yes, there are different types of people. But I talking about comparing claims to see what ones are more reliable. For people just seeking. You and I understand there are overlaps. There are atheist that deploy avoidance, diversion, and special pleading. Lets assume you and I are not.
Looking for angles, an example from some of the posts - and why I say atheists make particulary "good" lawyers (of a kind). Looking for angles - you could find a tecnicality somewhere to get a crook of the hook, or get an innocent person guilty, so to speak.
Creating from Nothing is true, when regarding the above.
One is always free to make clear statements.
I don't really think they are. Someone who doesn't really know what they believe or why they believe it is not free to clearly state any of that.
Yeah, and if you really want to get serious about folks resurrecting, Daniel Jackson got resurrected how many times, now? 5? 6? I stopped counting at some point. Probably at least once per season.We've raised the dead often. See it in cop shows from time to time too.
IIDB wouldn't be worth much without snark, double entendre, sarcasm, and all the other great things about internet forums.
You and I will just have to disagree on that one.
Not the first disagreement I've had on IIDB.
Duh. Why the devil do you think I wrote
Buffy is marvelous fiction; but that's beside the point. I get that you're Humpty Dumpty, the master of making words mean whatever you want them to mean -- the "homicide" discussion elsewhere established that. But the way "natural" and "supernatural" are used in Buffy and in most fiction of that genre is consistent with common usage among normal people; the way you have been using them is not. You say "I am supernatural with respect to the nature observed from within the simulation"; i.e., you are using those words as relational terms rather than as absolute properties. If you think normal people typically use them as relational terms, you are delusional.
When you ask normal people who use "supernatural" what they mean, you typically get something along the lines of the Wikipedia definition, "The supernatural is phenomena or entities that are not subject to the laws of nature." And that's a concept that makes perfect sense in fiction but is mushheaded when applied to the real world. I didn't ask you what people actually mean. I asked you what you actually mean.
Interesting... "poof, one can have him rise as often as one would like." would that actually be advantageous to the theist, if he or she used that line of method?
Would religion be the only sector of society to possess a school of memes, as you're putting it? 'A school of memes... like life's journey' would be the same for all sectors of the society would it not?
You do know that these cops shows aren't real, right? Those cops are actors! Has it not occurred to you, that there always happens to be a camera, right at the moment there's a ressurection?We've raised the dead often. See it in cop shows from time to time too.
Those are the only reasons I frequent these fora.
But, if they were dead, there is nothing you can do, except go through their pockets for some loose change. What they were is mostly dead.We've raised the dead often. See it in cop shows from time to time too.
Jarhyn, the reason examples from fiction are useful is because fiction writers base their characters on their experience with real people. Holding up a mirror to mankind is kind of the point of their artwork. I already quoted you a definition straight out of Wikipedia that was based on how real people talk, so any more of your belly-aching about my having used a fiction example is just a red-herring.
That would be red-herring belly-aching.
If you're on the autism spectrum then you have an excuse for being so bad at understanding those you claim to understand. Otherwise not.
