• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The God Question

Half of your OP was about what shouldn't be discussed and who shouldn't answer and you never asked any questions or raised any significant topic beyond the deference between two obviously distinct phrases (regardless of the concept they were referring to). I found it particularly off-putting that you dismissed out of hand any idea of conflating the two propositions when they're obviously linked - you can't talk about something existing without establishing what it is by definition.
Fair enough as regards what put you off.
Your final point is challenging and worth pursuing and appears to suggest that there is at least this much to discuss from the restricted OP. Are you still about?
 
Fair enough as regards what put you off.
Your final point is challenging and worth pursuing and appears to suggest that there is at least this much to discuss from the restricted OP. Are you still about?
I think that if after 800+ posts over 10 months, you couldn't achieve whatever it was you were trying to achieve with this thread, you should probably give it up as a bad job. :cool:
 
I think that if after 800+ posts over 10 months, you couldn't achieve whatever it was you were trying to achieve with this thread, you should probably give it up as a bad job. :cool:
Fair enough again, although 800+ posts and 15,000 views don't add up to "a bad job" in my book. But that's what makes horse racing, yes?
Still, the question you raise, whether we can know that something exists without knowing its nature, is a good one, and perhaps <alt>doxygen, who raises a similar question (See the quote in #875) from a different angle, will be more inclined to discuss it.
Thanks for the reply.
 
So if a car was bearing down on Angel at high-speed Angel would not jump out of the way because there is no proof of the car's existence.
Surely you who have proven that goblins exist in idyllic Northern Europe must understand something about "proof."
 
You've got it. That is Angel's limit.
Did your famous irony meter not go off? When was the last time a post of yours in a thread of mine was on topic and not personal?
 
Back
Top Bottom