Discussion:
Atheism is based on beliefs, not science.
(too old to reply)
Arthur
2016-02-19 23:56:45 UTC
Permalink
In article <charlie-gordon1492-***@88-209-239-
213.giganet.hu>
I do not reject scientific theory and have never indicated I do. At
the same time I do not accept the existence of any creator nor do I
automatically accept the requirement that existence alone proves
something must have been created. Existence only proves itself and
does nothing toward any origin either to prove one existed or what
that origin was.
What you are is so combative that you cannot even cope with the verb "create".
You are terrified that if you accept the normal meaning and use of the word, it
will obligate you agree to concepts not even under discussion.
Do you have a problem with ever verb that allows but does not require an agent?
Do you have a similar freak-out at "the Earth's core is made of iron and nickel"
because allowing that Earth's core is "made" of anything forces you to accept
that there must be a "maker"? You are pathetic.
Lol! You nailed him to the wall with his own hammer and nails.
--
Any one who has common sense will remember that the bewilderments
of the eye are of two kinds, and arise from two causes, either from
coming out of the light or from going into the light, which is true
of the mind's eye, quite as much as of the bodily eye.
m***@.
2016-02-24 02:39:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Arthur
213.giganet.hu>
I do not reject scientific theory and have never indicated I do. At
the same time I do not accept the existence of any creator nor do I
automatically accept the requirement that existence alone proves
something must have been created. Existence only proves itself and
does nothing toward any origin either to prove one existed or what
that origin was.
What you are is so combative that you cannot even cope with the verb "create".
You are terrified that if you accept the normal meaning and use of the word, it
will obligate you agree to concepts not even under discussion.
Do you have a problem with ever verb that allows but does not require an agent?
Do you have a similar freak-out at "the Earth's core is made of iron and nickel"
because allowing that Earth's core is "made" of anything forces you to accept
that there must be a "maker"? You are pathetic.
Lol! You nailed him to the wall with his own hammer and nails.
--
Any one who has common sense will remember that the bewilderments
of the eye are of two kinds, and arise from two causes, either from
coming out of the light or from going into the light, which is true
of the mind's eye, quite as much as of the bodily eye.
Strong atheism is the most faith based of any religious belief with the
possible exception of strong agnosticism, afaik. Neither has nor ever could have
a shred of evidence to support it in any way, so those who believe in either are
doing no more than putting thair faith in their own particular guess being
correct with no evidence at all to back it up.
Dave Taylor
2016-02-24 04:58:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@.
Post by Arthur
213.giganet.hu>
I do not reject scientific theory and have never indicated I do. At
the same time I do not accept the existence of any creator nor do I
automatically accept the requirement that existence alone proves
something must have been created. Existence only proves itself and
does nothing toward any origin either to prove one existed or what
that origin was.
What you are is so combative that you cannot even cope with the verb "create".
You are terrified that if you accept the normal meaning and use of the word, it
will obligate you agree to concepts not even under discussion.
Do you have a problem with ever verb that allows but does not require an agent?
Do you have a similar freak-out at "the Earth's core is made of iron and nickel"
because allowing that Earth's core is "made" of anything forces you to accept
that there must be a "maker"? You are pathetic.
Lol! You nailed him to the wall with his own hammer and nails.
--
Any one who has common sense will remember that the bewilderments
of the eye are of two kinds, and arise from two causes, either from
coming out of the light or from going into the light, which is true
of the mind's eye, quite as much as of the bodily eye.
Strong atheism is the most faith based of any religious belief with the
possible exception of strong agnosticism, afaik.
You don't know anything.
m***@.
2016-02-26 04:01:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave Taylor
Post by m***@.
Post by Arthur
213.giganet.hu>
I do not reject scientific theory and have never indicated I do. At
the same time I do not accept the existence of any creator nor do I
automatically accept the requirement that existence alone proves
something must have been created. Existence only proves itself and
does nothing toward any origin either to prove one existed or what
that origin was.
What you are is so combative that you cannot even cope with the verb "create".
You are terrified that if you accept the normal meaning and use of the word, it
will obligate you agree to concepts not even under discussion.
Do you have a problem with ever verb that allows but does not require an agent?
Do you have a similar freak-out at "the Earth's core is made of iron and nickel"
because allowing that Earth's core is "made" of anything forces you to accept
that there must be a "maker"? You are pathetic.
Lol! You nailed him to the wall with his own hammer and nails.
--
Any one who has common sense will remember that the bewilderments
of the eye are of two kinds, and arise from two causes, either from
coming out of the light or from going into the light, which is true
of the mind's eye, quite as much as of the bodily eye.
Strong atheism is the most faith based of any religious belief with the
possible exception of strong agnosticism, afaik. Neither has nor ever could have
a shred of evidence to support it in any way, so those who believe in either are
doing no more than putting thair faith in their own particular guess being
correct with no evidence at all to back it up.
You don't know anything.
Try providing evidence that suggests I'm wrong.
felix
2016-02-27 09:59:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@.
Post by Arthur
213.giganet.hu>
I do not reject scientific theory and have never indicated I do. At
the same time I do not accept the existence of any creator nor do I
automatically accept the requirement that existence alone proves
something must have been created. Existence only proves itself and
does nothing toward any origin either to prove one existed or what
that origin was.
What you are is so combative that you cannot even cope with the verb "create".
You are terrified that if you accept the normal meaning and use of the word, it
will obligate you agree to concepts not even under discussion.
Do you have a problem with ever verb that allows but does not require an agent?
Do you have a similar freak-out at "the Earth's core is made of iron and nickel"
because allowing that Earth's core is "made" of anything forces you to accept
that there must be a "maker"? You are pathetic.
Lol! You nailed him to the wall with his own hammer and nails.
--
Any one who has common sense will remember that the bewilderments
of the eye are of two kinds, and arise from two causes, either from
coming out of the light or from going into the light, which is true
of the mind's eye, quite as much as of the bodily eye.
Strong atheism is the most faith based of any religious belief with the
possible exception of strong agnosticism, afaik. Neither has nor ever could have
a shred of evidence to support it in any way, so those who believe in either are
doing no more than putting thair faith in their own particular guess being
correct with no evidence at all to back it up.
that's exactly right
--
"As long as there is this book [Koran] there will be no peace in the world"
-William Gladstone, four times PM of Great Britain
http://www.siotw.org/
Jeff-Relf.Me <@.>
1970-01-01 00:00:00 UTC
Permalink
<h2><PRE Style='Font-Family: OCR A, monospace !important;'> 
Christians enslave women, forcing them to breed exponentially.
When resourses get tight, they die like flies.

Scientists are more humane.
The Starmaker
2016-02-27 17:55:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeff-Relf.Me <@.>
Â
Christians enslave women, forcing them to breed exponentially.
When resourses get tight, they die like flies.
Scientists are more humane.
“Go forth and multiply” comes from the Jewish religion, not the Christian religion.



"The study, commissioned by the Jewish Agency, was conducted by Prof. Sergio Della-Pergola of Hebrew University, Dr. Mina Zemach of the Dahaf Institute and Dr. Rimona Weisel of the Jewish Agency.

They claim that birth trends in Israel are exceptional compared to the Western world: While most developed nations in Europe and America have recorded declines in birth rates, the birth rate in Israel has remained steady, despite the rise in the standard of living."


Now American is mostly Christians and the birth rate is declining. Israel is all Jewish and birth rate is steady...around up to 3 children per nice jewish girl.



Get your facts straight!


Now go die like a fly.




,, ,,
((((( )))))
(((((( ))))))
(((((( ))))))
(((((,r@@@@@@@@@@e,)))))
(((@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@)))
\@@/,:::,\/,:::,\@@
/@@@|:::::||:::::|@@@\
/ @@@\':::'/\':::'/@@@ \
/ /@@@@@@@//\\@@@@@@@\ \
( / '@@@@@====@@@@@' \ )
\( / \ )/
\ ( ) /
\ /
felix
2016-02-27 21:55:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeff-Relf.Me <@.>
Â
Christians enslave women, forcing them to breed exponentially.
When resourses get tight, they die like flies.
Scientists are more humane.
“Go forth and multiply” comes from the Jewish religion, not the Christian religion.
"The study, commissioned by the Jewish Agency, was conducted by Prof. Sergio Della-Pergola of Hebrew University, Dr. Mina Zemach of the Dahaf Institute and Dr. Rimona Weisel of the Jewish Agency.
They claim that birth trends in Israel are exceptional compared to the Western world: While most developed nations in Europe and America have recorded declines in birth rates, the birth rate in Israel has remained steady, despite the rise in the standard of living."
Now American is mostly Christians and the birth rate is declining. Israel is all Jewish and birth rate is steady...around up to 3 children per nice jewish girl.
Get your facts straight!
Now go die like a fly.
,, ,,
((((( )))))
(((((( ))))))
(((((( ))))))
\( / \ )/
\ ( ) /
\ /
and demographers tell us that at current birth rates in the Europe and
America, their cultures will die out before the end of this century
--
"As long as there is this book [Koran] there will be no peace in the world"
-William Gladstone, four times PM of Great Britain
http://www.siotw.org/
Jeff-Relf.Me <@.>
1970-01-01 00:00:00 UTC
Permalink
<h2><PRE Style='Font-Family: OCR A, monospace !important;'> 
There's an estimated 7.4 billion people on this planet,
guzzling oil as fast as they can, breeding exponentially.
When resourses get tight, they'll drop like flies.

Scientists are more humane, they breed less.
The Starmaker
2016-02-28 01:00:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeff-Relf.Me <@.>
Â
There's an estimated 7.4 billion people on this planet,
guzzling oil as fast as they can, breeding exponentially.
When resourses get tight, they'll drop like flies.
Scientists are more humane, they breed less.
there is a reason why....


hanson
2016-02-28 00:07:53 UTC
Permalink
"Go forth and multiply" comes from the Jewish religion,
not the Christian religion.
"The study, commissioned by the Jewish Agency, was
conducted by Prof. Sergio Della-Pergola of Hebrew University,
Dr. Mina Zemach of the Dahaf Institute and Dr. Rimona Weisel
of the Jewish Agency ... claim that birth trends in Israel are
exceptional compared to the American which is mostly
Christians where the birth rate is declining.
hanson wrote:
Hey Sternmacher, you splendid Schmuck, your citation
is self-serving to lunatic. All around Israel the Billions of
Muslims are breeding like flies and intermarriages been
Israelis and Muslims are increasing at an alarming rate.
In 2-3 generations the current stock, of white Diaspora
Settler Jews, will be experiencing the same what the
WASPs in the US are seeing now: America is aging and
Browning.. and so will you precious Israel. Pity, but
IAROTFMAO
m***@.
2016-02-28 04:39:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by felix
Post by m***@.
Post by Arthur
213.giganet.hu>
I do not reject scientific theory and have never indicated I do. At
the same time I do not accept the existence of any creator nor do I
automatically accept the requirement that existence alone proves
something must have been created. Existence only proves itself and
does nothing toward any origin either to prove one existed or what
that origin was.
What you are is so combative that you cannot even cope with the verb "create".
You are terrified that if you accept the normal meaning and use of the word, it
will obligate you agree to concepts not even under discussion.
Do you have a problem with ever verb that allows but does not require an agent?
Do you have a similar freak-out at "the Earth's core is made of iron and nickel"
because allowing that Earth's core is "made" of anything forces you to accept
that there must be a "maker"? You are pathetic.
Lol! You nailed him to the wall with his own hammer and nails.
--
Any one who has common sense will remember that the bewilderments
of the eye are of two kinds, and arise from two causes, either from
coming out of the light or from going into the light, which is true
of the mind's eye, quite as much as of the bodily eye.
Strong atheism is the most faith based of any religious belief with the
possible exception of strong agnosticism, afaik. Neither has nor ever could have
a shred of evidence to support it in any way, so those who believe in either are
doing no more than putting thair faith in their own particular guess being
correct with no evidence at all to back it up.
that's exactly right
So why are they ashamed of it? And since they clearly ARE ashamed of it,
what prevents them from trying to change that position they're so clearly
ashamed to be in?
felix
2016-02-28 06:18:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by m***@.
Post by felix
Post by m***@.
Post by Arthur
213.giganet.hu>
I do not reject scientific theory and have never indicated I do. At
the same time I do not accept the existence of any creator nor do I
automatically accept the requirement that existence alone proves
something must have been created. Existence only proves itself and
does nothing toward any origin either to prove one existed or what
that origin was.
What you are is so combative that you cannot even cope with the verb "create".
You are terrified that if you accept the normal meaning and use of the word, it
will obligate you agree to concepts not even under discussion.
Do you have a problem with ever verb that allows but does not require an agent?
Do you have a similar freak-out at "the Earth's core is made of iron and nickel"
because allowing that Earth's core is "made" of anything forces you to accept
that there must be a "maker"? You are pathetic.
Lol! You nailed him to the wall with his own hammer and nails.
--
Any one who has common sense will remember that the bewilderments
of the eye are of two kinds, and arise from two causes, either from
coming out of the light or from going into the light, which is true
of the mind's eye, quite as much as of the bodily eye.
Strong atheism is the most faith based of any religious belief with the
possible exception of strong agnosticism, afaik. Neither has nor ever could have
a shred of evidence to support it in any way, so those who believe in either are
doing no more than putting thair faith in their own particular guess being
correct with no evidence at all to back it up.
that's exactly right
So why are they ashamed of it? And since they clearly ARE ashamed of it,
what prevents them from trying to change that position they're so clearly
ashamed to be in?
atheists are simply ppl who want to deny the possibility that a God may
exist, and some spiritual things may be true. if they weren't, they
would be happy to simply be non-religious like everyone who isn't
religious, or nominally christian (or whatever) , if they wish to
identify with a culture or heritage or belief system, or call themselves
agnostic
--
"As long as there is this book [Koran] there will be no peace in the world"
-William Gladstone, four times PM of Great Britain
http://www.siotw.org/
Jeff-Relf.Me <@.>
1970-01-01 00:00:00 UTC
Permalink
<h2><PRE Style='Font-Family: OCR A, monospace !important;'> 
Christianity is neither scientific nor logical.
benj
2016-02-28 07:20:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeff-Relf.Me <@.>
Christianity is neither scientific nor logical.
Rolf Big Font, this statement is neither true nor based on any rational
thing. For this to be true you'd have to have superpowers like HVAC and
sadly you do not. What you mean is that in your total ignorance
Christianity is neither scientific nor logical for YOU.

The problem with all religions (not just Christianity) is that it is a
pitiful human attempt to describe advanced science and understanding far
beyond primitive human present understanding. So they end up talking
about "miracles" when it's really just sufficiently advanced technology.
The dumber people are the more they become convinced that anyone
describing advanced science is "insane". HVAC and you being prime examples.
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
Jeff-Relf.Me <@.>
1970-01-01 00:00:00 UTC
Permalink
<h2><PRE Style='Font-Family: OCR A, monospace !important;'> 
Ben Jacoby,

Christianity is not "advanced science", and you're not a scientist.

It's a drug, and you're addicted to it.
Jeanne Douglas
2016-02-28 11:53:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by felix
Post by m***@.
Post by felix
Post by m***@.
Post by Arthur
213.giganet.hu>
I do not reject scientific theory and have never indicated I do. At
the same time I do not accept the existence of any creator nor do I
automatically accept the requirement that existence alone proves
something must have been created. Existence only proves itself and
does nothing toward any origin either to prove one existed or what
that origin was.
What you are is so combative that you cannot even cope with the verb "create".
You are terrified that if you accept the normal meaning and use of the word, it
will obligate you agree to concepts not even under discussion.
Do you have a problem with ever verb that allows but does not require an agent?
Do you have a similar freak-out at "the Earth's core is made of iron
and nickel"
because allowing that Earth's core is "made" of anything forces you to accept
that there must be a "maker"? You are pathetic.
Lol! You nailed him to the wall with his own hammer and nails.
--
Any one who has common sense will remember that the bewilderments
of the eye are of two kinds, and arise from two causes, either from
coming out of the light or from going into the light, which is true
of the mind's eye, quite as much as of the bodily eye.
Strong atheism is the most faith based of any religious belief with the
possible exception of strong agnosticism, afaik. Neither has nor ever could have
a shred of evidence to support it in any way, so those who believe in either are
doing no more than putting thair faith in their own particular guess being
correct with no evidence at all to back it up.
that's exactly right
So why are they ashamed of it? And since they clearly ARE ashamed of it,
what prevents them from trying to change that position they're so clearly
ashamed to be in?
atheists are simply ppl who want to deny the possibility that a God may
exist,
Nope, that's not it at all.

Why don't you pay attention when we tell you what it actually is?
--
JD

"If ANYONE will not welcome you or listen to
your words, LEAVE that home or town and shake
the dust off your feet." Matthew 10:14
je suis charly
2016-02-28 15:46:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by felix
Post by m***@.
what prevents them from trying to change that position they're so clearly
ashamed to be in?
atheists are simply ppl who want to deny the possibility that a God may
exist,
Nope, that's not it at all.
Why don't you pay attention when we tell you what it actually is?
Most people are agnostics most of their lives, not thinking about any deity in
the small joys and pains of daily life. My real life experiences are that beyond
that most of the rest of the time people are not interested in fighting over
religion. Why fight unless you think you can beat religion into or out of
another?

Unfortunately a few toxic individuals do think they have the right and power to
decide what others should think. My real life experiences are that such toxic
personalities occur with the same frequency among atheists, Christians, Moslems,
and every other beliefs. It is not function of religion or lack thereof but a
sign that an immature baby is running an adult body and still believing they are
the master of the universe.

And, yes, I put people who spontaneously state that you are going to hell or
Christianity is irrelevant mythology or other poisons dripped into our wells of
public discourse as toxic. It is one thing to tell your opinion when asked, and
quite another to say things you know will cause anger in others simply because
you disgree with them.

And anyone with a program to end all religion or to force their religion on
everyone else is a putrifying personality that hates freedom.
--
Any one who has common sense will remember that the bewilderments
of the eye are of two kinds, and arise from two causes, either from
coming out of the light or from going into the light, which is true
of the mind's eye, quite as much as of the bodily eye.
m***@.
2016-02-29 03:42:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeanne Douglas
Post by felix
Post by m***@.
Post by felix
Post by m***@.
Post by Arthur
213.giganet.hu>
I do not reject scientific theory and have never indicated I do. At
the same time I do not accept the existence of any creator nor do I
automatically accept the requirement that existence alone proves
something must have been created. Existence only proves itself and
does nothing toward any origin either to prove one existed or what
that origin was.
What you are is so combative that you cannot even cope with the verb
"create".
You are terrified that if you accept the normal meaning and use of the
word, it
will obligate you agree to concepts not even under discussion.
Do you have a problem with ever verb that allows but does not require
an agent?
Do you have a similar freak-out at "the Earth's core is made of iron
and nickel"
because allowing that Earth's core is "made" of anything forces you to accept
that there must be a "maker"? You are pathetic.
Lol! You nailed him to the wall with his own hammer and nails.
--
Any one who has common sense will remember that the bewilderments
of the eye are of two kinds, and arise from two causes, either from
coming out of the light or from going into the light, which is true
of the mind's eye, quite as much as of the bodily eye.
Strong atheism is the most faith based of any religious belief with
the
possible exception of strong agnosticism, afaik. Neither has nor ever could have
a shred of evidence to support it in any way, so those who believe in either are
doing no more than putting thair faith in their own particular guess being
correct with no evidence at all to back it up.
that's exactly right
So why are they ashamed of it? And since they clearly ARE ashamed of it,
what prevents them from trying to change that position they're so clearly
ashamed to be in?
atheists are simply ppl who want to deny the possibility that a God may
exist,
Nope, that's not it at all.
Why don't you pay attention when we tell you what it actually is?
Try doing it now.

Christopher A. Lee
2016-02-28 17:30:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by felix
Post by m***@.
Post by felix
Post by m***@.
Post by Arthur
213.giganet.hu>
I do not reject scientific theory and have never indicated I do. At
the same time I do not accept the existence of any creator nor do I
automatically accept the requirement that existence alone proves
something must have been created. Existence only proves itself and
does nothing toward any origin either to prove one existed or what
that origin was.
What you are is so combative that you cannot even cope with the verb "create".
As usual, some lying theist nastily amateur-psychologises the natural
human reaction to in-your-face rudeness and stupidity into something
it isn't,
Post by felix
Post by m***@.
Post by felix
Post by m***@.
Post by Arthur
You are terrified that if you accept the normal meaning and use of the word, it
Liar.
Post by felix
Post by m***@.
Post by felix
Post by m***@.
Post by Arthur
will obligate you agree to concepts not even under discussion.
Liar.

It's rejected because it's baseless, worthless bullshit.
Post by felix
Post by m***@.
Post by felix
Post by m***@.
Post by Arthur
Do you have a problem with ever verb that allows but does not require an agent?
Do you have a similar freak-out at "the Earth's core is made of iron and nickel"
because allowing that Earth's core is "made" of anything forces you to accept
that there must be a "maker"? You are pathetic.
Deliberate dishonesty, noted.

Even this poster knows that "created" is used by religious
fundamentalists to mead "my particular god did it"
Post by felix
Post by m***@.
Post by felix
Post by m***@.
Post by Arthur
Lol! You nailed him to the wall with his own hammer and nails.
Another pathologically lying theist supporting the original liar.
Post by felix
Post by m***@.
Post by felix
Post by m***@.
Post by Arthur
--
Any one who has common sense will remember that the bewilderments
of the eye are of two kinds, and arise from two causes, either from
coming out of the light or from going into the light, which is true
of the mind's eye, quite as much as of the bodily eye.
Idiot.
Post by felix
Post by m***@.
Post by felix
Post by m***@.
Strong atheism is the most faith based of any religious belief with the
Liar.

It's the falsifiable position in response to theists who can't keep
their nonsense where it belongs - pending their doing something they
have never done. ie showing that their beliefs describe reality.
Post by felix
Post by m***@.
Post by felix
Post by m***@.
possible exception of strong agnosticism, afaik. Neither has nor ever could have
Idiot.

Neither atheism nor agnosticism mean what stupid theists who can't
think outside the box imagine. They start from the presumption that
their beliefs are true and invent positions neither atheists nor
agnostics actually have, about something they have yet to show has any
importance or even relevance outside their religion.
Post by felix
Post by m***@.
Post by felix
Post by m***@.
a shred of evidence to support it in any way, so those who believe in either are
THERE IS NO "EITHER WAY", liar - just theists who can't live and let
live, and who try to impose their religious beliefs.
Post by felix
Post by m***@.
Post by felix
Post by m***@.
doing no more than putting thair faith in their own particular guess being
WHAT FUCKING "THEIR OWN PARTICULAR GUESS", imbecile?

Theists have a baseless memetic belief that was implanted in
childhood.

Atheists don't, either because they grew out of it or they never had
it in the first place.

It's the theist's presumption, not the atheist's - atheists don't even
have it in their worldview as anything other than "what theists
believe as part of their religion".

How many times do we have to keep explaining it to these sociopathic,
in-your-face idiots?
Post by felix
Post by m***@.
Post by felix
Post by m***@.
correct with no evidence at all to back it up.
Why the fuck should we back up somebody else's lies about us, liar?
Post by felix
Post by m***@.
Post by felix
that's exactly right
Liar.
Post by felix
Post by m***@.
So why are they ashamed of it?
Another deliberately nasty lie.
Post by felix
Post by m***@.
And since they clearly ARE ashamed of it,
Hardly, pathological liar.
Post by felix
Post by m***@.
what prevents them from trying to change that position they're so clearly
ashamed to be in?
Why can't you stop lying?
Post by felix
atheists are simply ppl who want to deny the possibility that a God may
Liar.
Post by felix
exist, and some spiritual things may be true. if they weren't, they
Liar.
Post by felix
would be happy to simply be non-religious like everyone who isn't
religious, or nominally christian (or whatever) ,
We would be, if you sociopaths could only live and let live, if you
didn't push your religion where it is neither wanted nor needed, if
you weren't trying to destroy science education, if you didn't impose
your religious beliefs against contraception, abortion and stem-dell
research, if you didn't discriminate against those who don't share
your beliefs, etc, etc, etc.

But psychopaths like the two of you wipe your deliberate nastiness in
our faces all day and every day, in a place where atheists get
together to be away from all that and to discuss our own business.
Post by felix
if they wish to
identify with a culture or heritage or belief system, or call themselves
agnostic
Liar.

Atheism and agnosticism are orthogonal - one can be either, neither
or both.

But if you psychos even bothered to use your allegedly god-given
minds, atheists are simply people who aren't theist - so they don't
have anything in their worldview to be agnostic about. After all, it's
merely part of somebody else's religion.
felix
2016-02-27 09:58:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Arthur
213.giganet.hu>
I do not reject scientific theory and have never indicated I do. At
the same time I do not accept the existence of any creator nor do I
automatically accept the requirement that existence alone proves
something must have been created. Existence only proves itself and
does nothing toward any origin either to prove one existed or what
that origin was.
What you are is so combative that you cannot even cope with the verb "create".
You are terrified that if you accept the normal meaning and use of the word, it
will obligate you agree to concepts not even under discussion.
Do you have a problem with ever verb that allows but does not require an agent?
Do you have a similar freak-out at "the Earth's core is made of iron and nickel"
because allowing that Earth's core is "made" of anything forces you to accept
that there must be a "maker"? You are pathetic.
Lol! You nailed him to the wall with his own hammer and nails.
no he didn't. made in that context simply means 'consists of'
Post by Arthur
--
Any one who has common sense will remember that the bewilderments
of the eye are of two kinds, and arise from two causes, either from
coming out of the light or from going into the light, which is true
of the mind's eye, quite as much as of the bodily eye.
--
"As long as there is this book [Koran] there will be no peace in the world"
-William Gladstone, four times PM of Great Britain
http://www.siotw.org/
Loading...