1. Cosmos
    Joined
    21 Jan '04
    Moves
    11184
    07 Jun '06 04:38
    Originally posted by orfeo
    The chess comment wasn't an excuse,

    nor was the headache one (it was an explanation of the discrepancy between the two scores and which was more likely to be accurate),

    the online test was all over the world (like most online things, you twerp),

    you completely failed in your bullheadedness to understand that I wasn't TRYING to define God (in fact, non ...[text shortened]... different shades of meaning in the word 'control',

    and I am done with this conversation.
    Go and lick your wounds in a corner.
  2. Cosmos
    Joined
    21 Jan '04
    Moves
    11184
    10 Jun '06 07:14
    So a month of trying, and not one single believer in God has even managed to mention any of his 3 primary properties:

    Benevolence.
    Omnipotence.
    Omniscience.
    (BOO)

    What a bunch of no-hopers!
  3. R
    Standard memberRemoved
    Joined
    15 Sep '04
    Moves
    7051
    10 Jun '06 07:53
    Originally posted by howardgee
    So a month of trying, and not one single believer in God has even managed to mention any of his 3 primary properties:

    Benevolence.
    Omnipotence.
    Omniscience.
    (BOO)

    What a bunch of no-hopers!
    Depends which God we're defining. Certainly those are the properties of a christian God. In which case we already have a definition of God. Well, that was boring.
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree