This is why I don't like debating religion

[dsgrue3]

happydolphin said:

dsgrue3 said:

lol, your definition for existence was A exists because B requires it to exist. You said A does not have to exist for B to exist and then proceeded to claim that A exists.

You realize evolution does not require God, right? 

@bold. I realize that, and it wasn't in my logic.

It's not part of my definition, it was a supporting clause. It's not required, but if and when B depends on A, then yes this comes into effect. Not the case for the God clause I'm afraid.

Do you realize how frustrating it is talking to you?

You defined existence as if B requires A to exist, A exists. I said okay, I accept that definition. Now you say that has nothing to do with the defintion. Then what's the definition?

Here, I'll start: Existence: