Ryan McAvoy said:
RicOlie_2 said:
RicOlie_2 said:
[...stuff...]
Apologies, it was just an odd usage of the word. Most people would have said it differently when using it to refer to the first definition. I just misunderstood, that's all.
^ The first is what it means, the second is what you believe it to mean. You keep suggesting I and others have made silly "mistakes" in our posts which comes across as quite patronising (Especially when you are infact incorrect yourself), I'm sure it is not your intent to do so. I let it go the first few times but thought it time to mention that.
You may not realize it, but you have come across as being condescending and patronizing a few times. You have also been wrong about some things regarding religion. I don't mean that to sound/look condescending, but please realize that both of us are doing the same things.
Apologies if I come of like that, it's not my intent either. I tend to pepper my arguments with a little humour, even light sarcasm but it is meant in jest (Gives a debate some zest IMO). But there is a subtle difference between poking a bit of fun at the content of somebody's argument and suggesting that somebody lacks the basic language skills to make that argument.
The best of us are guilty of that. Humour tends to come across badly over the internet. In the heat of a debate, things can be taken more personally than normal, or things you say might seem OK from your perspective, but appear rude to the other person.
RicOlie_2 said:
This is the kind of story that only confirms my belief in the non-existence of God.
I don't think it is evidence against God's existence. I think it is evidence, albeit weak, for the existence of God.
For me, it is a story of the kind of crazy stuff the human mind can dream up when it is pushed to the limits. If it was a story of a totally rational and sober man seeing Angels, it would be less easy to dismiss.
[story]
Exactly, that story is less easy for me to dismiss or explain. I still don't believe it and am sure there must be a rational explanation somewhere in there if I had more information like Doctor's notes, pathologist's reports, a library of similar case notes, patient history, multiple witness testimonies, a degree in medicine etc etc.
It is certainly impossible to refute some purported miracles, and equally hard to prove they happened. I choose to accept many of them, but you choose to believe there is a natural explanation. Both work, I guess, but each side shouldn't be too quick to dismiss the other.