Why do you approach opinion with fact? Believing in God is an opinion. Believing a certain way to live life is the best is an opinion. Can you disprove something is beautiful with math? Can you disprove Love with math? Can you say someone is evil with math?
What I'm trying to say is that you're approaching it from a manner where your opinions are strictly mathematics. But as you said, you can't believe in Mathematics, it is factual. In a religious argument, it is often a debate over ethics, unless the histories are mentioned. Can you disprove or prove literal stories of the Bible? Yes. Can you disprove or prove the ethics it teaches? No.
What you basically did was insult him and his opinion, regardless if you used mathematics or not or believe in the Bible or not. That is what I was stating in the first place when I said:
I should've rephrased those opinions as being strictly theory.
Why do I approach theory with fact? Because I was approached from the theorized end. I don't wildly start religious debates. Beauty is an opinion, I have yet to be bashed for my tastes in women, and thus I do not argue it. Same for love, and evil. Those are all perceptions that I have yet to be ridiculed for.
My opinions aren't strictly mathematic, I simply do not follow a system. I don't abide by anything specifically, so if someone starts to argue with me on my points, I'll argue with them on theirs. If someone bashes out my friend for being homoloveual, then later tries to convert them to their religion, I will forcefully create an argument. The bible's teachings are false, which is dictated by the bible itself. What this implies is that, other than the things the bible is based from (the earth, the land, etc), the basic concepts at which it creates are false, for it contradicts itself to where it's physically impossible. And, thus, with the bible being the primary source of christianity, the teachings are, indeed, disproven.
I argued with him after he bashed someone else out, stating he was trying to "save" him. Even more so, he stated that the bible was fact. You should've actually read the IRC, not skimmed through it. Also, don't nitpick next time. You seem to do that a lot.
I will refrain from doing so and instead inform you that you're stupid if you honestly think Lalam interprets everything exclusively with math.
I agree with this.
