There is no such thing as hell. It was made up by Jesus, who was in turn made up by the Egyptians who got it from another culture. The story is just a long standing myth; and I being atheist do not believe I lose everything in death. If you think back to a time before you were born you'll notice that you were dead... therefore, you would go back to which you came... presumably to come back again...It happened once, it can surely happen again.
Also, this is an opinion debate! Not a for or against debate.
"Evolution is a theory; it cannot be proven.
Evolution may be proven sometime in the future.
---------------------------------------
Actually, it isn't a contradiction. He said it cannot be proven yet (YET) but maybe in the future we will be smart enough to. For now we are faithful...
con·tra·dic·tion
/ˌkäntrəˈdikSH(ə)n/
noun
the statement of a position opposite to one already made.
What he said was a contradiction by definition.
What you did was change his words and their meanings to suit how you would like to understand it. Going as far as to put words in his mouth(keyboard strokes).
Try to test my flawless logic, I dare you.
I guess I have to argue against both sides of this debate since both imply that God can be partially real
You cant argue against both sides and that's not logically viable. You cant be partially real. Even though anime characters are drawn and brought to life they are cartoons not partially real beings. Same idea with your God.
To say He is not at all real implies He could be partly real but not entirely real
No, to say he's not real at all means he's not real at all... That of course being at the logical level; I say that cuz I expect that you'll twist the meaning to suit your needs.
say He is so real that it hurts implies He is not so real that He heals.
It's a figure of speech. The context you've taken it to is over the top.
This kind of challenge against God is the product of a mind twisted away from reality which is an evil mind, perverting the truth to the destruction of it's own soul.
Stop perverting my debate and attacking me personally.
Okay, you haven't said what was wrong with it. You're just showing me a list of things that continues indefinitely and a statement underneath that was completely and contextually related to the relevancy of pedophilic priests; all the while telling me that the only thing I did right was creating a list that continues indefinitely, capitalizing an acronym and putting a period after a shortform...
We were having a discussion about the relevance of pedophilic priests in churches you come back to me just to dispute my fucking grammar? ARE YOU TROLLING? I ask again because you're really getting on my nerves.
A pedophilic priest was caught - key word "Caught"- in the month of march during the year 2015.
Is that better? Or are you going to just keep being a prick? If the latter, allow me to tell you this discussion is over. You're not worth my time.
Considering I've thrown that whole message into 30 grammar checkers since you've brought it to light and not one of them came back with any errors, I'm going to have to ask you to step off and if you have a real argument to confront me with besides my spelling and grammar then pass it on.
And Catholics are completely against child rape, and anyone having sex before marriage
Mhm...?
Saying that the Catholic ideology is perverse-
Hold it right there young one. You've misinterpreted my statement completely. I didn't make any statement that was calling the catholic ideology perverse.
It's a generalization that is completely false.
Considering my statement was directed at one person in particular I have to disagree with your assessment.
Listen, if you take a typo as a strong assessment of my grammar skills you're going to find yourself in a whole heap of trouble; also, you have a brain why don't you read that sentence in a context that is most likely to be the case. You know... Drop the "r" and it's pretty clear what was meant by that statement.
