Atheism

As usual you have no idea what is going on. Obviously it is a topic you know nothing about and have selected someone else's work without accreditation.I could have told you much worse about religious leaders including Popes, that is why it was tame. It does show the degree of hysteria you suffer from though.You are either a non-english speaker or are poorly educated, whichever, you have wandered into the wrong forum. Some questions...who are "like minded people" ? Who is "your Mob" ? Atheists were murdered ? Says who ?

tf must have read it in a book or magazine written by an atheist in victim mode. tf probably thinks that murder then carried the same importance as it does today.

Spendiousus.... quote

Tf must have read it in a book or magazine written by an atheist in victim mode. Tf probably thinks that murder then carried the same importance as it does today...... unquote

Nope --- got my information same place a you get yours ... Only difference is I don't care a stuff what popes do or don't do ,( except about the high rate of pedophilia among priests ) whereas you have to endeavor to make your information all Godly, and incomprehensible, Seeing you are a expert at incomprehensibilities your remarks above fit you like glove.

"Why doesn't Mars have the sun and the moon? How come?"

A
R
T

Bill O'Reilley makes the Onion obsolete. Sorry, Onion!

After all these years of putting your views forth and not listening, you still don't get it. Atheists don't do group think.

I find it odd that you and I were watching the same video today! I found this one interesting as well!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlnnWbkMlbg

That was almost as stupid as the "Banana was designed for the human hand" video. Almost.

Are you suggesting there is no stupidity on the side of science when even Einstein and Hawking made major errors ? Why don't you laugh at some videos of their mistakes ? Or could it be all these self proclaimed scientists wouldn't understand the concepts ?

I ran across this quote today

Whatever a man prays for, he prays for a miracle. Every prayer reduces itself to this: "Great God, grant that twice two be not four."
Ivan Turgenev (1818-1883) Russian author

They have no alternative but "group think" osso. Instruments are their oracle.

You are taking advantage of a Christian world and avoiding explaining the alternative.

That was pretty freaking funny. 'If I don't understand something it must be God's work'.

You don't seem to get non-belief. It is an absence.
That is the alternative.

You are describing agnostics, not atheists.

I think that atheist take things one step further than you or I Ionus!
Maybe I am wrong but they know there are no pink horses with poke a dots no elfs no santa claus no spaghetti monsters no crocaducks no gods or anything else that can be dreamed up. Now if it is ever revealed to them that there are such things I do think that they will know by observation and not because they believe.

Sounds "reasonably logical" to me! LOL

Atheists are cavemen who cant make flint tools telling other cave men we will never cross the big water and any thoughts about such are not scientific.

Is this the guy who was poking fun at other people's use of English? I'd suggest you stick to writing but that would simply tend to mislead you.

Philosophy ain't your bag. A surrendered brain is a such a waste. Is there any chance you can reenlist?

Recently someone pointed out why this dichotomy is false.

Atheism is a statement on belief. Whereas agnosticism is a statement on knowledge. Agnosticism is not some point between theism and atheism. Nor is atheism exclusive from agnosticism; you can express both. Atheistic expression is that of skepticism given a specific claim. Agnosticism is the declaration that we do not have sufficient information to make a claim.

Given the specific claims made by religions, a person will probably express both. To the deficiency of information (agnosticism) to make such a claim, and the rejection of the claim itself as being unconvincing (atheism). A simple question to most self-described agnostics is: "Are you convinced there is a god?" I believe that many will say "no." Many may say "I don't know." However, wouldn't this mean simply that a cogent case has failed to form? If in the end, you don't know, but you don't believe, you not just an agnostic, you're an atheist. If you believe we have enough knowledge, then you're no longer an agnostic.

What is perhaps then scary for those who believe is that they are agnostic as well. Not being convinced that a god exists based on what your presented is atheism. Stating that we do not have enough knowledge to confirm a god's existence is agnosticism. So while the faithful like to thrust at atheists about what "we cannot know," they fail to realize that (1) this doesn't assault a person's skepticism, and (2) it asserts only their own agnosticism.

The question them becomes: "Why believe in what you will claim we cannot know?" A second question: "If you set out to illustrate the limitation of our worldly knowledge, why then would a position of skepticism be so threatening?"

A
R
T

Sorry, more atheistic ridiculing of christianity.