Name your favorite theist

Jaywalker

I think it's high time that we give our hardcore, bible thumping, super highly educated creationists/theists the credit they deserve.

My favorite theists:
Mordecai whom I’ve had the pleasure of having civilized discourse with in so many threads. I remember how kind he was –whenever he felt like I didn’t understand something he said, he’d give me very helpful advice like, “try getting that through your head!” He’d even thank me for writing long monologues for him …ahh those sweet memories. Sheep he definitely was not as his ideas and beliefs were so unique …so different from normal people’s (did I say normal? I meant average) even those who have the same religion as he, that he should be up there among the likes of Darwin and Galileo. He believed that the earth was only 6000 years old and he even had some very convincing scientific evidence to prove it. He also believed that there was a conspiracy in the global scientific community to hold back evidence for a great flood because that would be proof for the story of Noah and therefore God

Mr scientist Jourdan PhD, whose outstanding credentials at pisay and impeccable knowledge of quantum physics always inspire me. I think he may even have ESP since he can detect arguments that haven’t even been posted yet. ..and he hasn’t even posted scientific arguments for god. If he did I’m sure I’ll become a believer again

Sigh …it’s just sad that they don’t visit us anymore

Oneiros

Feh, ba't di na lang kasi sila maging fideistic. Masyado na talagang maraming apologists na na-obssess sa Empiricism at Materialism. Gaya nga ng sinabi ni Tillich:

It would he a great victory for Christian apologetics if the words "God" and "existence" were very definitely separated except in the paradox of God becoming manifest under the conditions of existence.... God does not exist. He is being-itself beyond essence and existence. Therefore, to argue that God exists is to deny him.

The method of arguing through to a conclusion also contradicts the idea of God. Every argument derives conclusions from something that is given about something that is sought. In arguments for the existence of God the world is given and God is sought.... But, if we derive God from the world, he cannot be that which transcends the world infinitely.

From here: Tillich, P. Systematic Theology, Volume 1. University of Chicago Press. 1951

Akala ko tuloy (dahil sa title nung thread) ibibigay dapat ang paboritong apologist outside of PEx. Fan (fanning the flames?) thread pala .

st.anger

perkins (perky) FTW. this guy is ad hominem incarnate whenever he visits a thread here. instead of rambling on with silly, little arguments to defend his faith, he'll just call you a "cockroach" or whatever quaint name he can think of.

easter. i salute him for his perseverance. instead of actually trying to form his own arguments he'll just drop a link or two at you. and he doesn't disappear-reappear as much as the other theists on the forum. he's always ready to fight the good fight.

easter

^Ha ha! Thanks st.anger!

I usually don't expound my own opinions unless it is needed. I just direct people here to sources who have better answers than I do.

micketymoc

easter, it comes across quite differently. It seems you don't have the confidence to expound your own point of view - that your point of view, instead, is dictated verbatim by your sources.

I can't emphasize this enough: The whole point of being on Pex is to get your own opinion across. Otherwise, you're wasting your time, and the time of others.

blue[]ce

me personally, its ok to drop links and text, but it is most important that when questioned, you can defend them and show your understanding. what i dislike are those who drop links/text then disappear.

micketymoc

I think the point of being on a messageboard like this is to have an identity.

easter - who doesn't have an opinion to begin with "unless it's absolutely necessary" is no better than a 'bot that's only just smart enough to drop a link or two.

No analysis. No personal touch. No opinions. Just an unthinking assent to whatever he's posting in the absence of any perceivable critical thought.

For easter, I think it's fair game to just respond with another set of links and be done with it.

faaip_de_oiad

I vote for Papa Razzi Cardinal Bratzinger!

Yes, he's a PEXER

beware!

my_identity

Hmm, raggster, brownpau and Mordecai. They argue(d) with logic and they back(ed) up their religious/theistic stance with plausible and rational arguments. Kudos to them!

Never seen Jourdan PhD, ever. Why and when did he stop posting? I would love to see his posts. I think I'll have to tinker with PEX's search function then. . .

perkins

st.anger wrote:

perkins (perky) FTW. this guy is ad hominem incarnate whenever he visits a thread here. instead of rambling on with silly, little arguments to defend his faith, he'll just call you a "cockroach" or whatever quaint name he can think of.

easter. i salute him for his perseverance. instead of actually trying to form his own arguments he'll just drop a link or two at you. and he doesn't disappear-reappear as much as the other theists on the forum. he's always ready to fight the good fight.

st. cockroach..er..st. anger, i thought all along that you simply fancy being the patron saint of atheists posers around here. i never realized that you now like to be their foremost crybaby.

now, now, then. just please don't tell on me to your momma.

loc0

Wow, so much leftover adolescent angst. I'm now your number one fan

gekokujo

seriously, the one theist with whom I shared a genuine give-and-take discussion was AsiaWest. yes he was informed, yes he was articulate, yes he could argue convincingly, but what distinguished the character of his reasoning from those of everybody else was relevance. no red herrings, strawmen, generalizations, equivocation, playing loose with the premises, etc. ultimately, intellectual honesty is what separates pretenders from the contenders.

essex

micketymoc wrote:

I think the point of being on a messageboard like this is to have an identity.

easter - who doesn't have an opinion to begin with "unless it's absolutely necessary" is no better than a 'bot that's only just smart enough to drop a link or two.

No analysis. No personal touch. No opinions. Just an unthinking assent to whatever he's posting in the absence of any perceivable critical thought.

For easter, I think it's fair game to just respond with another set of links and be done with it.

Don't forget he loves to re-use arguments (if you can even call it that) which have been debunked and disproven a hundred kagillion times already...

Sigh easter, why do you even bother posting if you don't 'feel' like debating? You do know what the purpose of a forum is don't you? Perhaps your style would be best suited for blogging... that way you can keep posting your quotes and links and spout out nonesense (of other people) to your heart's content.

Quite frankly, I find most of easter's posts to be lacking in substance, meaning, and purpose... nothing more than your average spammer.

st.anger

perkins wrote:

st. cockroach..er..st. anger, i thought all along that you simply fancy being the patron saint of atheists posers around here. i never realized that you now like to be their foremost crybaby.

now, now, then. just please don't tell on me to your momma.

thank you, thank you. i knew i'd get your attention. i was starting to miss you.

*hugs*

decoy47

Jaywalker, you should have specified different categories for this. And to be fair, it has to be based on certain "episodes". These are my favorite theists for:

Best Use of Cut-and-Paste Skill: This definitely goes to nicolai_frank. Man, those posts are priceless.

Best Literal Interpretation of the Book of Job: Archimedes and easter try to get the spotlight here, but the award definitely belongs to Mordecai.

Best Use of a Simple Analogy to Explain a Theistic Point: losav definitely wins this award for his post #18! Bok bok bok!

Best Use of an Alternate Handle: this definitely belongs to Muhammad/Allah, for demonstrating that theists really love to talk to imaginary friends.

Ischaramoochie

@decoy47: man, those bring back a lot of good memories...

easter

micketymoc wrote:

easter - who doesn't have an opinion to begin with "unless it's absolutely necessary" is no better than a 'bot that's only just smart enough to drop a link or two.

No analysis. No personal touch. No opinions. Just an unthinking assent to whatever he's posting in the absence of any perceivable critical thought.

For easter, I think it's fair game to just respond with another set of links and be done with it.

When you ask about apples, do I throw a link to laptops?

Are the links I provide totally out of the blue meaning it isn't related to the topic that some of you being angered by it? Does it not in some way provide a response to your contention? A response that you may or may not agree with?

Is it because that in some (not all) of your queries, I am able provide link responses that the skeptical questions you guys ask are not original and has been responded to in the past? If they are not original then they have been raised in some book (even link) before the existence of PEX or even the internet.

essex wrote:

Sigh easter, why do you even bother posting if you don't 'feel' like debating? You do know what the purpose of a forum is don't you?

Forums can be used to share information among members. It can also be a support group wherein people can help and ask for help. Forums are a great source for brain storming and generating ideas if you have a project in mind. Forums can also be used in business so as to know what products to buy or if you are the owner, how customers are responding to your products and services.

Forums provide interaction and debates are only one of its many avenues. And yes this applies to PEX and even to it's ROT threads.

loc0

He's still dodging micketymoc's questions, isn't he?