[Stargazer]

Egor wrote

Ah, so you can make threats of grotesque physical violence, but you can’t even take the heat of being diss’d. I’d be appalled except I see physical cowards all the time. In the U.S. we’d call you a bitch. It’s why U.S. servicemen are always able to steal your women—even if only for a night when they’re TDY.

This is disrespectful to women as it portrays them as objects to be "stolen." I hope this isn't the way you treat the women in your life, Egor.

Egor wrote

But as an atheist you should respect this, right? The better seed is essential for the evolution of the species. After all, we wouldn’t want your kind of cowardice to be passed on, now would we? Who would stand up to the lions and the bears and all that other natural selection stuff? You train dogs, right? Surely you know what I’m talking about.

Honestly, this is the posturing of an adolescent.

Egor wrote

So, just remember, if I’m ever in Scotland on a speaking gig or something, I like breakfast in bed: coffee in the morning (not tea) and one of those jelly-belly doughnuts. Oh, and uh, whatever she likes.

Do you regularly give speaking gigs? About what?

Egor wrote

You know, I’ve done this before.

So have we. So?

Egor wrote

There was an atheist who e-mailed with me and we had a serious intellectual debate with mutual respect about the existence of God. As we were going along, he just ducked out of the conversation and came back in here and started up with the same ol’ disrespect-shtick. It was a complete waste of my time.

You complain about disrespect, but are doing it yourself. How about getting back to the discussion?

Egor wrote

But what the hell, this is what I’m here for. So here it goes:

Given the existence of the universe as we find it, the best explanation is to infer that a Supreme Being created it and sustains its existence. Once we accept this, I believe we can speculate logically as to the character of this Being and derive the purpose of our lives and thus the best way to live our lives.

You've skipped over this: Why should we accept this?

Egor wrote

I define the Supreme Being as follows: God is the monistic entity of fundamental consciousness.

OK:

mo·nism (mnzm, mnzm)
n. Philosophy
1. The view in metaphysics that reality is a unified whole and that all existing things can be ascribed to or described by a single concept or system.
2. The doctrine that mind and matter are formed from, or reducible to, the same ultimate substance or principle of being.

Even with a definition the phrase seems vague. Unless you're attempting to say God is a single concept or system. Seriously, without some more specific details, this is impossible to work with.

Egor wrote

Religiously, I’m a Veridican. A Veridican is a type of Christian who believes that God is monistic in His nature and that the human purpose is to become Christ; Christ being God conscious of Himself from within His creation.

OK. Veridican. You must have made that term up because it does not come up on a Google search. The rest of the explanation seems to imply that every person is God.

Egor wrote

I am willing to start a mature dialogue or debate on any of those topics.

Then stop strutting around and flashing your biceps and address some of my questions. IF it's OK with you to talk to a woman as an equal.