Nay_Sayer
I say nay!
Seeing as how god doesn't exist I feel I can write the word in any way I choose.
Aphrodite didn't define itself with proper relevance to the opposites. So how could you ask such a senseless question?Does capitalizing Aphrodite change the validity of assuming a female love-goddes with that nomenclature exists?
Your incapability of incorporating Revelation 22:13, which I specifically mentioned, into the works is a sign of you being totally unprepared for following arguments made of formal logic. Such a deficiency is the main "pillar" of strong atheism.More important, does it make Odin more assumable if you capitalize it?![]()
What do you relate the negative to? Did I say "God defined himself by writing that...?"No, a human being wrote that.
Your incapability of incorporating Revelation 22:13, which I specifically mentioned, into the works is a sign of you being totally unprepared for following arguments made of formal logic. Such a deficiency is the main "pillar" of strong atheism.
No, god(s) don't make fun of anyone, people do. You might want to actually think about it.Quote:
God defines himself as
I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.
What do you relate the negative to? Did I say "God defined himself by writing that...?"
This is another example of the contradictory nature of positive atheism that God likes to make fun of.
So do you understand that words attributed to made up god(s) are actually the words of the people who make them up? If not, why not?Btw, that definition couldn't be John's own idea, because the odds against it are just too big.
Of course you can. I mean, you looked inside the closet, under your bed... No God. Why would you be different from those people who write email to their friends that they will be late, because they can't find their Car Keys.Seeing as how god doesn't exist I feel I can write the word in any way I choose.
God defines himself as
Does anyone have any kind of a clue what epix is on about?
Really? That's mighty observant of someone who asserts the hard way that deities don't exist. I mean, is there any end to the procession of the contradictions that positive atheism can herd together?No, god(s) don't make fun of anyone, people do. You might want to actually think about it.
I told you didn't I?So do you understand that words attributed to made up god(s) are actually the words of the people who make them up? If not, why not?
Btw, that definition couldn't be John's own idea, because the odds against it are just too big.
Of course you can.I mean, you looked inside the closet, under your bed... No God. Why would you be different from those people who write email to their friends that they will be late, because they can't find their Car Keys.
You can chose any illogical way to express yourself. But you can't force anyone to pay attention to your ways and means. That's why there is atheism and theism.
Really? That's mighty observant of someone who asserts the hard way that deities don't exist. I mean, is there any end to the procession of the contradictions that positive atheism can herd together?
I told you didn't I?
There seems to be no end to the contradictions that all the man made religions and made up gods can get up to. Is that what you meant?Really? That's mighty observant of someone who asserts the hard way that deities don't exist. I mean, is there any end to the procession of the contradictions that positive atheism can herd together?
You just haven't told me which made up god(s) you subscribe to and which you are atheistic about. Will you be honest enough to do so?I told you didn't I?
If you read it, you noticed the idea that no one thought of before: the assigning of numbers to logical formulas. Of course, there was a number assignment done to words before, such as the common binary substitute,Having read several entire books on the subject of Godel's Incompleteness Theorem...
http://iopscience.iop.org/1742-6596/82/1/012008A typical character of a genius is that it extends beyond his period. Kurt Godel was not an exception. His letters to his mother show his tendency to search for explanations of seemingly random coincidences.
If you read it, you noticed the idea that no one thought of before: the assigning of numbers to logical formulas. Of course, there was a number assignment done to words before, such as the common binary substitute,
absence = 1
presence = 0
closed = 1
opened = 0
or any opposites such as those below:
I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.
Revelation
But GODel, (I can also mutilate other personal nouns when I feel like it) came with his own numbering system (a numerology for the lay) that involved natural numbers that he assigned to various logical formulas. It was like the Bible. There was no system of numbering and then came the Geneva Bible, and you can now assign numbers to the opposites
I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.
Revelation 22:13
So what?
Well, remember once again who was GODel.
http://iopscience.iop.org/1742-6596/82/1/012008
Your incapability of incorporating Revelation 22:13, which I specifically mentioned, into the works is a sign of you being totally unprepared for following arguments made of formal logic. Such a deficiency is the main "pillar" of strong atheism.