# Logic - or the lack of it (Rules of Logic)



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

In a recent thread I noticed that some folks are either willfully lying, ignorant, or lack a basic understanding of logic and reasoning

There are three basics:

Law of identity - “each thing is the same with itself and different from another”
Law of non-contradiction - "contradictory statements cannot both be true in the same sense at the same time"
Law of Excluded Middle - "For any proposition, either that proposition is true, or its negation is true"


Law of non-contradiction -
“Anyone who denies the law of non-contradiction should be beaten and burned until he admits that to be beaten is not the same as not to be beaten, and to be burned is not the same as not to be burned.” ― Ibn Sina 

Statements are either true or false. 
Statements that contradict can not both be true

truth is worth knowing
----------------------------------------------------------------------


----------



## PaulS (Mar 11, 2013)

Maine-Marine,
Concerning the law of non-contradiction:

Jesus is God. true
Jesus is man. true? (contradictions can exist in faith)
There is only one God. true
Jesus referred to his Father and to the Holy Spirit - three separate persons in one God? (faith supercedes contradiction)

Logically these statements cannot all be true but in faith they can be.

Conclusion: No discussion on faith can be held to the rules of logic.
No logical discussion can admit faith as an argument.

Statements can be true, false or unknown quantities. In a logical discussion unknown quantities are disallowed. (for the most part)
Evidence is fact based (not faith based).

It used to be a fact that the Earth was flat, the the stars were just holes in the covering of Earths shell and the universe consisted only of what could be seen, heard and felt.
Today it is a fact that the Earth is a spheroid, the starts are other suns and the universe is a 14 billion light year spheroid that contains things that are visible and invisible, physical and non-physical.
Truth is immutable. It can never change. If it is truth than it has always been truth and will always be truth. There are very few truths.
Facts are only true now. They may change.


----------



## Diver (Nov 22, 2014)

"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds" Ralph Waldo Emerson


----------



## PaulS (Mar 11, 2013)

Diver,
The actual quote is:
" A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines."

It changes the meanings when you cut it short...


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

Paul, your assertions are not contradictions to those who understand the triunal nature of both God and man, and that Jesus came as God incarnate.

Stop making me type on this infernal tablet!


----------



## PaulS (Mar 11, 2013)

That is exactly my point. 
They are logical contradictions but acceptable through faith.
To quote a religious text (paraphrased): No man can know the nature of God and live. (No man can know the mind of God and live)

"Those who accept the triunal nature of God, through faith, believe that Jesus came as God incarnate" is a truer statement.

The Jews have a name for God, El which comes from the Sumerian Anki which changed to An in the thousands of years that the civilization survived. The Hebrew "Elohim" means the many faces of God, or the attributes of God. Elohim is a multigendered proper noun that is at the same time genderless. A fairly good understanding of God in my opinion.


----------



## bigwheel (Sep 22, 2014)

Let us not confuse seeming logical contradictions with plausibly explained dilemmas. Was the Risen Christ's apparent ability to pass through solid walls a contradiction or a dilemma?

https://answersingenesis.org/answers/books/demolishing-supposed-bible-contradictions-1/introduction/


----------



## Frostbite (Jan 28, 2015)

> Jesus is God. true
> Jesus is man. true? (contradictions can exist in faith)
> There is only one God. true
> Jesus referred to his Father and to the Holy Spirit - three separate persons in one God? (faith supercedes contradiction)


Interesting.

Jesus is God? A claim supported by no evidence.
Jesus is man? Lots of Hispanic guys would provide themselves as evidence.
There is only one God? Another claim supported by no evidence.
Jesus referred? We have no evidence that Jesus referred anything (unless we're talking about one of those Hispanic guys referring us to a Mexican restaurant).

Well, that sure is a hodge-podge of bizarre talk that has nothing to do with logic.

I'll give you logic (assuming you really want it).

It is logical to refuse to believe a collection of absolutely uncorroborated and self-serving ancient Jewish campfire stories!

Stories that have the common theme of: God is on our side and we can kill anybody who disagrees with us because we're just..........BETTER than they are.

Are such things usually true or mostly fantasy?

Yeah, I thought so.

Now.......say we have another bunch of wild and imaginative stories.......written a little later by a man named Saul (with a suspicious alias of Paul) and his ONE disciple, Luke (at least he didn't have an alias) and a few of their followers (said stories being revised and refined by OTHER followers for about 250 years).

And Saul/Paul and Luke and company claimed to speak in tongues of angels, cast out demons, be immune to snake venom, heal the sick, raise the dead and do other miracles.

Well, how much credibility does logic give THEM????? Where's the proof?

And, oh yes, by the way......they also take up collections of hard cash with no accountability except themselves......providing the common human motive for most new false religions.

And about this mysterious "Saul" character.......he seems to have started his new religion about ten years after the death of Jesus, yet he claims to be a disciple of Jesus and to have met and known Jesus personally. Odd, isn't it? He's clearly a liar.

He claims to be a highly educated Pharisee, yet Jewish scholars see no sign of such an education in his crude writings.

Indeed, the later book of "Acts of the Apostles" reveals that he was from Tarsus (where it would have been almost impossible to find a learned Pharisee teacher) and Saul/Paul himself never mentions in his letters that he was from Tarsus. He really didn't want the recipients of his letters to know he was from Tarsus.....because they would have known his claim of being a highly educated Pharisee was highly unlikely. Thus he lied by omission.

Another thing that is odd indeed......and along the way he changes his name to "Paul." What's up with that?

Christians of today base their belief on the writings of one man and his disciple. These two being Saul AKA Paul and Luke, a Greek who also never met Jesus--AND the writings of the Greek and Roman followers they collected as they established a new religion based on common pagan myths attached to the name of Jesus and the new Pauline concept of "GRACE."

This concept of "Grace" was a stroke of Pauline genius. He alone invented it......he was telling the Greeks and Romans (who loved to sin) that they could sin all they wanted and still get to heaven because of "GRACE." Jesus the "CHRIST" had PAID for their sins!!!! All they had to do was pay in the collection plate. Which was fine with them.

This was a new thing! A PERFECT religion where you could have your cake and eat it too.

A religion which quickly evolved into the greatest money-making religio/political machine in the history of the world.

Logic. Well, the only logical conclusion here is to see the whole thing for what it was.......a compelling scam that took off like a rocket.

There's your logic.


----------



## Diver (Nov 22, 2014)

PaulS said:


> Diver,
> The actual quote is:
> " A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines."
> 
> It changes the meanings when you cut it short...


The point is if someone posts something inconsistent or illogical, I will simply consider it a normal day.


----------



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

Frostbite said:


> Interesting.
> 
> Jesus is God? A claim supported by no evidence.
> Jesus is man? Lots of Hispanic guys would provide themselves as evidence.
> ...


I pray that you would come to a saving GRACE. You would not be the first or last angry atheist that saw the light and converted...just like Saul. Have a Blessed day

oh, and the fact that you are on the road to hell - does not make me better then you!


----------



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

PaulS said:


> Maine-Marine,
> Concerning the law of non-contradiction:
> 
> Jesus is God. true
> ...


Truth is always true.. all true things are facts.

Paul I hope you are not a Christian minister!


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

Paul, don't make me smash this tablet! My company toolbox has a hammer and I am not afraid to use it!
Not even sure why they put a hammer in an avionics toolbox.


----------



## Frostbite (Jan 28, 2015)

Maine-Marine said:


> I pray that you would come to a saving GRACE. You would not be the first or last angry atheist that saw the light and converted...just like Saul. Have a Blessed day
> 
> oh, and the fact that you are on the road to hell - does not make me better then you!


First of all, I'm not an atheist. I'm a deist.

Second, I'm not angry.

Third, I agree.....you're definitely not better than me--in any way.

:armata_PDT_12::armata_PDT_12::armata_PDT_12:


----------



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

Frostbite said:


> First of all, I'm not an atheist. I'm a deist.


deist - Classic - so you believe in a unknown god that never reveals him/her self and is totally unknowable... you are one step away from islam

My Bible talks about you folks -

Romans 1:25
They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator


----------



## Frostbite (Jan 28, 2015)

Maine-Marine said:


> deist - Classic - so you believe in a unknown god that never reveals him/her self and is totally unknowable... you are one step away from islam
> 
> My Bible talks about you folks -
> 
> ...


Since Deists believe in the Creator.....what you said is nonsense.

But I've learned to expect that of you.

:armata_PDT_12:


----------



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

Frostbite said:


> Since Deists believe in the Creator.....what you said is nonsense.
> 
> But I've learned to expect that of you.
> 
> :armata_PDT_12:


Deist believe in A creator.. they do not know which one... but there is a creator... unknown and unknowable...

they do not know who, what, where, how, when..but there is one...

sort of like having a powerball ticket but nobody ever draws numbers to see who won


----------



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

Frostbite said:


> Since Deists believe in the Creator.....what you said is nonsense.


Deists point their finger at others and say "There is a God - just not the one YOU worship"

(and they think christians are arrogant... ha ha ha ha)


----------



## Salt-N-Pepper (Aug 18, 2014)

This discussion reminds me of directions I once read about how to kiss a girl.


----------



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)

Lmao. My thread spurned a side thread.


----------



## bigwheel (Sep 22, 2014)

Jakthesoldier said:


> Lmao. My thread spurned a side thread.


Yes..you are a trouble making bad boy. Good job. The muzzies are rising to the top like dead fish. Its good to get them sorted out.


----------



## shoot2live (Feb 6, 2015)

Frostbite said:


> Interesting.
> 
> A religion which quickly evolved into the greatest money-making religio/political machine in the history of the world.
> 
> ...


You, sir, are my new hero.


----------



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)

The greatest truth. Everything that lives, dies. Beyond that it is all opinion. No one (despite whatever they claim to know) actually has any friggin clue as to what comes after death. So, with that being said, if you choose to believe in something, GO FOR IT. It doesn't matter if anyone else believes it. That is the great truth of faith. True faith persists whether anyone else supports it, no matter what. If you have a menial understanding of the Bible, its full of contradictions. If you have an advanced understanding of both the language mechanics in which it was written, and the language mechanics into which it was translated, then you have a better understanding that it does not actually contain a single contradiction. to better illustrate this point there is a $1 million standing reward to anyone who can find a contradiction in the Bible. that offer has existed longer than I have been alive. It has yet to be claimed. The greatest minds in the world have tried, and found there are none. You are not special, you are not that smart, you just have insufficient understanding of the language you are reading. And we all know ignorance sometimes rears its head in the form of seeming genius.


----------



## Frostbite (Jan 28, 2015)

Jakthesoldier said:


> there is a $1 million standing reward to anyone who can find a contradiction in the Bible. that offer has existed longer than I have been alive. It has yet to be claimed.


LOL! No, ROFL!!!!

There are plenty that have been documented.

Who's offering this $Million?????

If it were true I'd cash in.

:emmersed::emmersed::emmersed:


----------



## Prepadoodle (May 28, 2013)

God doesn't tell you exactly what God wants, but will put you through hell if you don't figure it out.

Logic thus tells us that God must be a woman.


----------



## shoot2live (Feb 6, 2015)

Prepadoodle said:


> God doesn't tell you exactly what God wants, but will put you through hell if you don't figure it out.
> 
> Logic thus tells us that God must be a woman.


Logic - closing one sliding door at a time, leaving one open. Why force yourself to do double the work?
Jak has no logic. Going out to our storage closet, he made me walk into a screen door, while listening to him, after I opened the sliding glass door. The entire screen door came off the track. 
According to Prep's logic, Jak should have walked into the screen door.

Feel free to laugh. Tears continue to roll down my cheeks from the surprise attack. At least I can say, "I took that door down!" and mark it as a victory.


----------



## Frostbite (Jan 28, 2015)

shoot2live said:


> You, sir, are my new hero.


No big deal......I'm just cursed with common sense.

:armata_PDT_12:


----------



## shoot2live (Feb 6, 2015)

Frostbite said:


> No big deal......I'm just cursed with common sense.
> 
> :armata_PDT_12:


Only the best of us have the ability to apply common sense.


----------



## Slippy (Nov 14, 2013)

Most certainly something I'd buy in .308 Win. And better to look at than reading the drivel above which has nothing to do with anything but causing trouble.
Thanks


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

Frostbite said:


> No big deal......I'm just cursed with common sense.
> 
> :armata_PDT_12:


Maybe one day we will see it in use?


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

Slippy said:


> Most certainly something I'd buy in .308 Win. And better to look at than reading the drivel above which has nothing to do with anything but causing trouble.
> Thanks


This is why Slippy is my hero.


----------



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)

Frostbite said:


> LOL! No, ROFL!!!!
> 
> There are plenty that have been documented.
> 
> ...


0 have been found. Ever. Period. However the deciding authority are church historians. Regardless, not one single contradiction exists in the King James Bible. If you wonder why only one translation is eligible, it is because the King James version is the only one DIRECTLY translated from the original texts to a (somewhat) modern English and is considered the most accurate translation by all authorities on the subject. Again, if you think you have found a contradiction, it just proves you are not as smart as you think you are.

Now to be clear, I'm not commenting on the 30 some odd books that never were canonized, nor am I commenting on any of the decanonized books removed circa the dark ages.


----------



## Sasquatch (Dec 12, 2014)




----------



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

Jakthesoldier said:


> it is because the King James version is the only one DIRECTLY translated from the original texts


Sorry no ORIGINAL docs were used in the translation... lots of copies of originals but no originals


----------



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)

Maine-Marine said:


> Sorry no ORIGINAL docs were used in the translation... lots of copies of originals but no originals


Lemme tell you what. Why don't you go do some actual research, and come back when you actually have some inkling as to what you are talking about. Until then you are just spouting off #### you were told by people who heard from some guy.


----------



## oddapple (Dec 9, 2013)

He's making a superfluous point that you have to catch the wording of - copies of original material, ie there's no disagreement on the material.....


----------



## Frostbite (Jan 28, 2015)

Jakthesoldier said:


> 0 have been found. Ever. Period. However the deciding authority are church historians. Regardless, not one single contradiction exists in the King James Bible. If you wonder why only one translation is eligible, it is because the King James version is the only one DIRECTLY translated from the original texts to a (somewhat) modern English and is considered the most accurate translation by all authorities on the subject. Again, if you think you have found a contradiction, it just proves you are not as smart as you think you are.


Then why can't you come up with proof of this offer of a million dollars for whoever finds a contradiction in the Bible???

I know......

1. There is no such offer.
2. There are many proven contradictions.

By the way, the KJV is one of the most inaccurate and #### translations in existence.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

"Believing with you that *religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship*, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."
-Thomas Jefferson

This should put an end to the matter.
Arguing over who claims to make a logical "point" is, well, pointless.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

Frostbite said:


> By the way, the KJV is one of the most inaccurate and bullshit translations in existence.


This should be easy enough to prove...
How good is your Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek?


----------



## Frostbite (Jan 28, 2015)

Kauboy said:


> "Believing with you that *religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship*, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."
> -Thomas Jefferson
> 
> This should put an end to the matter.
> Arguing over who claims to make a logical "point" is, well, pointless.


Good point!!!

:armata_PDT_12:

Problem is, people love to argue and always will.


----------



## oddapple (Dec 9, 2013)

Frostbite said:


> Good point!!!
> 
> :armata_PDT_12:
> 
> Problem is, people love to argue and always will.


No....people are arguing because what they "love to do and always will" is against the law in peace time. Some people may get socialization or some other thing out of yapping but the majority are only doing it because they are repressing what they would.


----------



## Frostbite (Jan 28, 2015)

Kauboy said:


> This should be easy enough to prove...
> How good is your Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek?


Probably better than yours, but they're probably Greek to both of us, right?

No serious Bible scholars rate the KJV highly or even mediocre as a study Bible.

The NRSV is rated best by most (some here should try it, they are obviously befuddled).

Here's a good link from Missouri State University that rates them quite accurately.

A Discussion of Bible Translations



> *Best Choice for Serious Bible Study:
> 
> The New Revised Standard Version (NRSV). The NRSV is an extremely accurate translation, faithful to the earliest and best manuscripts of the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament (HB/OT) and the Greek New Testament (NT). It is fairly literal and is the translation most often quoted by a wide variety of biblical scholars (Evangelicals, Catholics, Mainline Protestants, Jews, secular historians, etc.) in the top academic publications. It uses gender inclusive language where the grammar and/or context supports it. If you want it in a Study Bible edition, the best choices are The HarperCollins Study Bible (2d ed.) or The New Oxford Annotated Bible (3d ed.). Both try to present the best of historical-critical biblical scholarship in an objective way. The more concise and economical Access Bible from Oxford is also a good academic Study Bible.
> 
> ...


----------



## Frostbite (Jan 28, 2015)

oddapple said:


> No....people are arguing because what they "love to do and always will" is against the law in peace time. Some people may get socialization or some other thing out of yapping but the majority are only doing it because they are repressing what they would.


ANOTHER good point!!!

The banter here serves a useful purpose.

If some of the things said to me here were spoken face to face I'd have to punch the guy in the nose.

Thus things said here are safe and do not result in bloodshed.......and they also allow folks to express aggression without risk of violence and thus get it out of their system SAFELY.

Were it not for places like this for obnoxious louts to vent safely we'd probably have much blood in the streets.

:armata_PDT_12:


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

Frostbite said:


> Probably better than yours, but they're probably Greek to both of us, right?
> 
> No serious Bible scholars rate the KJV highly or even mediocre as a study Bible.
> 
> ...


Oh, I made no claim as to which was better or worse. You did, and I was seeking more information on how you would know.
From your response, you only know because someone else told you so. I assume you're taking what they say on *FAITH*, since you don't actually know.

That said, I use the New English Translation on my Android, as it contains footnotes of actual translated words in order to clear up why a certain translation was used over another.


----------



## slewfoot (Nov 6, 2013)

salt-n-pepper said:


> this discussion reminds me of directions i once read about how to kiss a girl.


roflmao


----------



## Frostbite (Jan 28, 2015)

Kauboy said:


> Oh, I made no claim as to which was better or worse. You did, and I was seeking more information on how you would know.
> From your response, you only know because someone else told you so. I assume you're taking what they say on *FAITH*, since you don't actually know.
> 
> That said, I use the New English Translation on my Android, as it contains footnotes of actual translated words in order to clear up why a certain translation was used over another.


Oh, I think you're intentionally clouding the waters here. While we might certainly believe what highly regarded Bible scholars TELL us, we also have the ability in our own muddled way to figure out the simpler things (like the KJV is a bullshit translation) and go for better.

As I see you yourself have done in a limited way with your New English translation. Not the best, but better.


----------



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

Jakthesoldier said:


> Lemme tell you what. Why don't you go do some actual research, and come back when you actually have some inkling as to what you are talking about. Until then you are just spouting off shit you were told by people who heard from some guy.


Let me tell you WHAT... when the King James was written (1607 - 1610) there were NO Original (autograph) texts around... None...

By original I mean ORIGINA, written by Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, etc... they had and we have over 5,800 copies.... BUT NO "autographs" are known to exist

I would suggest you do a little study before making yourself look silly

https://bible.org/article/did-original-new-testament-manuscripts-still-exist-second-century-0


----------



## AquaHull (Jun 10, 2012)

PaulS said:


> Maine-Marine,
> Concerning the law of non-contradiction:
> 
> Jesus is God. true
> ...


----------



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

Frostbite said:


> If some of the things said to me here were spoken face to face I'd have to punch the guy in the nose.


this is a very telling post...


----------



## Frostbite (Jan 28, 2015)

Maine-Marine said:


> *Let me tell you WHAT... when the King James was written (1607 - 1610) there were NO Original (autograph) texts around... None...
> I would suggest you do a little study before making yourself look silly.*


This is fun.

Marine Guy: "I'll tell you what!"

Soldier Guy: "No, I'll tell YOU what!"

Marine Guy: "NO! I'LL TELL YOU WHAT!!!!!"

Soldier Guy: "You look silly!"

Marine Guy: "You look SILLIER!!!"

I'll tell you guys what.....You both look silly.

You are bickering and "Telling each other WHAT" about irrelevancies.

Did you miss this?



> *Unacceptable for Serious Bible Study:
> 
> The following translations have serious shortcomings of various sorts:
> 
> ...


So who cares about your useless and obsolete "translation?"


----------



## AquaHull (Jun 10, 2012)

Frostbite said:


> This is fun.
> 
> Marine Guy: "I'll tell you what!"
> 
> ...


quoted for truth


----------



## Salt-N-Pepper (Aug 18, 2014)

Salt-N-Pepper said:


> This discussion reminds me of directions I once read about how to kiss a girl.





slewfoot said:


> roflmao


Ummm, no... that's not how the directions for kissing a girl read... not even really close, in fact...


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

Frostbite said:


> Oh, I think you're intentionally clouding the waters here. While we might certainly believe what highly regarded Bible scholars TELL us, we also have the ability in our own muddled way to figure out the simpler things (like the KJV is a bullshit translation) and go for better.
> 
> As I see you yourself have done in a limited way with your New English translation. Not the best, but better.


I don't see that I'm clouding anything.
You posted an opinion based on the views of someone other than yourself. You've not proven those views to be accurate, but accepted them on faith from a presumed authority.

I didn't choose the NET over the KJV because I think the KJV to be lesser. I stated why I chose it. I have more insight available to me via the NET. Also, while it is written in modern English, it still provides the original literal translations, and explains their sometimes difficult meanings more clearly.
I've still made no case for which is better as *I* cannot know for certain with my limited knowledge in the field of linguistics. I find that, in times where I'm at a loss due to lack full understanding in a field, it is best to reach out to multiple sources and compile them together for a more full interpretation. Take the supposed good with the supposed bad, and see what comes out of it. As a layperson, it's all I can do without seeking higher education.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

*READ THIS!*

Well, there you have it, boys and girls!

Does anyone have a question about why arguing religion at the dinner table or here is a bad idea?

I viewed this thread as a social experiment. Could we discuss things in a calm, rational way, or would we go to flaming each other? Seems we know.

By the way, some of you might notice that I edited foul language from your posts. Those were freebies, but I am growing weary of following behind y'all and erasing what you should be able to NOT type in the first place. * If this helicopter mechanic can refrain from typing the words he uses when bleeding on helicopters, you can, too!*

Now, I am not going to lock this silliness so that you can read this response before it rolls off the active threads listing, but please, use reason and restraint in your posting.

If the insults continue, I am going to view the board rules in a more "letter of the law" manner. Nobody wants that.


----------



## Jakthesoldier (Feb 1, 2015)

Frostbite said:


> Then why can't you come up with proof of this offer of a million dollars for whoever finds a contradiction in the Bible???
> 
> I know......
> 
> ...


I'm sure Google is not beyond your capability to operate. Follow the leads and have your own discovery journey.

And before anyone makes assumptions about my own beliefs, let me make clear that I have yet to actually state an opinion. When discussing religion I deal in facts only. When discussing faith however, I will reveal my own beliefs if asked.


----------



## Slippy (Nov 14, 2013)

Frostbite said:


> ...Problem is, people love to argue and always will.


Yes they do. :icon_smile:


----------



## Slippy (Nov 14, 2013)

Some of y'all need some female company...although for some I highly doubt that ever has or will happen...

In the meantime, check out the Benelli 828U on my wishlist;


----------



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

My friend ask me one time "Do you ever wake up grumpy in the morning?"

I said "once in a while but I mostly like to let her sleep in!"


----------



## survival (Sep 26, 2011)

Salt-N-Pepper said:


> This discussion reminds me of directions I once read about how to kiss a girl.


Yes, Playboy rocks.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

survival said:


> Yes, Playboy rocks.


For those who never saw the real thing. :biggrin-new:


----------



## Frostbite (Jan 28, 2015)

Kauboy said:


> I don't see that I'm clouding anything.
> You posted an opinion based on the views of someone other than yourself. You've not proven those views to be accurate, but accepted them on faith from a presumed authority.


Oh, I think you are definitely clouding the waters.....and intentionally.

I suspect you know better, but right now you're pretending that I've read an expert and taken his opinion "on faith."

That's neither true nor realistic. Hardly anybody does that.

What most of us do in the real world is read many experts, evaluate ALL their learned views, weigh them all against one another when they disagree--and make our own decision based on our own experience and judgement and the information we have garnered from many sources.

Even if we don't read the old languages much, or well, we can look at sources such as the ones you mention that allow us a detailed examination of the various meanings of the words and allow us to make our own decisions about which experts may be the most reliable.

Now I think we've got it straight.


----------



## Slippy (Nov 14, 2013)

Sig Sauer


----------



## Frostbite (Jan 28, 2015)

Jakthesoldier said:


> I'm sure Google is not beyond your capability to operate. Follow the leads and have your own discovery journey.


Oh, you don't get away with trying to sneak away like that!!!

:armata_PDT_12:

Now Jake.......why don't you just admit that you misspoke and the offer you mentioned does not exist???

We both know that the FACT is that there is NO legitimate offer of a million dollars to the first person to find a Biblical contradiction as you claim.

I know that because many Biblical contradictions have been identified and most Bible scholars are quite aware of it and not really concerned--because an ancient book cobbled together from so many writers is BOUND to have contradictions.

I hope we have that all straight now.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

Slippy said:


> Sig Sauer


Thanks. I might lose my job this October due to sequestration and you are putting that in my face?

You are just wrong.


----------



## Sasquatch (Dec 12, 2014)

I think Slippy changed this thread to "Guns- or the lack of it". Cause I know I am missing many of the fine tools he has highlighted.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

Frostbite said:


> Oh, I think you are definitely clouding the waters.....and intentionally.
> 
> I suspect you know better, but right now you're pretending that I've read an expert and taken his opinion "on faith."
> 
> ...


Whatever you need to tell yourself.
I can certainly understand why Maine tried to emphasize the use of logic in arguments.
It is absent in most of yours.

It's painfully obvious from your history of posts what kind of person you are, and what kind of person you *think* you are.
You'll want the last word in every conversation, and make another vain attempt to boost your ego while putting others down or correcting what they've said/done to fit what you think.
Have at it.


----------



## Frostbite (Jan 28, 2015)

Kauboy said:


> Whatever you need to tell yourself.
> I can certainly understand why Maine tried to emphasize the use of logic in arguments.
> It is absent in most of yours.
> 
> ...


Whatever you need to tell yourself.


----------



## Diver (Nov 22, 2014)

I'm lucky if my spelling is decent. Logic? I make no such claim.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

I just replaced a bad logic unit on a helicopter. If only it were that easy with people!


----------



## Diver (Nov 22, 2014)

Denton said:


> I just replaced a bad logic unit on a helicopter. If only it were that easy with people!


They already have bad logic units.


----------



## Smitty901 (Nov 16, 2012)

God gave man both logic and emotion. Logic to prevent emotion from making our life a wreck and emotion to keep logic from making life a bore.
I try to balance both after trying to live a life based on what was logical. Want to deify logic ,have kids.


----------



## Prepared One (Nov 5, 2014)

It would appear that this discussion is an exercise in futility. I think I will wonder on down to the bar to discuss world politics and what color DOES a smurf turn when you choke it.


----------



## Slippy (Nov 14, 2013)

Or check out the Precision Firearms Mamba SPR Carbon T3 in .308 Win!


----------



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

Gravity, true for you but not true for me....

you can replace the word gravity with any thing

(There is a book titled "Gravity, True for you but not true for me." ) I have read it a few times


----------

