Thomas Aquinas and HIS silly PROOVES |
Posted by
parhad
(Guest)
- Saturday, September 4 2004, 2:38:47 (CEST) from - Windows XP - Internet Explorer Website: Website title: |
..really..if you take a close look at Chritian dogma it is SUCH a scream...there`s old Aquinas figuring he can prove god exists in five easy steps..the first of which tells you he exists..the other four merely to say it had best be his god you decide exists...this is on a par with Dean and his flailing encyclopedias..the disappering ones. This has to be the only place you`re told to believe something harder the more stupid it gets...no wonder. Circumstantial evidence isn`t even what you`d call Deans Christian dogma..there isn`t a shred of evidence to suggest Jesus flew anywhere or made fish out of wine..all they have is a book that tells them it`s so...and THAT satisfies them. Circumstantial evidence is the best kind they can get...but even then it`s so easy to make it blow up in their faces..take the "Watch and the Watchmaker"...recent attempts to propose that Creationism is a "valid" theory..like any other theory...right!!!...has its fans trying to use "Reason" to make their case... The children`s story goes something like this...you`re out walking in the woods and you find a watch...no one is around...so you would be correct in assuming SOMEONE made that watch..it didn`t just appear..or "evolve" from a rock or tree...silly Darwin! Likewise when you find a man or woman in the woods...you are correct and are indeed FORCED to accept that a "ManMaker" made him...that is, "god" and here again it had better be yahwe or you`re in deep shit. This is SUCH a crock of "Reasoning" that it`s no wonder it made Daen warm and fuzzy. In the first place we all know a watch is MAN made..therefore if you find a fucking watch anywhere there`s no reason to assume a God made it..it was made by the person who makes man-made things. The whole point is that we DON`T know who makes people...now Dean will tell you he KNOWS it`s an Armenian..because they always were...and to try to prove what you don`t know by using what you also don`t know as prooves...well, you`re talking about Dean`s sort of reason. To go from what we KNOW..which is that men make watches..and use that to make the leap that GOD must have made humans..since SOMEBODY had to..and to use as an example a man-made thing to stand in for a god-made thing..which is what we`re trying to PROOOVE is so damn silly I expect Dean to take up several posts saying that since I can produce no evidence to show that man WASSN`T made by god...then he MUST have been. Ditzy fails to describe this sort of education. --------------------- |
The full topic: No replies. |
Content-length: 2893 Content-type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded Accept: image/gif, image/x-xbitmap, image/jpeg, image/pjpeg, application/vnd.ms-powerpoint, application/vnd.ms-excel, applicatio... Accept-encoding: gzip, deflate Accept-language: es-mx Cache-control: no-cache Connection: Keep-Alive Cookie: *hidded* Host: www.insideassyria.com Referer: http://www.insideassyria.com/rkvsf2/rkvsf_core.php?.ORSn. User-agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; MSN 6.1; MSNbMSFT; MSNmes-mx; MSNc00; v5m) |