CoCrucified
New member
Shouldn't the Zakath banner have the little clown smiley on it???
:zakath: :zakath: :zakath: :zakath: :zakath: :zakath:
Battle Royale VII is coming....
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
Shouldn't the Zakath banner have the little clown smiley on it???
:zakath: :zakath: :zakath: :zakath: :zakath: :zakath:
LOL... :think:
One Eyed Jack
New member
Originally posted by Crow
Boy, this is going to be a tough one to wait for!
Yeah. You might want to make yourself scarce by the time it's over, lest someone try to eat you...
Originally posted by One Eyed Jack
Yeah. You might want to make yourself scarce by the time it's over, lest someone try to eat you...
Yikes--maybe I'll just cook up a humble pie as a substitute! :cheers:
:devil: :devil: :devil: :devil: :devil: :devil: :devil:
"HUMBLE PIE "
A 17th century English dish, in which the heart, liver, kidney and other innards of a deer were combined with apples, currants, sugar and spices and baked as a pie. The servants ate this inexpensive but filling repast while the gentry dined on the VENISON. The name comes from the old-English word numble , meaning a deer's innards. "A numble pie" became "an umble pie," which eventually worked it's way to "a humble pie."
Last edited:
One Eyed Jack
New member
Another culinary delight from the land that brought us black pudding and haggis...
Battle Royale VII Collector T-Shirts now available in the TheologyOnLine Store.
Get yours today while supplies last!
CLICK HERE
Get yours today while supplies last!
CLICK HERE
CoCrucified
New member
Remember the old Wendy's commercial, "Where's the beef!"?
Where's the "Zakath clown?" :chuckle: :ha:
This shirt needs a clown on it!
:zakath: :zakath: :zakath: :zakath: :zakath:
:zakath: :zakath: :zakath: :zakath: :zakath:
Lord Vader
New member
A couple of problems with this debate and some suggestions.
1) The question is loaded. "Does God exist"? It should be, "Does a God exist".
2) It doesn't matter how soundly you crush Enyarts arguments, he and his will celebrate victory. If you said, "the sky is blue" and Enyart said, "what about all these websites and scholars of old who say the sky is made of cheese" and you said, "that's silly", Enyart will come away from it declaring victory -- and the look in his eye will say that he really genuinely believes it. So I don't know what use it is to have a discussion with him.
Suggestions: Keep it simple. Religiosos will use long windend statements to their advantage -- they look for the weakest part of the statement and latch on to it or they use some part of it as a way to digress. Keep it simple and there won't be any snags hanging out for them to grab onto and slip out from under your point.
Predictions: This will be an episode of dueling website references becuase neither party is a professional historian or scientist and so neither can be expected to have facts at their mental finger tips. So if you ask simply, "how do you know there is a God?" it's easy enough to say, "why, all of the evidence" and then naturally you will ask, "what evidence" and that's when all the websites will be whipped out, the references to books written by non-historians and by religiosos referencing other people who referenced somebody else who referenced someone else until we get to the original source who turns out to be a homeless guy shouting incoherently on the corner (at least Rush Limbaugh is infamous for this kind of phenomenon). So what's the point? About all you can do is say, "I won't bother with whether or not I trust your facts, I will assume they are facts, tell me the facts you have that tell you Jehovah is real". Then all you can say is one of two things, "those facts are persuasive" or "those facts (assuming they are facts) aren't persuasive to me". And that's about as much as you can hope and pray to get from a debate like this.
A note to Zakath: In the game of dueling websites, you might enjoy endorsing this gem. For some reason I've never heard anyone mention it but it really is one of the best websites out there. I found it back in 1996 when I was a toddler. It is
http://answers.org/newlook/
It is an online book. Very nice and comprehensive.
1) The question is loaded. "Does God exist"? It should be, "Does a God exist".
2) It doesn't matter how soundly you crush Enyarts arguments, he and his will celebrate victory. If you said, "the sky is blue" and Enyart said, "what about all these websites and scholars of old who say the sky is made of cheese" and you said, "that's silly", Enyart will come away from it declaring victory -- and the look in his eye will say that he really genuinely believes it. So I don't know what use it is to have a discussion with him.
Suggestions: Keep it simple. Religiosos will use long windend statements to their advantage -- they look for the weakest part of the statement and latch on to it or they use some part of it as a way to digress. Keep it simple and there won't be any snags hanging out for them to grab onto and slip out from under your point.
Predictions: This will be an episode of dueling website references becuase neither party is a professional historian or scientist and so neither can be expected to have facts at their mental finger tips. So if you ask simply, "how do you know there is a God?" it's easy enough to say, "why, all of the evidence" and then naturally you will ask, "what evidence" and that's when all the websites will be whipped out, the references to books written by non-historians and by religiosos referencing other people who referenced somebody else who referenced someone else until we get to the original source who turns out to be a homeless guy shouting incoherently on the corner (at least Rush Limbaugh is infamous for this kind of phenomenon). So what's the point? About all you can do is say, "I won't bother with whether or not I trust your facts, I will assume they are facts, tell me the facts you have that tell you Jehovah is real". Then all you can say is one of two things, "those facts are persuasive" or "those facts (assuming they are facts) aren't persuasive to me". And that's about as much as you can hope and pray to get from a debate like this.
A note to Zakath: In the game of dueling websites, you might enjoy endorsing this gem. For some reason I've never heard anyone mention it but it really is one of the best websites out there. I found it back in 1996 when I was a toddler.
It ishttp://answers.org/newlook/
It is an online book. Very nice and comprehensive.
Zakath
Resident Atheist
We'll see...
Enyart is allegedly a believer in the efficacy of the TAG (Transcendental Argument for the existence of God) stype of apologetics, based on some of his published materials and the arguments presented by his followers here on TOL. While TAG has been thoroughly drubbed in philosophical circles, it usually fails to be effective in non-philosophical arguments as well because it begs too many questions. It will be interesting to see what he trots out here...
Following the KISS rule is essential for this format and I will endeavor to do so.
Regarding the question, as a minister of an allegedly Christian church (though there are some posters here who would claim that he is outside orthodoxy), I am making the assumption that "God" for him is the biblical entity YHWH. But perhaps we'd be best to clarify that...
Thanks for the link BTW.
Enyart is allegedly a believer in the efficacy of the TAG (Transcendental Argument for the existence of God) stype of apologetics, based on some of his published materials and the arguments presented by his followers here on TOL. While TAG has been thoroughly drubbed in philosophical circles, it usually fails to be effective in non-philosophical arguments as well because it begs too many questions. It will be interesting to see what he trots out here...
Following the KISS rule is essential for this format and I will endeavor to do so.
Regarding the question, as a minister of an allegedly Christian church (though there are some posters here who would claim that he is outside orthodoxy), I am making the assumption that "God" for him is the biblical entity YHWH. But perhaps we'd be best to clarify that...
Thanks for the link BTW.
Zakath.. your an atheist. Remember? :zakath:
Therefore...
If God exists (any god)..... your atheism is in error.