Wanted: Honest intelligent productive thinking to resolve the issue God exists or not.

a reply to: Pachomius

You

so no need to probe the depths of quantum mechanics

Fearful at the thought of one of the expressions and languages of god?

Please define the language of god in fifty words or less?

a reply to: Pachomius

Dr. Ian Malcolm, "God creates dinosaurs, God destroys dinosaurs. God creates Man, man destroys God. Man creates dinosaurs"
Dr. Ellie Sattler, "Dinosaurs eat man..... Woman inherits the earth

Jurassic Park

www.goodreads.com...

MONO




No instance of honest intelligent productive thinking so far.


Now, dear everyone with honest intelligent productive thinking, here is how honest intelligent productive thinking will lead you to know that existence is the default status of reality.

First you have got to realize that you have a mind, otherwise, it is not the fact that for you there is a brain inside your skull, unless of course you are a robot, and robots are not eligible to participate in this thread - although I know of forums where robots are into exchange of God knows what among themselves, considering that the owners and operators of these online forums are also robots.

With the presence of your mind, then you can and do think, honestly, intelligently, and productively, with and in your mind.

Here, start with a thought inside your mind, what about the nose on our face, of course it can be your balls, but that is not feasible in polite conversation - softly hehehehe.

So, now you and I we have the thought of the nose in our mind, which is in fact on our face, is that all right with everyone?

Do I hear some robot with the objection that I am into circular logic?

Haha, let him come out first with his concept of what is circular logic, in less than say 40 words, and no running to dictionaries.

Let us work together to concur on what is circular logic, as you bring up that term, then you must have in your stock knowledge and information an idea of what is circular logic, otherwise you are talking nonsense aka insanity - until you have consulted your dictionaries, which is an unfathomable task: try the voluminous i.e. in several volumes, of The Oxford Dictionary of the English Language on Historical Principles.

Dear everyone, I will now owing to unavoidable distraction, entertain the resident robot here - stay tuned of course, I will resume my exposition on how thinking will bring us to the fact sooner than later, the permanent i.e. eternal reality of existence.

a reply to: Pachomius

You don’t think god can communicate? Isn’t that the bases of an intelligent being. Communication?

Please define the language of god in fifty words or less?

MONO




Haha, gotcha, dear robot Neutron, you are again running away via a derail, I ask you to tell me what is circular logic, not about God, not in the current context.

That is the programming of a robot, in case of ignorance, go into derail mode.

Hey, Neutron, better go into your erstwhile favorite mode, faith in the Bible for evidence, okay?


ANNEX

From Pachomius

Do I hear some robot with the objection that I am into circular logic?

Haha, let him come out first with his concept of what is circular logic, in less than say 40 words, and no running to dictionaries.

Let us work together to concur on what is circular logic, as you bring up that term, then you must have in your stock knowledge and information an idea of what is circular logic, otherwise you are talking nonsense aka insanity - until you have consulted your dictionaries, which is an unfathomable task: try the voluminous i.e. in several volumes, of The Oxford Dictionary of the English Language on Historical Principles.

Dear everyone, I will now owing to unavoidable distraction, entertain the resident robot here - stay tuned of course, I will resume my exposition on how thinking will bring us to the fact sooner than later, the permanent i.e. eternal reality of existence.

From Neutron
You don’t think god can communicate? Isn’t that the bases of an intelligent being. Communication?

Please define the language of god in fifty words or less?

a reply to: neutronflux

originally posted by: Pachomius
MONO




Haha, gotcha, dear robot Neutron, you are again running away via a derail, I ask you to tell me what is circular logic, not about God, not in the current context.

That is the programming of a robot, in case of ignorance, go into derail mode.

Hey, Neutron, better go into your erstwhile favorite mode, faith in the Bible for evidence, okay?


ANNEX

From Pachomius

Do I hear some robot with the objection that I am into circular logic?

Haha, let him come out first with his concept of what is circular logic, in less than say 40 words, and no running to dictionaries.

Let us work together to concur on what is circular logic, as you bring up that term, then you must have in your stock knowledge and information an idea of what is circular logic, otherwise you are talking nonsense aka insanity - until you have consulted your dictionaries, which is an unfathomable task: try the voluminous i.e. in several volumes, of The Oxford Dictionary of the English Language on Historical Principles.

Dear everyone, I will now owing to unavoidable distraction, entertain the resident robot here - stay tuned of course, I will resume my exposition on how thinking will bring us to the fact sooner than later, the permanent i.e. eternal reality of existence.

From Neutron
You don’t think god can communicate? Isn’t that the bases of an intelligent being. Communication?

Please define the language of god in fifty words or less?

a reply to: neutronflux

Huh. Ok? Do you actually read what other people post.

Other people have called you out on your “logic”. Is that false.

I have explained your use of circular logic, and provided examples how your “logic” is not “evidence”. Is that false.

More than one individual has called you out on circular logic and tried to explain (as you will not accept any credible argument, just your own ego driven rants) why your “logic” is not evidence. Is that false.


I’ll tune up one of my examples of circular logic. And made it short.

In concept god is an uncorrupted and perfect being. So such a being would never have created imperfect beings like humankind. So, something other than god created flawed humans. Because a perfect being would never make something as corruptible as humankind.

So logic disproved god.

a reply to: Pachomius

Again..

You don’t think god can communicate? Isn’t that the bases of an intelligent being. Communication?

Please define the language of god in fifty words or less?

MONO




I am going to read the news now, so dear readers here, you also go and read the news, there is the debate between Trump and Biden to catch up with, okay?


(signing off)

originally posted by: Pachomius
MONO




I am going to read the news now, so dear readers here, you also go and read the news, there is the debate between Trump and Biden to catch up with, okay?


(signing off)

Run off when your asked honest true or false questions. So much for your honest conversation.

MONO




Says Neutron:

I’ll tune up one of my examples of circular logic. And made it short.

In concept god is an uncorrupted and perfect being. So such a being would never have created imperfect beings like humankind. So, something other than god created flawed humans. Because a perfect being would never make something as corruptible as humankind.

So logic disproved god.

Please prove your statement, okay?

MONO




I will just partition the statement of Neutron to render it easier to read:


Partitioned statement of Neutron:

1. I’ll tune up one of my examples of circular logic.

2. And made it short.

3. In concept god is an uncorrupted and perfect being.

4. So such a being would never have created imperfect beings like humankind.

5. So, something other than god created flawed humans.

6. Because a perfect being would never make something as corruptible as humankind.

7. So logic disproved god.

Original statement of Neutron:

I’ll tune up one of my examples of circular logic. And made it short.

In concept god is an uncorrupted and perfect being. So such a being would never have created imperfect beings like humankind. So, something other than god created flawed humans. Because a perfect being would never make something as corruptible as humankind.

So logic disproved god.

Pachomius posted to Neutron on Oct, 1 2020 @ 12:25 PM
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

MONO




Says Neutron:

I’ll tune up one of my examples of circular logic. And made it short.

In concept god is an uncorrupted and perfect being. So such a being would never have created imperfect beings like humankind. So, something other than god created flawed humans. Because a perfect being would never make something as corruptible as humankind.

So logic disproved god.

Please prove your statement, okay?

a reply to: Pachomius

What are you doing. More intellectually dishonesty by you.

The actual context of my post.


originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: Pachomius
MONO




Haha, gotcha, dear robot Neutron, you are again running away via a derail, I ask you to tell me what is circular logic, not about God, not in the current context.

That is the programming of a robot, in case of ignorance, go into derail mode.

Hey, Neutron, better go into your erstwhile favorite mode, faith in the Bible for evidence, okay?


ANNEX

From Pachomius

Do I hear some robot with the objection that I am into circular logic?

Haha, let him come out first with his concept of what is circular logic, in less than say 40 words, and no running to dictionaries.

Let us work together to concur on what is circular logic, as you bring up that term, then you must have in your stock knowledge and information an idea of what is circular logic, otherwise you are talking nonsense aka insanity - until you have consulted your dictionaries, which is an unfathomable task: try the voluminous i.e. in several volumes, of The Oxford Dictionary of the English Language on Historical Principles.

Dear everyone, I will now owing to unavoidable distraction, entertain the resident robot here - stay tuned of course, I will resume my exposition on how thinking will bring us to the fact sooner than later, the permanent i.e. eternal reality of existence.

From Neutron
You don’t think god can communicate? Isn’t that the bases of an intelligent being. Communication?

Please define the language of god in fifty words or less?

a reply to: neutronflux

Huh. Ok? Do you actually read what other people post.

Other people have called you out on your “logic”. Is that false.

I have explained your use of circular logic, and provided examples how your “logic” is not “evidence”. Is that false.

More than one individual has called you out on circular logic and tried to explain (as you will not accept any credible argument, just your own ego driven rants) why your “logic” is not evidence. Is that false.


I’ll tune up one of my examples of circular logic. And made it short.

In concept god is an uncorrupted and perfect being. So such a being would never have created imperfect beings like humankind. So, something other than god created flawed humans. Because a perfect being would never make something as corruptible as humankind.

So logic disproved god.

——————

So logic is not actual evidence. Get the point? But logic can lead to a hypothesis that can be tested. The results of the test is the evidence.

Now...

Again..

You don’t think god can communicate? Isn’t that the bases of an intelligent being. Communication?

Please define the language of god in fifty words or less?

a reply to: Pachomius

Another example.

God being an intelligent being should be able to communicate in specific ways. Logic.

So if god is intelligent, then:

Please define the language of god in fifty words or less.

Off that, you should be able create a hypothesis and A test on how god communicates with you.

a reply to: neutronflux
Why not tell us how God communicates with you?

Please..... don't bring any other posters into the reply.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: neutronflux
Why not tell us how God communicates with you?

Please..... don't bring any other posters into the reply.

I have repeatedly posted I have a personal relationship with God. Is that false.

And repeatedly asked if you have a personal relationship with God, why do you need “evidence”. Is that false.

Now your asking? Your argument seems more out of spite and is disingenuous.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

I know one thing God is telling me. If this thread is down to a few people that cannot answer simple true / false questions, that lie about what people actually post, and general trolling. Leave the thread, let the thread die as it deserves, and STOP feeding the trolls.

a reply to: neutronflux
You have said that you have a personal relationship with God.....but how does God communicate with you?

a reply to: neutronflux
I don't have a personal relationship with God.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: neutronflux
I don't have a personal relationship with God.

Then maybe you have a harden heart. Good luck and God bless.

a reply to: neutronflux
So you refuse to answer the question....how does God communicate with you?

So why are you bullying another poster with the same question?