Is hell enough as punishment?

[_The Erotic Apologist]

you claim you thought up a number...

Yes, because I did.

you have offered no evidence to support that claim

As a matter of fact I have.

If you are suggesting that myself, and everyone else here, accept your claim merely based on your claim as supported by you being an expert witness of things you claim, then you must allow Nipper's claim to be equally "true"...ergo God exists as he claims.

What you or anyone else may or may not claim is not the issue. Because you're not the one who thought up the number. That would be me.

you have no evidence to confirm the number you claim you were thinking.

Except that I do, and I've already covered this.

you have no evidence to confirm that you are, indeed, an expert witness.

Except that I am, and I've already covered this, too.

the "evidence" of reality actually concludes that you are not, and cannot be, an "expert witness' for your own action...

You seem to have an adversarial relationship with reality.

unless you care to give reference to the planet that allows, or rather gives credence to the notion of, an expert witness able to testify as such at his/her own trial....

Except we're not in court. And you seem confused as to what planet you're on.

sure you can testify in your own defense...

That's nice.

but obviously you would have us consider only your testimony as being evidence...

Naturally, because I'm the one who thought up the number. Not you.

other people - not so much, unless it agrees with you....got it!

Of course, because I'm still the one who thought up the number. Not you.

nice try

but

you

still

lose

Part of your problem is the fact that you're stuck on looking at this in terms of winning or losing.

don't be mad...maybe "4" was just a lucky guess.....maybe?

Uh, no.

Take care, sub-creature.

[_The Erotic Apologist]

On what planet is the testimony of an expert witness not considered evidence?

I will then take the new testament as evidence. Well of course it is evidence.

Sure, the New Testament is evidence. So is the Book of Mormon, the Quran, Dianetics, the Bhagavad Gita, the Tibetan Book of the Dead, the Egyptian Book of the Dead, the Book of Abraham, the Popol Vuh, the Dauist Creation Myth, the Maori Creation Myth, the Poetic Edda, The Matrix Trilogy, Star Wars, etc., etc.

Which evidence should we accept as accurately reflecting the true nature of things?

Which evidence should we ignore?

[_LittleNipper]

I will then take the new testament as evidence. Well of course it is evidence.

Sure, the New Testament is evidence. So is the Book of Mormon, the Quran, Dianetics, the Bhagavad Gita, the Tibetan Book of the Dead, the Egyptian Book of the Dead, the Book of Abraham, the Popol Vuh, the Dauist Creation Myth, the Maori Creation Myth, the Poetic Edda, The Matrix Trilogy, Star Wars, etc., etc.

Which evidence should we accept as accurately reflecting the true nature of things?

Which evidence should we ignore?

The Bible is a whole lot older, and is still accepted by many people.

[_The Erotic Apologist]

Sure, the New Testament is evidence. So is the Book of Mormon, the Quran, Dianetics, the Bhagavad Gita, the Tibetan Book of the Dead, the Egyptian Book of the Dead, the Book of Abraham, the Popol Vuh, the Dauist Creation Myth, the Maori Creation Myth, the Poetic Edda, The Matrix Trilogy, Star Wars, etc., etc.

Which evidence should we accept as accurately reflecting the true nature of things?

Which evidence should we ignore?

The Bible is a whole lot older, and is still accepted by many people.

In other words, your criteria for separating truth from myth are POPULARITY and SENIORITY.

Nipper, are you still in high school?

[_huckelberry]

I will then take the new testament as evidence. Well of course it is evidence.

Sure, the New Testament is evidence. So is the Book of Mormon, the Quran, Dianetics, the Bhagavad Gita, the Tibetan Book of the Dead, the Egyptian Book of the Dead, the Book of Abraham, the Popol Vuh, the Dauist Creation Myth, the Maori Creation Myth, the Poetic Edda, The Matrix Trilogy, Star Wars, etc., etc.

Which evidence should we accept as accurately reflecting the true nature of things?

Which evidence should we ignore?

I am unsure of the import of your list. All events are evidence of a whole lot of associated events. Seeing the connections requires thought.

[_The Erotic Apologist]

I am unsure of the import of your list. All events are evidence of a whole lot of associated events. Seeing the connections requires thought.

I believe all the items on this list are of equal importance...with the possible exception of The Matrix and Star Wars.

I don't see why the supernatural context presupposed by the Bible should be any more or less improbable than that presupposed by Dianetics, or the Tibetan Book of the Dead. They are all equally true. They are all equally false.

[_subgenius]

you claim you thought up a number...

Yes, because I did.

re-enacting the claim does not affirm its truth. I already admitted that you made the claim...i was asking for your evidence in support of that claim.....and quite predictably you have offered none.

you have offered no evidence to support that claim

As a matter of fact I have.

and which fact is that...the one where you simply say "yes i did"?...not really evidence is it?...or by that measure it is acceptable to respond to your inquiry with "Yes there is a God and He is the God of the Hebrew text"....evidence being "i just said so".
got it!

If you are suggesting that myself, and everyone else here, accept your claim merely based on your claim as supported by you being an expert witness of things you claim, then you must allow Nipper's claim to be equally "true"...ergo God exists as he claims.

What you or anyone else may or may not claim is not the issue. Because you're not the one who thought up the number. That would be me.

again, you have no evidence that you thought up a number...however, i know that you did and that the number was 4.

you have no evidence to confirm the number you claim you were thinking.

Except that I do, and I've already covered this.

see above..."because i said so" is not actually evidence is it?...if it is then evidence of God is no longer necessary for you.

you have no evidence to confirm that you are, indeed, an expert witness.

Except that I am, and I've already covered this, too.

nope...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expert_witness

the "evidence" of reality actually concludes that you are not, and cannot be, an "expert witness' for your own action...

You seem to have an adversarial relationship with reality.

as contrasted by your total absence of any relationship with reality?

unless you care to give reference to the planet that allows, or rather gives credence to the notion of, an expert witness able to testify as such at his/her own trial....

Except we're not in court. And you seem confused as to what planet you're on.

i know, right? whoever brought up this whole idea of expert witness must surely be confused
viewtopic.php?p=764648#p764648
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expert_witness

sure you can testify in your own defense...

That's nice.

in your case...not so much, you seem determined to lose.

but obviously you would have us consider only your testimony as being evidence...

Naturally, because I'm the one who thought up the number. Not you.

yes, i know...it was the number "4".

other people - not so much, unless it agrees with you....got it!

Of course, because I'm still the one who thought up the number. Not you.

yes, i know...it was the number "4".

nice try

but

you

still

lose

Part of your problem is the fact that you're stuck on looking at this in terms of winning or losing.

not winning or losing...just the obvious condition...which is that you lost.

don't be mad...maybe "4" was just a lucky guess.....maybe?

Uh, no.

i agree...."4" never the less.

Take care, sub-creature.

why would i not?

[_The Erotic Apologist]

re-enacting the claim does not affirm...blah...blah...blah...

Seriously? You're still stuck on this? You're still saying there's essentially no difference between me claiming to know that I've made up a certain number and Nipper claiming to "know" that A) a god exists, and B) that it's the ancient war god of the tribal Hebrews?

Jeez, get a life, get a girlfriend.

[_subgenius]

re-enacting the claim does not affirm...blah...blah...blah...

Seriously? You're still stuck on this? You're still saying there's essentially no difference between me claiming to know that I've made up a certain number and Nipper claiming to "know" that A) a god exists, and B) that it's the ancient war god of the tribal Hebrews?

Jeez, get a life, get a girlfriend.

both of you have provided equal evidence of that "knowledge".
fact is...you were thinking of the number "4".
You saying otherwise is dishonest and an obvious ruse.
Either prove you were thinking of another number or concede.

[_The Erotic Apologist]

Subby, don't fight the thorazine. It's your friend.