RE: Question

David McFadzean (
Fri, 18 Aug 95 14:14:00 CDT

At 02:14 PM 8/18/95 CDT, you wrote:

>>Even though our minds are finite, they can still comprehend logic.
>>You can postulate some other supernatural logic if you like, but
>>you are living in a different reality then.
>I am living in the same reality. Mine is just not confined...

If yours is the same reality, I guess mine is not confined either.

>>>>If God does not know fear as I know it, he doesn't know everything does
>>>>That is the whole point.
>>>You know what I meant...
>>No, I don't. You have not answered my question.
>Yes I have.

Sorry, I didn't understand your answer. Did you say God can know fear
or God can't know everything?

>>That is your logic, not mine, not reality's.
>Who said your logic is realities? If it is then what is reality?

Logic is a description of reality. Reality is where we exist.

>>>Is your logic limited to what you know? Or choose to know? Yes.
>>No, science is logical but deals with the unknown. You don't have
>>to give up logic in ignorance.
>So you are saying you are ignorant.

Yes, I am ignorant of many things. Are you implying that you know everything
or that my ignorance of some things somehow disqualifies my knowledge?

>>Yes, I already have. A global flood is impossible. Stars are billions
>>of light years away. You just choose to dismiss what I say.
>What fact have you shown me? You just keep saying the same things over, and
>I have given you a logical opposition...

You must have a different definition of "fact". Please enlighten me.


Is this meant as an insult?

>>I think the Devil in Christian faith represents logic and knowledge, the
>seeds of destruction of all faith.
>Evolution is a faith. So now the Devil is the second law of thermodynamics.

Sure, by your definitions.

>The Devil is as real as God is, and doesn't care if you believe he is real
>or not, he will drag you to Hell anyway (if you let him).

Evolution doesn't care whether you believe it or not.

>>Yes, I find it very frustrating that you pretend to have a conversation
>>but ignore everything I say. I present evidence you ask for then you
>>dismiss it without saying why or just ignore it.
>What evidence have you shown? Who is dismissing who's idea's? Definately not
>you right? I have been studying your ideas, and they don't prove anything.
>Could you please give me unrefutable evidence?

Obviously all the evidence I've written about does not count as evidence
to you. I'm not going to waste my time any more until you tell me what
kind of evidence would convince you. Be explicit and detailed.

>>I feel like I'm trying to play a game of chess with someone who refuses
>>to follow the rules. Why limit yourself to 3-dimensional finite rules
>>of chess?
>Because chess is a three dimensional game made by three dimensional people,
>or did it evolve by natural selection too?

I think you missed the point. Having a conversation is like a game of chess.

>>When you play by your own rules, you always win, right?

Well think of the other person for a moment.