Apart from an objective Creator there is no objective truth with any meaning.
Says you.
Boy, that's a cogent argument. You forgot to say "nyah-nyah."
For the zillionth time, you may be able to create a "meaning" that suits you personally, but a Creator is necessary for any such meaning to be universal and objective.
Remember this?
Nope.
Yeah, that was intelligent. What's the matter, don't you know any html? Do you know what a hyper-link is?
Yes, really. The Moonies can say that they rest on an objective foundation that no other religion ever has had or ever will have.
The Hari Krishnas, Catholics, Wiccans and whoever else can all say the same. You are unique, just like everybody else.
Did you refuse to read the article I referenced out of ignorance as to what a hyper-link is or because you were afraid its logic would cut the ground out from under your position?
I honestly don't understand why I have infuriated you so. This whole thing started with my reference to the pagan connotations of the olympic flame and you act as if I had insulted your mother.
Why don't you relax? If you really believe that the world is random and meaningless then why don't you start acting like it??? FCOL, if you've got some crazy idea that I'm ever gonna come knockin' at your door with a sword to put at your neck to force you to my way of thinking, then you're wrong (I simply believe that the True Religion must inevitably triumph in the end). In fact, seems to me that you're trying every bit as hard to convert me to your way of thinking! Now I can understand why a "religious fanatic" like myself would be a "missionary," but what is your excuse?
Now calm down, Sunshine! And while you're at it, learn some html like the rest of us have had to do. Let that be your "phony reason for living" for the day.
> Boy, that's a cogent argument.
Compared to your "arguement" that only your worldview has objectivity to it? You bet it is.
> a Creator is necessary for any such meaning to be universal and objective.
Wrong.
>>>Remember this?
>>Nope.
>Yeah, that was intelligent.
Yes, it was. You asked if I remembered something; I did not. You consider lack of rememberign something I've never seen before to be a sign of stupidity?
>Did you refuse to read the article I referenced ...
Non-sequitur. Your religion is no more unique than any other.
> I simply believe that the True Religion must inevitably triumph in the end
People ahve believed that for millenia, and it's coming any closer to truth... unless you're a Muslim.
> I can understand why a "religious fanatic" like myself would be a "missionary," but what is your excuse?
Because nonsense must be confronted with sense. Otherwise Kerry will be elected President.
> Boy, that's a cogent argument.
Compared to your "arguement" that only your worldview has objectivity to it? You bet it is.
> a Creator is necessary for any such meaning to be universal and objective.
Wrong.
>>>Remember this?
>>Nope.
>Yeah, that was intelligent.
Yes, it was. You asked if I remembered something; I did not. You consider lack of rememberign something I've never seen before to be a sign of stupidity?
>Did you refuse to read the article I referenced ...
Non-sequitur. Your religion is no more unique than any other.
> I simply believe that the True Religion must inevitably triumph in the end
People ahve believed that for millenia, and it's coming any closer to truth... unless you're a Muslim.
> I can understand why a "religious fanatic" like myself would be a "missionary," but what is your excuse?
Because nonsense must be confronted with sense. Otherwise Kerry will be elected President.