Split from: DV Christians Unite! (Christian Only Thread)

[Xei]

Lol are you seriously asking me about a quote that simply states a comparison? And again, are you seriously asking me if the one who spoke this quote originally is lying? Holy crap, look at the quote, what the hell is there to lie about? "The probability of life originating from accident is comparable to the probability of the unabridged dictionary resulting from an explosion in a printing shop." What facts in this quote are there to lie about? Attain some common sense and realize, ITS A COMPARISON, there are no facts. What the hell kind of evidence do I need for a quote simply comparing two things!?!? What truth is there to tell in a comparison, its just common sense stuff. Good Lord I wouldve thought you had more common sense, but now seeing you ask this question, I question whether you graduated highschool. For how your probably going to reply to this as your probably an atheist, I dont care about your opinion about how "good" of a christian I am. It infuriates me when an athiest comes on a thread and posts something as sad as what you posted. You know its a christian thread, why the hell are you on here? Asking me why im so hateful being a christian? Its because Ive grown to be intolerant athiests because of their mind-set. All I did was ask a quick, simple question as to whether your quote had any evidential substance, and this pile of insults and prevarications was your response. Just think on that for a bit.

[OneUp]

All I did was ask a quick, simple question as to whether your quote had any evidential substance, and this pile of insults and prevarications was your response. Just think on that for a bit. I did think about it a bit, that was my whole response. Did you read the last line of the reply? I will admit though, my insults were pointless and unnecessary, please forgive me for that part. But take a look at your very first reply and think on it a bit. It wasnt a very thought-out question in my opinion, but who am I to talk down on someone for trying to learn? So really, my bad for the insults, but please understand that the quote I posted is true and simple, it doesnt need anything to back it up.

[Xei]

So really, my bad for the insults, but please understand that the quote I posted is true and simple, it doesnt need anything to back it up. This was what I meant by prevarication. How can a meaningful statement be true and yet require no evidence? If it required no evidence then it would be an empty statement. But if you thought it were an empty statement then I imagine you wouldn't have posted it, as you have done a couple of times. Spoken like a Satanist, if you ask me. I wouldn't call myself a Satanist, but I would express concern as to how you didn't even think "wipes out civilizations... tells people to rape, kill babies and much more" was something that needed repudiation.

[OneUp]

This was what I meant by prevarication. How can a meaningful statement be true and yet require no evidence? If it required no evidence then it would be an empty statement. But if you thought it were an empty statement then I imagine you wouldn't have posted it, as you have done a couple of times. I wouldn't call myself a Satanist, but I would express concern as to how you didn't even think "wipes out civilizations... tells people to rape, kill babies and much more" was something that needed repudiation. You really seem as though you have no idea what your talking about. Look at the quote, it is only making a comparison. There is NO evidence in a comparison, stop trying to tell me there is. It is a simple comparison which also declares something more. I can say "Dr. Pepper is good" and theres no evidence for it other than my taste and my opinion and yet its true. Your argument against it is pointless. Please gaze at the quote for a few minutes and then realize that what you are saying makes no sense. There is no such thing as an empty statement, any statement is a statement because is states something, your claim was not well thought on it being an "empty statement". Here's what I really don't get about Christianity: why doesn't God just forgive? Why does he need death to forgive? You seriously believe that God requirement for forgiveness was killing livestock? "Hey, you did a bad thing, but if you kill a goat, I'll forgive you." Thats why Jesus came, to end all of the sacrifices. Its sad seeing people with certain mindsets comlpetly doubting something just because they dont understand it. A finite mind can only barely understand the infinite. In the Old testament if God just forgave with no punishment, literally no one would learn, likewise for todays society pertaining to jail. Then in the new testament Jesus came to end all the killing of animals and punishments. Jesus wasnt sacrificed? In the Bible Jesus states that he knows why he has come to earth and his whole purpose. Why do you think he preached and did everything that he did?

[Darkmatters]

You really seem as though you have no idea what your talking about. Look at the quote, it is only making a comparison. There is NO evidence in a comparison, stop trying to tell me there is. It is a simple comparison which also declares something more. I can say "Dr. Pepper is good" and theres no evidence for it other than my taste and my opinion and yet its true. Your argument against it is pointless. Please gaze at the quote for a few minutes and then realize that what you are saying makes no sense. There is no such thing as an empty statement, any statement is a statement because is states something, your claim was not well thought on it being an "empty statement". I don't like Dr. Pepper - therefore your statement is false. The true statement would be "it is my opinion that Dr. Pepper is good". (of course it would be you making that statement, not me). The same applies to your earlier statement - it's just somebody's opinion.

[Xei]

You really seem as though you have no idea what your talking about. Look at the quote, it is only making a comparison. There is NO evidence in a comparison, stop trying to tell me there is. It is a simple comparison which also declares something more. I can say "Dr. Pepper is good" and theres no evidence for it other than my taste and my opinion and yet its true. Your argument against it is pointless. Please gaze at the quote for a few minutes and then realize that what you are saying makes no sense. There is no such thing as an empty statement, any statement is a statement because is states something, your claim was not well thought on it being an "empty statement". Nope, you're still prevaricating, and it's becoming more and more incoherent. Of course comparisons can require evidence. "The odds of winning the lottery are similar to the odds of getting a head in a coin toss" is a comparison. It is not a "matter of opinion". It does require evidence. And in fact in this case, it is false. "France is of a similar size to Germany" is another comparison. It requires evidence. In this case, it is true. How was "Dr. Pepper is good" supposed to support your point? "Dr. Pepper is good" isn't even a comparison for goodness sakes, it is a statement of personal taste, which is not remotely the same thing. "Dr. Pepper is good" is a statement of a subjective opinion. It can vary from person to person. "Life emerging by random processes is extremely unlikely" is a statement of an objective proposition. It is not an opinion. Its truth does not vary from person to person. It is either true or it is false. It requires evidence. It is quite bizarre that you are so intent on denying something so manifestly obvious. If instead I had said, "the probability of life originating from accident is comparable to the probability of a dictionary being found in a book shop", are you seriously telling me that you wouldn't object to this statement? If I then told you, "the quote I posted is true and simple, it doesn't need anything to back it up", you're telling me you'd have just said, "oh okay then, I guess I can't argue, your quote is true and doesn't need proving"? Don't talk nonsense, of course you wouldn't. It's a statement that needs evidence, like any other, and without evidence it is just a baseless claim.

[OneUp]

Nope, you're still prevaricating, and it's becoming more and more incoherent. Of course comparisons can require evidence. "The odds of winning the lottery are similar to the odds of getting a head in a coin toss" is a comparison. It is not a "matter of opinion". It does require evidence. And in fact in this case, it is false. "France is of a similar size to Germany" is another comparison. It requires evidence. In this case, it is true. How was "Dr. Pepper is good" supposed to support your point? "Dr. Pepper is good" isn't even a comparison for goodness sakes, it is a statement of personal taste, which is not remotely the same thing. "Dr. Pepper is good" is a statement of a subjective opinion. It can vary from person to person. "Life emerging by random processes is extremely unlikely" is a statement of an objective proposition. It is not an opinion. Its truth does not vary from person to person. It is either true or it is false. It requires evidence. It is quite bizarre that you are so intent on denying something so manifestly obvious. If instead I had said, "the probability of life originating from accident is comparable to the probability of a dictionary being found in a book shop", are you seriously telling me that you wouldn't object to this statement? If I then told you, "the quote I posted is true and simple, it doesn't need anything to back it up", you're telling me you'd have just said, "oh okay then, I guess I can't argue, your quote is true and doesn't need proving"? Don't talk nonsense, of course you wouldn't. It's a statement that needs evidence, like any other, and without evidence it is just a baseless claim. Ok, let me put it out plain and simple with a question, do you see any unabridged dictionaries resulting from an explosion in a printing shop? Didnt think so. I thought you were more intellectual, I thought wrong. Next question, Do you see life originating from an accident? If you believe in the "Big Bang" then you do. Now that you know you havent seen any unabridged dictionaries resulting from an explosion in a printing shop, and you believe in life originating from an accident(if you do believe in the Big bang) you can now see that the statement "The probability of life originating from an accident is comparable to the probability of an unabridged dictionary resulting from an explosion in a printing shop" makes sense and has evidence because you KNOW that it is impossible for an unbridged dictionary to result from a printing shop explosion. Thats why in the quote it was compared to Life originating from an accident because you dont simply get life in general, trees, systems such as photosynthesis, fruits, the human body, etc. out of an explosion. Its simple logic and only required a little bit of thinking. I thought youd figure that out by now, but once again I guessed wrong. You can tell me my insults mean nothing, and thats good that they dont, but I wont care at all. But please feel free to reply to my actual reply instead of my insults. You've really pissed me off in this thread. However, I will forgive you if you go kill some farm animals. In a few thousand years, you won't have to worry about that because I am going to kill myself for myself and come back to life. Awh, did i really piss you off? Thats too bad seeing that this is a Christian only thread, and seeing the you arent christian i couldnt careless that you are pissed. It means nothing to me. By the title of this thread containing "Christians Only" that means you were never invited. Sadly, atheists all the time, come in spark arguments and then say we christians are bad and harsh when they themselves come in and start the arguments.

[Xei]

Ok, let me put it out plain and simple with a question, do you see any unabridged dictionaries resulting from an explosion in a printing shop? Didnt think so. I thought you were more intellectual, I thought wrong. Next question, Do you see life originating from an accident? If you believe in the "Big Bang" then you do. Now that you know you havent seen any unabridged dictionaries resulting from an explosion in a printing shop, and you believe in life originating from an accident(if you do believe in the Big bang) you can now see that the statement "The probability of life originating from an accident is comparable to the probability of an unabridged dictionary resulting from an explosion in a printing shop" makes sense and has evidence because you KNOW that it is impossible for an unbridged dictionary to result from a printing shop explosion. Is anybody else following this?