Okay...let's see...where was I...

I was chatting up Nancy the other day and she told me atheists are better lovers.(cause agnostics passout after 3 minutes).

0 Replies

I believe that...

0 Replies

My criteria is that the entire premise is bogus. Plus we have lots of scientific evidence in evolutionary theory that suggests a much more worthy premise for the origination of life. Whether a god created evolution is not a premise that I consider to be worth knowing. If he did......good for him.

The methphorical richness that may be gleaned from the various god stories, passed down now through centuries is lost when we argue about whether the characters in the story actually exist.

0 Replies

dyslexia wrote:

I was chatting up Nancy the other day and she told me atheists are better lovers.(cause agnostics passout after 3 minutes).

Now you're in trouble Dys Laughing

0 Replies

I'm an agnostic too (on the God question anyhow). Very Happy

I do not know whether the universe has a first mover or not, or whether the universe is a portion of what we call God, or whether there is an omnipotent being. Such questions are beyond the realm of present knowledge.

0 Replies

yeah really; Diane just told me she has never (except from laughter) passed out. (she also still thinks she is agnostic)

0 Replies

Lola wrote:

My criteria is that the entire premise is bogus.

That is no criteria....and it sure as hell is not an argument that there are no gods.

Quote:

Plus we have lots of scientific evidence in evolutionary theory that suggests a much more worthy premise for the origination of life.

What does that have to do with the existence or non-existence of gods?

Are you saying that a god could not make a world this way?

Why not?

Quote:

Whether a god created evolution is not a premise that I consider to be worth knowing. If he did......good for him.

Him????

The possibility exists that gods exist. So far you have not given a single bit of evidence or "criteria" for an assumption that there are no gods....or for your suggestions that it is implausible or improbable.

Quote:

The methphorical richness that may be gleaned from the various god stories, passed down now through centuries is lost when we argue about whether the characters in the story actually exist.

If your argument that the idiotic stories from the Bible are better guessed to be fiction created by humans than the "word" of some god...I can probably come up with as many reasons for that being so as you.

But that does not impact on whether it is probable or plausible that there are gods.

Surely you see that!

You are an intelligent individual.

0 Replies

dyslexia wrote:

I was chatting up Nancy the other day and she told me atheists are better lovers.(cause agnostics passout after 3 minutes).

Dys, it couldn't have been my Nancy you were chatting with....because she knows that I don't consider it "love making" unless it lasts for an hour or more.

Hey...just the massage I give takes three-quarters of an hour.

And although I am 69....I figure twice a week as an absolute minimum for a tussle.

Oh...Diane...how ya been! How's Dys treating ya? Twisted Evil

0 Replies

Ray wrote:

I'm an agnostic too (on the God question anyhow).

I do not know whether the universe has a first mover or not, or whether the universe is a portion of what we call God, or whether there is an omnipotent being. Such questions are beyond the realm of present knowledge.

:wink:

0 Replies

Perhaps a way to move this discussion forward would be to choose the Wikipedia definition that you feel applies best to you and go from there? The mutability of the terms involved makes meaningful discussion difficult to impossible. Especially when we have duelling dictionary definitions.

0 Replies

sozobe wrote:

Perhaps a way to move this discussion forward would be to choose the Wikipedia definition that you feel applies best to you and go from there? The mutability of the terms involved makes meaningful discussion difficult to impossible. Especially when we have duelling dictionary definitions.

I'm completely willing to disregard any designations in this discussion.

We can easily eliminate the words "atheist" "agnostic" and "theist" from the discussion immediately.

My position regarding the true nature of the Ultimate REALITY is that I do not know what it is....and I do not have enough unambiguous evidence upon which to base a meaningful guess....particularly (but not exclusively) as regards whether or not there is a God or are gods or are no gods.

I have not seen any evidence of reasonable probative value ever presented by anyone who supposes differently....whether they suppose there is a God....are gods....or are no gods....that truly supports their suppositions.

I refer to them as "guesses" because that is what they are. And I do not dignify them by assuming them to be "educated guesses" because they are not.

If anyone disagrees....just present your position....and any evidence you want to present. We can discuss it without referring to any of those other words.

0 Replies

But it's sooooo tempting to call you a weak atheist!!! (Wikipedia says you are, really!)

I think I mostly agree with what you're saying. The only thing that I personally object to is the idea (which I think, but am not certain, you espouse) that everything is equally unknowable -- I think some things are less knowable than others. I think some guesses are more educated than others.

0 Replies

Well Frank, I sort of agree with part of what you said about the true nature of the untimate reality. I hope we never know for sure.......that would surely be hell.

But I respectfully say to you that I think you're arguing concretely about a mute point. Look at the larger picture.

We don't look for proof of every idea or story that's ever existed in the world. The God stories have so many obvious incongruities on the face of them, not to mention what's lurking underneath that they lack the credibility required to launch a scientific investigation. It's up to those who, for instance, want to talk about creation science, to prove there's any possibility that the creation story is worth investigating......beyond it's metaphorical value.

I don't want to waste my time trying to prove or disprove an idea or concept that is not credible. That's the way I see it.

Do you really want me to start listing those incongruities? Will it get us anywhere?

0 Replies

sozobe wrote:

But it's sooooo tempting to call you a weak atheist!!! (Wikipedia says you are, really!)

I think I mostly agree with what you're saying. The only thing that I personally object to is the idea (which I think, but am not certain, you espouse) that everything is equally unknowable -- I think some things are less knowable than others. I think some guesses are more educated than others.

By not means whatever do I suppose that everything is equally unknowable. Don't know where you got that idea....but chuck it out. It ain't so....and never has been. That is something I have made a huge point about in many threads.

0 Replies

Lola wrote:

Well Frank, I sort of agree with part of what you said about the true nature of the untimate reality. I hope we never know for sure.......that would surely be hell.

But I respectfully say to you that I think you're arguing concretely about a mute point. Look at the larger picture.

We don't look for proof of every idea or story that's ever existed in the world. The God stories have so many obvious incongruities on the face of them, not to mention what's lurking underneath that they lack the credibility required to launch a scientific investigation. It's up to those who, for instance, want to talk about creation science, to prove there's any possibility that the creation story is worth investigating......beyond it's metaphorical value.

I don't want to waste my time trying to prove or disprove an idea or concept that is not credible. That's the way I see it.

Do you really want me to start listing those incongruities? Will it get us anywhere?

If you...or anyone else...is going to assert that the Ultimate REALITY is...or is not....something....I will argue with you.

If you are going to assert that one side or the other on this issue is more probable or more plausible or more likely....I will argue with you.

0 Replies

sozobe wrote:

I went looking for whether there was something between "agnostic" and "atheist", as at least "atheist"

There is, and Webster, the dictionary Frank used, calls what they believe in .... atheism.

Webster wrote:

1 archaic : UNGODLINESS, WICKEDNESS
2 a : a disbelief in the existence of deity b : the doctrine that there is no deity

Definition 2a surely applies to Frank, and possibly definition 1 too. (Just not 2b.) By the definition of his own dictionary, Frank adheres to atheism. And just because he has guts and integrity unlike myself, that doesn't make him an agnostic.

0 Replies

So are you saying Frank that you guess there is an Ultimate REALITY and that it's unknowable? Is that one or two guesses?

0 Replies

Frank Apisa wrote:

Quote:
It (the assertion that there are no gods) would only be a guess if there were no criteria to base it on....and since there is a lot of that then I can't call it a guess.

WHAT IS THIS CRITERIA?

Is the story backed up with any pertinent facts? Is the story good enough to be told and retold often whether it is true or not? If the answer is "yes to both", it is an urban legend, so most probably false. (To get an impression of the batting average of such stories, take a look at Snopes.com)

0 Replies

Thomas wrote:

sozobe wrote:
I went looking for whether there was something between "agnostic" and "atheist", as at least "atheist"

There is, and Webster, the dictionary Frank used, calls what they believe in .... atheism.

Webster wrote:
1 archaic : UNGODLINESS, WICKEDNESS
2 a : a disbelief in the existence of deity b : the doctrine that there is no deity

Definition 2a surely applies to Frank, and possibly definition 1 too. (Just not 2b.) By the definition of his own dictionary, Frank adheres to atheism. And just because he has guts and integrity unlike myself, that doesn't make him an agnostic.

C'mon, Thomas. Don't resort to lying. You are not going to prevail in this argument because your arguments are illogical and unsustainable. But don't resort to lying.

The dictionary I used was the on-line Merriam-Webster....and I quoted the definition in that dictionary in its entirety.

Here it is again:

One entry found for atheist.

Main Entry: athe·ist
Pronunciation: 'A-thE-ist
Function: noun
: one who believes that there is no deity
- athe·is·tic /"A-thE-'is-tik/ or athe·is·ti·cal /"A-thE-'is-ti-k&l/ adjective
- athe·is·ti·cal·ly /-ti-k(&-)lE/ adverb

Here is a link to the site:

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=atheist&x=14&y=17

If you want to assert there are other definitions....do so. Don't try to make it look like I played loose and fast with my post.

And in any case....we are trying to do this thing without labels.

I've given my position on the matter.

If your's differs....tell us about it and we can discuss it.

0 Replies

Thomas wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
Quote:
It (the assertion that there are no gods) would only be a guess if there were no criteria to base it on....and since there is a lot of that then I can't call it a guess.

WHAT IS THIS CRITERIA?

Is the story backed up with any pertinent facts? Is the story good enough to be told and retold often whether it is true or not? If the answer is "yes to both", it is an urban legend, so most probably false. (To get an impression of the batting average of such stories, take a look at Snopes.com)

None of what you just said goes to the question of whether or not there are gods. What the hell are you terminally stupid?

I agree that the gods proposed are pathetic....and most of the stories seem like myths.

But that does not mean there are no gods involved in whatever the hell this is that we are experiencing.

So don't give me that urban legend bullshyt.

If you have some evidence or criteria establishing that there are no gods...give it....or work up the spine and integrity to simply acknowledge that you have none.

Or continue to make a fool of yourself....as you choose.

0 Replies

Okay...let's see...where was I...

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know