The tolerant atheist

So your life was so good that you wanted to die, just to make sure it stops being so good...

Anyway, to each his own life and death. I'm a tolerant atheist after all.

@InfraBlue, @oliver5

True that.

What he meant was that in YOUR heaven all the interesting people are missing.

But still, his heaven wasn't very interesting either.

Once you've had enough of anything, more of it is just boring.

La chair est triste, hélas! et j'ai lu tous les livres.
Fuir! là-bas fuir! Je sens que des oiseaux sont ivres
D'être parmi l'écume inconnue et les cieux !

Stéphane Mallarmé - Brise marine

Dracula comes from Transylvania,
Stevie Nicks talks about kleptomania,
Johnnie looked out of his bedroom window and shouted to his mum,
"Fred Titmus!"

Half Man Half Biscuit.

Flight, on wing or wheel, often does seem like the only respite.
But leaving would feel more like going home rather than some exotic land.

Dear Leadfoot, let us go back to the topic of the thread, "The tolerant atheist."

Are you an atheist?

I will assume you are one, if not; then please anyone atheist can step in to take Lead's place.

I am a theist.

Suppose you and I, we each produce what is for you your concept of what is an atheist, like as you are one.

And from me, I will produce my concept of what is a theist, like as I am one.

I will start first.

For me a theist, I hold to the truth and the fact and the logic and the best thoughts of mankind from since the dawn of man's conscious intelligence, that God exists in concept as first and foremost the creator cause of everything with a beginning.

Okay, dear Lead, your turn, tell me what is you concept of being an atheist.

Then we can both work together to refine our each one's position, so that we get to be more enlightened in our respective view.

TROLL WARNING!

Dear Sus, in case you are wondering why no one is taking you seriously, it's because you are mainly talking to yourself without any real appreciation for the identity of others or really listening to what they say.

You already asked me this question in another thread and I told you I was clearly not an atheist. You were not listening then and probably not now either.

In addition, it should be obvious if you are reading and responding to my posts that I am a theist. If you have to ask, you aren't paying any attention to what is in them. You make everyone you respond to feel like troll-bait.

First you need to find an Atheist who thinks you're worthy of debate. Now that's a real labour of Hercules in itself.

Thanks, dear colleagues here.

I cannot keep track of everyone with whom I had an exchange.

That is why to check, in particular, to find out whether he be atheist or theist, I ask.

Now, about my not listening to others, that of course is your observation, but I tell you, it is not correct.

You see, when I read the first 50 words of a post, I know already what the poster is into.

Like for example, there are posters who do nothing but drop names and plus drop technical terms, so they will show themselves to be into that track, and I stop reading them: BECAUSE they are not saying anything from their very own personal thinking, on their very own personal mental resources.

Of course such posters among themselves can talk on and on and on forever, but they don't realize that they are not ever into anything from their very own personal thinking at all.

Now, you will tell me that my thinking is not anything new, well that is your observation.

Try to do your very own personal thinking, okay?

You see, mankind cannot get ahead when people do nothing from their very own personal thinking, but just in effect repeat what others said, and seek to impress thereby each other with reciprocating names dropping and technical terms dropping - all most uselessly to the rest of mankind, but they feel so smart and smug about their Oh great learning.

I am reminded of Sisyphus. I doubt that hateful sumbitch, especially given his hilarious conceits, would ever accomplish that.

It is equally hilarious that he's so desperate to attack an atheist, that he assumed that Leadhead is an atheist.

Dear colleagues here, I am what I see to be myself, into a special investigation of how atheists think, if at all they do.

And my conclusion is that they don't really think, but they emote.

What they seem to make people take them to be into thinking, it is not really thinking, but all manners and degrees of evasiveness from the issue itself of God exists or not.

If you don't agree with me, and you are an atheist, then let you tell me, what or how do you describe yourself as an atheist, and what do you know of any information of the concepts of God, at all?

There, dear readers here, let us all sit back and await with bated breath to witness how an atheist describes himself, i.e., his self-concept of an atheist, and then also what if any at all concepts of God he has information of.

That is the litmus test for readers to know whether they atheist do think, or they are all the time into all manners and degrees of evasiveness from the issue itself of God exists or not.

By the way, for our comic relief, Oh ye atheists and theists, there is a god here in a2k, and in concept he is first and foremost an agent who is into deleting anything at all which he does not condone to allow to if having come out in public forum, to continue existing, by deleting it altogether from existence in his kingdom of a2k - hahahahahaha!

Thief ! Hypocrite !
You've stolen my suggestion of 'divine intervention' ...so much for your claims of 'thinking for yourself'.

Dear Fresco, you really like to talk with me, whatever the bad trips we had.

Suppose I and you look up something in this a2k forum, whatever, that we are both keen to talk about, how about that?

At this point in time, I am very curious why sponsors of web forums like here in a2k, they are into some kind of taboo or phobia, against a thread like the one I just saw deleted here, namely, "My cognitive adventure with Layman."

This is also what I have observed with other sponsors of web forums.

If this exchange gets us both thrown out here, so what is the big deal?

We are still alive and we can go to another web forum, who knows it might be receptive to posters going into cognitive adventure they had with some fellow posters in the same forum.

The reason that the thread you titled, "My Cognitive Adventures With Layman" was deleted is because it was probably seen as bating, and bordering on stalking. If someone discontinues participation in a discussion with you, they have a right to not be badgered or otherwise goaded by you into returning to the thread. By including a poster's name in the thread title, you crossed a line.

If they haven't already banned you.

That makes some kind of sense, or perhaps better, nonsense, that I appear to be stalking a poster who already does not want to continue with me further, until finally we get to concur on the resolution of an issue.

At the risk of me looking overly disingenuously centered on knowledge for the sake of knowledge, like as in art for art's sake, I welcome everyone to get me as their subject for studying how I think, and show how bad it is.

And I will find it most profitable that people are telling me, what is wrong with my thinking, and thereby I know what to change and how to change, as to be a better thinker.

Isn't that what forums are all about, for people to get together to learn from one another, instead of keeping away when they get themselves enlightened in where and how they are wrong, and therefore be thankful that now they know they are in need for better and surer ways and means of thinking?

Just the same, I submit.


*Cf. ars gratia artis - Wiktionary
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ars_gratia_artis
English. Etymology. Latin translation of the French l'art pour l'art, a phrase credited to Théophile Gautier: art for art's sake. "l'art grâce à l'art". ‎English • ‎Noun


PS That makes me a dick, pace** Izzy - hehehehehehehehe.

**pace - preposition
With the permission of; with deference to. Used to express polite or ironically polite disagreement: I have not, pace my detractors, entered into any secret negotiations.

Read more at http://www.yourdictionary.com/pace#LLgm0SozlcoWqJYt.99

I started out assuming you were sincere, Susie, and said so. As doubt about that began to creep in, I still gave you the benefit of the doubt. But with every post you made, the doubts kept increasing, to the point where there was no longer any doubt. Your insincerity was too clear and transparent to doubt.

It really started getting bad when you pretended you were somehow victimized if someone asked you what you meant by a particular sentence.

I think you are insincere, even if you don't really know it. You claim to be one way, but are really the opposite. You don't want to honestly "discuss" anything, you just want to tell others what to say to you.

PS: Just for your information, no one anxiously awaits, with "bated breath," responses to your posts, as you invariably assume, sorry.

I've read, and thoroughly enjoyed many of your posts here.

But I can't help wonder why you trouble yourself with what naysayers believe?

Is Jesus Christ your Lord and Saviour?

Do you have understanding of the Divinity and the explication of Divine Eternality that you are willing to share?