Re: How to Become a Christian, Version 1.01
From: Bob Myers (nospamplease_at_address.invalid)
Date: 11/22/04
- Next message: Sharon: "Tb Test and BCG"
- Previous message: Zee: "DRUG COMPANIES BLINDED BY QUEST FOR PROFIT"
- In reply to: Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD: "Re: How to Become a Christian, Version 1.01"
- Next in thread: Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD: "Re: How to Become a Christian, Version 1.01"
- Reply: Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD: "Re: How to Become a Christian, Version 1.01"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 18:05:42 GMT
"Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" <andrew@heartmdphd.com> wrote in message
news:1101062993.jQulus64Mero0zAS26Lhcw@teranews...
> Would suggest you write truthfully.
Would suggest that before YOU make some suggestions,
you find an actual error in what's being said to you. I seem
to recall some very well-known Biblical advice having to
do with motes and beams - perhaps you remember that one
as well?
> There is no flaw in the truth.
Obviously. However, what YOU have said with respect
to this subject is in error.
> There is only one God who is the Creator of the universe, the Maker of
> all things, our Father who resides in heaven. This is not changed by
> your disbelief.
A nice attempt at re-direction, but the subject at hand was
not the existence of God or the nature of God - it was the
flaw in the argument you were employing. My "disbelief" is
again an assumption on your part, not supported by any statement
made here so far. You continue to be so arrogant as to assume
that disagreement with Andrew Chung simply MUST equate
to "disbelief in God." This is so obviously silly that it deserves
no further discussion.
> Actually, just as a decision tree is not a wager nor is it an argument.
Then I would suggest you stop employing it as such, and
learn to construct an argument which is actually in support of
your position. After all, YOU are the one who used this so-called
"decision tree" as an argument, since you claimed that those who
did not believe the conclusion YOU stated for it were not being
"logical." You, sir, are now being evasive and duplicitous.
> Actually, there is zero logical weight in that which is false.
Correct; you continue to demonstrate that by repeating a line
of reasoning repeatedly shown to be invalid.
> Logically, Jesus Christ, who has identified Himself as "the way, the
> truth, and the life" is by definition infinitely greater than all other
> things that you may choose to make up (including Ubizmo) just as 1 is
> infinitely greater than 0.
But only if such identification can be shown to be true. You
have failed to do so.
Nor, for that matter, is "1 infinitely greater than 0." "By definition,"
one is precisely one greater than zero, just as two is one greater
than one. We apparently can add basic mathematics to the list
of subjects you fail to grasp.
>
> Only Christ has identified Himself to be the truth.
>
That claim is clearly also in error; the central figures of essentially
ALL religionshave claimed to either "be the truth" or "have the
truth" or other phrases which are equivalent for the purpose of
this discussion. Are you ignorant of this, or simply making this
up as you go along?
> > You
> > further assume that any of those who point out these problems
> > MUST, therefore, also have "rejected Christ," when in fact
> > no evidence of this or logical argument for that conclusion has
> > been presented. (In short, your failing here is in making the
> > unsupportable assertion that any who reject YOUR arguments
> > must therefore be rejecting Christ, which is amazingly arrogant
> > and presumptive on your part. It seems obvious at this point
> > that rejection of Andrew Chung in no way equates to rejection
> > of Christ, unless it is your intent to show that you ARE, in fact,
> > Christ. IS this your argument?)
>
> (No. Unlike you, it has been my choice to continue to write truthfully)
One can only wish that you would begin to do so at some point.
>
> The truth is without flaw.
>
However, YOU are not the perfect possessor of the truth.
Now, PLEASE get out of rec.food.cooking.
- Next message: Sharon: "Tb Test and BCG"
- Previous message: Zee: "DRUG COMPANIES BLINDED BY QUEST FOR PROFIT"
- In reply to: Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD: "Re: How to Become a Christian, Version 1.01"
- Next in thread: Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD: "Re: How to Become a Christian, Version 1.01"
- Reply: Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD: "Re: How to Become a Christian, Version 1.01"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
