Is There One Sound/valid Syllogistic Argument For The Existence Of God?

[Boss]

Not a bang (a real counterargument), but another whimper. More relativist crap for which there is no defense but insults and bald denials.

Yeah... question is, why do you and Justin continue doing that?

The real question is why a solipsist is arguing against the TAG.

Don't know, you'd have to ask one. I'm not a solipsist nor do I argue against TAG. I only stated that I believe in a God who created everything, who is omnipotent. You have a problem with that because you think God didn't create logic and is somehow bound by it, but illogically omnipotent at the same time.

 

[Justin Davis]

Not a bang (a real counterargument), but another whimper. More relativist crap for which there is no defense but insults and bald denials.

Yeah... question is, why do you and Justin continue doing that?

The real question is why a solipsist is arguing against the TAG.

I know. Right?

 

[Boss]

Fuck you, Justin. If all you're going to do is insult me and be a troll, go to hell.

Another phony. Your arguments are total crap. They're retarded. They're stupid and contradictory. Yeah and this filth is all you got left. Are you Hollie? Did Hollie hijack your account?

Aww.. .what's the matter boo? A few days ago you were falling all over yourself to THANK my posts, you and MD both! Now you've suddenly decided to turn into rabid dogs on me because I don't agree with you that logic wasn't created by God. Sorry I am not a member of your cult, I believe in a God who created everything.

Nothing I've said is contradictory, nothing is illogical or irrational... or STUPID and RETARDED. That is just YOU venting frustration because you lack the arguments to refute what I have said. Whenever you try, you sound like a moron. That has obviously caused you to get all butt-hurt and decide we aren't friends anymore.

Now do you see why we don't believe there is a god? Most of you theists are simply bat shit stupid/crazy.

You're probably my favorite theist on USMB and I think you are a fucking retard too don't get me wrong, but of all the dumb retarded theists you are the least dumb and retarded.

So just remember that when you say you believe in god because "we" have always believed in god. Yes Boss, idiots like Justin and MD's primitive ancient ancestors believed in god 20,000 years ago, and they argued about bullshit like "did god create logic?".

And I would agree with you. If there is a god and he created all this on purpose, of course he created logic too. But the truth is there is no god so no god created you or the logic in your head.

Actually, MD's argument is a pretty good one, and I don't disagree with it. Where MD fails is when he goes off the rails on the crazy train and starts applying human characteristics and attributes to God. Of course, this is where most organized religions fail as well.

You're already on record silly boob, you believe in something greater than self, you've admitted it in the past, and you tepidly admit that here. Your problem is, you don't want to openly admit that because you think it lends some kind of credibility to religious beliefs. You're anti-religion because they pose a threat to your immoral viewpoints.

You go off the train. The vast majority of theists in the world believe that God does have sentience, just like logic proves. God didn't create logic because God created everything! Moonbat crazy. Boss in the gap. You're arguing just like the atheist flakes now.

God didn't create logic because God created everything!

Does anyone else find this sentence to make any sort of rational sense whatsoever?

 

[Justin Davis]

Funny thing about all this

It is so easy to make an inductive argument for any religion based on the experiences of "all" the followers, from its inception to present.

However, deductive arguments are difficult to make for the most simplest of things that exist.

I think the op is running a really bad joke, IMHO.

The real funny thing about all this is that you're solipsist arguing against the TAG or arguing against the seven things that aren't true outside your mind, and none of atheist have enough sense to come in out of the rain and realize how moonbat stupid you are. You atheists don't think, you pom pom each other no matter how stupid the things you say are.

 

[Boss]

Not a bang (a real counterargument), but another whimper. More relativist crap for which there is no defense but insults and bald denials.

Yeah... question is, why do you and Justin continue doing that?

The real question is why a solipsist is arguing against the TAG.

I know. Right?

Rawlings is a total Jackass.
Justin is an Eddie Murphy cartoon wannabe jackass who follows Rawlings around offering to make waffles!

 

[sealybobo]

Another phony. Your arguments are total crap. They're retarded. They're stupid and contradictory. Yeah and this filth is all you got left. Are you Hollie? Did Hollie hijack your account?

Aww.. .what's the matter boo? A few days ago you were falling all over yourself to THANK my posts, you and MD both! Now you've suddenly decided to turn into rabid dogs on me because I don't agree with you that logic wasn't created by God. Sorry I am not a member of your cult, I believe in a God who created everything.

Nothing I've said is contradictory, nothing is illogical or irrational... or STUPID and RETARDED. That is just YOU venting frustration because you lack the arguments to refute what I have said. Whenever you try, you sound like a moron. That has obviously caused you to get all butt-hurt and decide we aren't friends anymore.

Now do you see why we don't believe there is a god? Most of you theists are simply bat shit stupid/crazy.

You're probably my favorite theist on USMB and I think you are a fucking retard too don't get me wrong, but of all the dumb retarded theists you are the least dumb and retarded.

So just remember that when you say you believe in god because "we" have always believed in god. Yes Boss, idiots like Justin and MD's primitive ancient ancestors believed in god 20,000 years ago, and they argued about bullshit like "did god create logic?".

And I would agree with you. If there is a god and he created all this on purpose, of course he created logic too. But the truth is there is no god so no god created you or the logic in your head.

Actually, MD's argument is a pretty good one, and I don't disagree with it. Where MD fails is when he goes off the rails on the crazy train and starts applying human characteristics and attributes to God. Of course, this is where most organized religions fail as well.

You're already on record silly boob, you believe in something greater than self, you've admitted it in the past, and you tepidly admit that here. Your problem is, you don't want to openly admit that because you think it lends some kind of credibility to religious beliefs. You're anti-religion because they pose a threat to your immoral viewpoints.

You go off the train. The vast majority of theists in the world believe that God does have sentience, just like logic proves. God didn't create logic because God created everything! Moonbat crazy. Boss in the gap. You're arguing just like the atheist flakes now.

God didn't create logic because God created everything!

Does anyone else find this sentence to make any sort of rational sense whatsoever?

Lets start over please, from the beginning. Who is god? Where can I see him? How do you know this god exists?

And it doesn't bother you that every organized religion(s) stories about meeting him in the past are all a bunch of lies? Doesn't make you wonder if the entire premise is made up?

Then you are dumb.

 

[sealybobo]

Funny thing about all this

It is so easy to make an inductive argument for any religion based on the experiences of "all" the followers, from its inception to present.

However, deductive arguments are difficult to make for the most simplest of things that exist.

I think the op is running a really bad joke, IMHO.

The real funny thing about all this is that you're solipsist arguing against the TAG or arguing against the seven things that aren't true outside your mind, and none of atheist have enough sense to come in out of the rain and realize how moonbat stupid you are. You atheists don't think, you pom pom each other no matter how stupid the things you say are.

You said that you know atheists who agree that the 7 things are true. I asked you, "how is it then they are still atheists?".

And if I can agree your 7 things are correct and still be an atheist, fine, your 7 things are 100% correct. So what? If it doesn't prove anything to your atheists friends, then why do you think it will prove anything to us?

 

[Justin Davis]

God did not create logic!

THEN GOD IS NOT OMNIPOTENT!

God is omnipotent; therefore he created logic. Boss in the gap, no minor premise, no connection at all. God is omnipotent; therefore he created himself. God is omnipotent; therefore he created the tooth fairy. God is omnipotent; therefore he created Santa Clause. My dog has four legs; therefore my dog is a cat. Santa Clause has boots; therefore Santa Clause created God. Humans have sentience; therefore God doesn't.

Major premise.
Minor premises.
Conclusion.

Boss' argument, major premise jumps to non sequitur. It's moonbat crazy.

 

[Justin Davis]

If Boss prefers his foolish, irrational pride over the objective facts of commonsensical logic, he is welcome to it.

LMFAO... NOW we have "commonsensical" logic! This is presumably logic which comes from our "common sense" (aka: conventional wisdom)

Do I need to chronicle the plethora of "common sense" beliefs humans have held through history, which turned out to be totally incorrect? I'm not sure if USMB can handle the bandwidth!

LMFAO ... LMFAO ... LMFAO... LMFAO... LMFAO... LMFAO... LMFAO... LMFAO... LMFAO...

Shades of Hollie. Boss, "I'll just pretend I don't understand."

God is omnipotent; therefore he created logic. Boss in the gap, no minor premise, no connection at all. No common sense. God is omnipotent; therefore he created himself. God is omnipotent; therefore he created the tooth fairy. God is omnipotent; therefore he created Santa Clause. My dog has four legs; therefore my dog is a cat. Santa Clause has boots; therefore Santa Clause created God. Humans have sentience; therefore God doesn't.

Major premise.
Minor premises.
Conclusion.

Boss' argument, major premise jumps to non sequitur. It's moonbat crazy.

LMFAO ... LMFAO ... LMFAO... LMFAO... LMFAO... LMFAO... LMFAO... LMFAO... LMFAO...

God is omnipotent.
Humans have sentience.
God doesn't have sentience.
I know he doesn't have sentience because I told myself he doesn't have sentience.
We can only believe what's true, not known what's true.
I know its true that God doesn't have sentience.
I know its true that God created logic.
Logic is created.
Santa Clause exists.
My dog is a cat.
Elvis lives.
I believe what I believe.
I know what I know.
I don't know what I know.
I only believe.
The tooth fairy exists.
God is not God.
I'm God.

 

[G.T.]

Yepp....they're the same dude.

 

[Justin Davis]

Jesus is defiantly coming back in the not to far off distant future and then you will have the absolute proof.
When the antichrist desecrates the third temple, He will return in 3 1/2 years.

Hey Boss & Emily. How do you expect us to intelligently communicate with a nut job like this? It's like trying to tell a Muslim that Allah is not Akbar. You think he's going to listen to you?

This poster is a great example of whats wrong with religion. I can handle people like boss. It's people like this who can't understand that their bullshit man made up religion is no different from all the rest.

Want to tell me you believe in God and give me phylisophical reasons? Fine. Try to tell me god talked to you or your ancestors and I'm going to think you are a fucking retard of the highest order.

You relativists are the nutjobs, nutjob!

Duuuuuhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh


There are no absolute truths except the absolute truth that there are not absolute truths; therefore, the absolute truth that there are not absolute truths must be absolutely false!

Duuuuuuuuhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

That's you nutjob, not I!

There can be no mutual process of connection on the grounds of relativism.

Relativism is irrationalism! Indeed, it's the circular reasoning of self-negation that necessarily and positively proves the opposite is logically true. Hence, the relativist himself necessarily proves that his claim is utter crap, that truth is necessarily absolute, that truth is not merely something we believe, but is something that we know; that is to say, our truth according to the logic we have is the only truth we can believe or know.

Since that very same logic tells us that God is a perfect Creator of all other things that exist apart from Himself in organic logic, that is the only thing we can rationally believe or know to be true.

If this's not true, then nothing's true. Atheistic or theistic subjective relativists have got nothin' to say to me that I need to give a damn about.

They’re the ones claiming that nothing is true or nothing can be known to be true.

So they need to shut up!

This absolutist who believes the objective facts of human cognition via the objective logic thereof doesn’t give a rat's ass for anything they have to say, because according to their very own claims nothing they have to say is true . . . except for the fact that every time they open their yaps and assert relativism, they necessarily prove that I am right or at the very least UNCONSCIOUSLY, UNWITTINGLY tell me that they actually hold truth to be absolute after all!

They don't even know what they’re doing or saying or thinking or actually proving.

Fine.

I am an absolutist because that’s what the objective facts of human cognition via the objective logic thereof prove to be true. I believe. I have faith. I hold that these things are true. I believe God. I have faith in God. I trust that what He is telling me is true. Hence, I believe the truth, and I know the truth, because God has given me the truth.

My truth is the simple truth. There is nothing complex about my arguments. No, sir! They are simple. It's just that simpletons demand proof for what the simpletons already know to be true, logically, so I show them the facts of the matter that prove these things must be true. They make simple things complex.

The objective facts of human cognition via the objective logic thereof is the only thing that is rational. My faith is rational.

The faith of the relativist is based on the irrational notion that what he himself proves to be true via his very own logic is not really true at all.

So how does he know that?

Answer: he doesn't, and he has no justifiable basis to stand on at all. It’s utter rubbish, guess work, maybe, perhaps, duh, uh, um, la-la, duck, dodge, derp-derp logic, Koolaid. . . .

The relativist is a boorish nitwit contradictorily claiming nothing to be known as true and all kinds of things to be known as true at the same time.

Shut up!

Dear Justin: Can you please help me explain to MD?
I said there was a difference between Absolute truth and Relative EXPRESSIONS OR PERCEPTIONS of truth.

So these Relative truths are what humans use such as science and empirical experience.
Sealybobo has no experience with spiritual healing but my other friends do,
so their relative truths are different.

Can you please explain to MD this does not contradict absolute truths?

We can have both.

Two people can play on the same baseball team,
and the score is tied 3 to 3 -- absolutely.

But one person says the game was fair, because mistakes were made on both sides, and it came out even to them;
and the other person can say the game was unfair because X Y Z were unfair calls and one team should have won.

That's not a perfect example,
but I hope you get what I mean.

The score is absolutely unquestioned,
but the interpretation of whether the game was evenhanded or not is relative.
One person sees it one way and the other sees it another way,
and they are both right from their perspective.

He knows the difference better than any of us.

 

[Justin Davis]

Pride, foolish pride: that's what we have here!

God is Love. Did God create love?

God is Truth. Did God create truth?

God is Omniscience. Did God create omniscience?

God is Omnipotence. Did God create omnipotence?

God is Omnipresence. Did God create omnipresence?

God is Rationality and Order. Did God create rationality and order in the cosmos or bestow His rationality and order on the cosmos when He created it?

Where is the contradiction in that?

Answer: there is no contradiction!

Is that the argument of human cognition refuting your nonsense?

Answer: Yes, it is!

God is not inherently bound by His own nature and is not bound to create things in accordance with His own nature?

That's your argument?

Answer: Yes, it is!

What's wrong with that argument?

Answer: everything!

Is that the argument of human cognition refuting your nonsense?

Answer: Yes, it is!

A perfect God is not bound by the imperatives of love and truth and rationality and order?

Answer: Yes, He is!

Is that the argument of human cognition refuting your nonsense?

Answer: Yes, it is!

Is God rational or is He irrational? He is rational!

Is that the argument of human cognition refuting your nonsense?

Answer: Yes, it is!

Is God bound by His nature of rationality and order? Yes or no?

Answer: Yes, He is!

Is that the argument of human cognition refuting your nonsense?

Answer: Yes, it is!

A: A = A.

God = Not-God?! Is that your argument?

Answer: Yes, it is!

Is that argument sensible?

Answer: No, it's not!

Is that the argument of human cognition refuting your nonsense?

Answer: Yes, it is!

God ≠ Not-God.

Is that the argument of human cognition refuting your nonsense?

Answer: Yes, it is!

If our logic is wrong, then God is leading us to believe things about Him that are wrong, indeed, things that according to your logic don't even makes sense to us!

Is that the argument of human cognition refuting your nonsense?

Answer: Yes, it is!

Is your logic right?

Answer: No, it's not! It's incoherent and insane.

Indeed, it contradicts itself at every turn: for example, according to you, we can only believe truth, not know truth.

Are you asserting that as an absolutely true statement? Yes or no?

Answer: Yes, you are!

Hence, does your claim necessarily negate itself and positively prove the opposite is true?

Answer: Yes, it does!

Is that the argument of human cognition refuting your nonsense?

Answer: Yes, it is!

Your logic is wrong, because the only thing that does make sense is the real logic of human cognition that just destroyed your nonsense, the logic that must be the eternally existing logic of God bestowed on us, not created!

Enough of this nonsense that the terms endow or bestow or confer are synonymous to the term create!

God did not create logic!

 

[Justin Davis]

The Syllogistic Arguments of Boss in the Gap Fallacy


The Boss in the Gap Argument for Created Logic
1. God created everything.
2. Boss in the gap
3. Hence, God created logic.


The Boss in the Gap Argument for Human Truth
1. Humans can only believe truth.
2. Boss in the gap
3. Hence, humans cannot know truth.


The Boss in the Gap Argument for the Anthropomorphism of God
1. Humans can only think about God on the terms of their understanding of consciousness: human logic and human emotions.
2. Boss in the gap
3. Hence, humans necessarily anthropomorphize God.


The Boss in the Gap Argument for "Nuh-huh, I Didn't Really Mean That"
1. God created everything.
2. Boss in the gap
3. Hence, God created logic.

Or:

1. Humans can only believe truth.
2. Boss in the gap
3. Hence, humans cannot know truth.

Or in the arguments where he thinks he's arguing something different, something I supposedly don't understand, when in fact it is he who fails to chart the true course of his own logic:

1. Humans think of God as having a consciousness that entails emotions and logic akin to their own because their consciousness is the only means by which they can think about consciousness.
2. Boss in the gap
3. Hence, "I never said the claptrap that humans necessarily anthropomorphize the consciousness of God in their minds."
[4. Rawlings, filling in the gap for Boss: "Yes, you effectively and necessary did!"]



Yep! Looks like we've got fallacious major premises, followed by no real minor premises at all connecting the major premises to the conclusions, except, of course, some mysterious thought processes going on in Boss's mind with Boss in the gap.



The Boss in the Gap Argument for Rawlings Supposed Irrationalism
1. Rawlings does not support his argument.
2. Boss ignoring the objective facts of human cognition, including the necessary line and implications of his own reasoning as if none of us noticed, as he stands in the gap
3. Rawlings is irrational.
[4. Rawlings: "Hogwash! See Post #4191."]

Or:

1. Rawlings points out that God is omniscient, all-knowing. Hence, God is the very substance and the ground of the first principles of knowledge: the universal laws of thought! God did not create everything that exists. God did not create Himself or any necessary aspect of His Mind. That is axiomatic. The logic that humans have is the uncreated logic of God endowed on man! The terms create and endow are not synonymous.
2. Straw man Boss in the gap
3. Hence, because Rawlings argues that God created everything (?), his statement that God didn't create logic contradicts his statement that God didn't create everything (?).
[4. Rawlings: "Boss is outside his mind and his nonsense has been utterly refuted here and in Post #4191. If Boss prefers his foolish, irrational pride over the objective facts of commonsensical logic, he is welcome to it. But his lies less than honest claims and confused thinking are tiresome, verging on an age older than dirt and exponentially more stupid."]

Common sense.

 

[Hollie]

The Syllogistic Arguments of Boss in the Gap Fallacy


The Boss in the Gap Argument for Created Logic
1. God created everything.
2. Boss in the gap
3. Hence, God created logic.


The Boss in the Gap Argument for Human Truth
1. Humans can only believe truth.
2. Boss in the gap
3. Hence, humans cannot know truth.


The Boss in the Gap Argument for the Anthropomorphism of God
1. Humans can only think about God on the terms of their understanding of consciousness: human logic and human emotions.
2. Boss in the gap
3. Hence, humans necessarily anthropomorphize God.


The Boss in the Gap Argument for "Nuh-huh, I Didn't Really Mean That"
1. God created everything.
2. Boss in the gap
3. Hence, God created logic.

Or:

1. Humans can only believe truth.
2. Boss in the gap
3. Hence, humans cannot know truth.

Or in the arguments where he thinks he's arguing something different, something I supposedly don't understand, when in fact it is he who fails to chart the true course of his own logic:

1. Humans think of God as having a consciousness that entails emotions and logic akin to their own because their consciousness is the only means by which they can think about consciousness.
2. Boss in the gap
3. Hence, "I never said the claptrap that humans necessarily anthropomorphize the consciousness of God in their minds."
[4. Rawlings, filling in the gap for Boss: "Yes, you effectively and necessary did!"]



Yep! Looks like we've got fallacious major premises, followed by no real minor premises at all connecting the major premises to the conclusions, except, of course, some mysterious thought processes going on in Boss's mind with Boss in the gap.



The Boss in the Gap Argument for Rawlings Supposed Irrationalism
1. Rawlings does not support his argument.
2. Boss ignoring the objective facts of human cognition, including the necessary line and implications of his own reasoning as if none of us noticed, as he stands in the gap
3. Rawlings is irrational.
[4. Rawlings: "Hogwash! See Post #4191."]

Or:

1. Rawlings points out that God is omniscient, all-knowing. Hence, God is the very substance and the ground of the first principles of knowledge: the universal laws of thought! God did not create everything that exists. God did not create Himself or any necessary aspect of His Mind. That is axiomatic. The logic that humans have is the uncreated logic of God endowed on man! The terms create and endow are not synonymous.
2. Straw man Boss in the gap
3. Hence, because Rawlings argues that God created everything (?), his statement that God didn't create logic contradicts his statement that God didn't create everything (?).
[4. Rawlings: "Boss is outside his mind and his nonsense has been utterly refuted here and in Post #4191. If Boss prefers his foolish, irrational pride over the objective facts of commonsensical logic, he is welcome to it. But his lies less than honest claims and confused thinking are tiresome, verging on an age older than dirt and exponentially more stupid."]

Common sense.

Flail those Pom Poms.

 

[Justin Davis]

Emily

Kindness can only reach people that are receptive to it.

Tolerance is for those who might mean no harm.

It is a brave thing to offer either to people you do not know. But make no mistake in assuming everyone will reciprocate your kindness or mean no harm.

There is a point when you must stop. If, at least, for the sake of your sanity.

There are people with dark personalities. They will not reciprocate your kindness, and they will take advantage of your tolerance.

Please keep what I said in mind as this thread continues.

And there are people with false, hypocritical personalities who manipulate the truth, who say stupid things and mock the simple truths of common sense.

 

[amrchaos]

After that last statement by Sealybobo--'you aren't converting atheist with your trash'-- they are still posting?

That is just sick.

 

[Hollie]

The Syllogistic Arguments of Boss in the Gap Fallacy


The Boss in the Gap Argument for Created Logic
1. God created everything.
2. Boss in the gap
3. Hence, God created logic.


The Boss in the Gap Argument for Human Truth
1. Humans can only believe truth.
2. Boss in the gap
3. Hence, humans cannot know truth.


The Boss in the Gap Argument for the Anthropomorphism of God
1. Humans can only think about God on the terms of their understanding of consciousness: human logic and human emotions.
2. Boss in the gap
3. Hence, humans necessarily anthropomorphize God.


The Boss in the Gap Argument for "Nuh-huh, I Didn't Really Mean That"
1. God created everything.
2. Boss in the gap
3. Hence, God created logic.

Or:

1. Humans can only believe truth.
2. Boss in the gap
3. Hence, humans cannot know truth.

Or in the arguments where he thinks he's arguing something different, something I supposedly don't understand, when in fact it is he who fails to chart the true course of his own logic:

1. Humans think of God as having a consciousness that entails emotions and logic akin to their own because their consciousness is the only means by which they can think about consciousness.
2. Boss in the gap
3. Hence, "I never said the claptrap that humans necessarily anthropomorphize the consciousness of God in their minds."
[4. Rawlings, filling in the gap for Boss: "Yes, you effectively and necessary did!"]



Yep! Looks like we've got fallacious major premises, followed by no real minor premises at all connecting the major premises to the conclusions, except, of course, some mysterious thought processes going on in Boss's mind with Boss in the gap.



The Boss in the Gap Argument for Rawlings Supposed Irrationalism
1. Rawlings does not support his argument.
2. Boss ignoring the objective facts of human cognition, including the necessary line and implications of his own reasoning as if none of us noticed, as he stands in the gap
3. Rawlings is irrational.
[4. Rawlings: "Hogwash! See Post #4191."]

Or:

1. Rawlings points out that God is omniscient, all-knowing. Hence, God is the very substance and the ground of the first principles of knowledge: the universal laws of thought! God did not create everything that exists. God did not create Himself or any necessary aspect of His Mind. That is axiomatic. The logic that humans have is the uncreated logic of God endowed on man! The terms create and endow are not synonymous.
2. Straw man Boss in the gap
3. Hence, because Rawlings argues that God created everything (?), his statement that God didn't create logic contradicts his statement that God didn't create everything (?).
[4. Rawlings: "Boss is outside his mind and his nonsense has been utterly refuted here and in Post #4191. If Boss prefers his foolish, irrational pride over the objective facts of commonsensical logic, he is welcome to it. But his lies less than honest claims and confused thinking are tiresome, verging on an age older than dirt and exponentially more stupid."]

Common sense.

Only to the senseless.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

[

He created everything in this universe.
We know very little or next to nothing yet about parallel worlds.

God did not create everything that exists in this universe. God created everything that exists apart from Himself. God did not create the logic that exists in this universe. The logic that exists in this universe was bestowed on it by God. Our logic is God's logic. Logic has always existed in God from eternity. Logic was not created.

 

[amrchaos]

Maybe they are not reading responses?

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

After that last statement by Sealybobo--'you aren't converting atheist with your trash'-- they are still posting?

That is just sick.

Why are you still posting? This is just sick.



Behold the atheist mentality: everything is about him. LOL!