92
   

Atheists... Your life is pointless

 
 
XXSpadeMasterXX
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Apr, 2013 06:53 pm
@reasoning logic,
I edited my post to include it in your quote...Sorry I am posting fast, and did not give you time to update your post...
0 Replies
 
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Apr, 2013 06:53 pm
@XXSpadeMasterXX,
Quote:

I sure do understand and know this...that is why I say I do not understand how atheism is not a form of belief..


We are all agnostic because none of "know" but many of us use the word atheist to mean that we do not worship a god.

XXSpadeMasterXX
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Apr, 2013 06:53 pm
>lag<
0 Replies
 
XXSpadeMasterXX
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Apr, 2013 06:55 pm
@reasoning logic,
Do you think that every other atheist would personally agree with this definition, or do you think that others may explain it differently?

Is it possible that the above is what you subjectively "think" "atheism" is?
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Apr, 2013 07:00 pm
@XXSpadeMasterXX,
I think that I agree with what you are implying so carry on
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Apr, 2013 07:20 pm
@reasoning logic,
In the end, none of us can offer irrefutable proof of anything. Even our basic axioms are subject to challenge. All we have is our considered application of anecdotal evidence. What we arrive at is belief.

BTW, my beliefs are more thoroughly considered than yours. Wink
0 Replies
 
XXSpadeMasterXX
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Apr, 2013 07:42 pm
@reasoning logic,
OK mate, thank you...Wink

(Is it possible that what you subjectively "think" "atheism" is?)...

= Is it actually possible it is a "belief" of what you think atheism has been and will be?, That can not be "proven"? (Since that is what "you" "think" or "believe" atheism is, that no one else may personally agree with)
0 Replies
 
FBM
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Apr, 2013 09:59 pm
@reasoning logic,
They do all miss it at some point or other, at least in my experience so far. Not long ago I had a brief exchange with a theist who didn't resort to ad homs, obfuscations, evasions, hand-waving, word salads, etc, like the guys here do.

Nevertheless, he did get annoyed when I pointed out all the evidence science and reason have to show that science works and then pointed out that there is no evidence for his god. He reiterated that he was open about believing on faith without evidence.

Then, however, he went on about how archaeologists have shown that this or that story in the Bible has some basis in historical fact. I think he mentioned Jericho or something. He also said that there was evidence that Jesus actually lived at the place and time the Bible says and said some things about Jesus actually being God.

I asked him to back up for a moment and reconsider the way he was building his argument, ie, Statement A: Yes, I have no evidence. Statement B: Here's some evidence.

He stopped replying to me after I pointed out that he was essentially arguing about how many angels could dance on the head of a pin while the question at hand was whether or not angels exist.

FBM
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Apr, 2013 10:00 pm
http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb192/DinahFyre/543157_10151536597025155_2131791554_n.jpg
0 Replies
 
tenderfoot
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Apr, 2013 10:45 pm
@reasoning logic,
@XXSpadeMasterXX,
Quote:
Are you actually willing to provide me with a belief about atheism?.

Why ask? you're one yourself.. by the way I hear there's a old God who's a Goddess wana come and make her our God? could be more interesting than this Latest one you got, and the one I just got rid of.
XXSpadeMasterXX
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Apr, 2013 10:56 pm
@tenderfoot,
I'll pass...
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  0  
Reply Sat 6 Apr, 2013 03:18 am
@spendius,
I was watching Simon Sharma's Shakespeare the other day, he made a point about Falstaff embodying three values that we English value, wit, irony and irreverence.

This thread shows Shakespeare was right, no sense of humour or irony and an insistence that they should be taken seriously.

I'm glad to be in Blighty.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sat 6 Apr, 2013 03:52 am
@FBM,
Quote:
Not long ago I had a brief exchange with a theist who didn't resort to ad homs, obfuscations, evasions, hand-waving, word salads, etc, like the guys here do.


Which guys? Show me where I have used those. Your sentence is an ad hom. You evaded the Austen quote with a word salad and an obfustication.

Your theist-of-the-month is word salad. And we don't know whether you invented him. What can you prove off one theist. The subject is a 2,000 year old belief system that has come to dominate the world. What's one iffy theist, selectively quoted and spun by you, compared to that?

I asked you do you want religion eradicating? You have not answered that.

And there have been 50 million abortions since the USSC signed off for them. So that's a lot of photographs. And those victims were helpless and hadn't done anything. The woman in your stoning picture, assuming it isn't faked, had presumably done something just as Ethel Rosenberg was presumed to have done.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sat 6 Apr, 2013 04:19 am
@reasoning logic,
Quote:
Do you really think that someone like spendius who finds it to be stylish to kill in the name of a supernatural being because he thinks it raises us above the other beasts,


That is not what I said rl and you damn well know it. I said "we". Not me.

When we launch a death dealing ship we say "may God bless all who sail in her".

When the Commander in Chief was inaugurated he was in church with the Veep and an ex-President and their wives.

When a speech is made to announce a surge or Shock and Awe it ends "God bless America".

You want scientific facts or just the ones you choose to want?
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sat 6 Apr, 2013 04:58 am
@FBM,
Quote:
Not really, no. And he's only too happy to join izzy and Spade in the dishonest rhetorical techniques of ad hom attacks, red herrings, etc, when someone approaches any of the huge gaps in his arguments, rather than provide evidence relevant to the real question about theistic belief.


That's an ad hom. And it is false. Where have I done what you say? There are no gaps in my argument.

Our theistic belief is "heap big medicine" on a scale that "heap big medicine" has never even approached before. As a scientific fact. It is selected in from an evolutionary point of view. And atheism has been selected out. Putin has been in church. The Chinese have relaxed their atheism. There's only the N.Koreans still flying the flag you fly. Scientific rationalism is official policy. Sex is never mentioned in their Media assuming one might call a one-way megaphone by that name.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sat 6 Apr, 2013 05:57 am
@XXSpadeMasterXX,
Quote:
Gladly Frank...I think that when someone questions how they could, in fact, be incorrect over and over and puts every subjective view, belief, opinion, thought, in the dust...because they would honestly like to know from a high conscious perspective...then they begin to start to understand how it is not about themselves, but what "God" thinks, or what is "correct" not what they previously thought...and why...since a God is perfect and they are not...they begin to understand this in an absolutely certain way, (because the answers come to them, from a higher consciousness directly to them within, or a self revelation happens), while they are not certain themselves...(because they had doubts it would work, but chose to do it, because they put their own thinking aside, and the revelations still occur, [faith])...So it can not be delusion, because if one was already delusional, then by doing that...nothing would happen...they would in fact realize they believe it is "nonsense"...and understand why they do not want to do this...freely choose not to believe in God...freely choose to have "rejections" freely chose not be "delusional"...IE become an atheist...If one thinks they are not "deluded", then by doing this, they believe it makes them truly become "delusional" It means they must agree or believe they were, or we all were...and only self revelations provide these answers...that some chose to reject...Unless one can "provide facts" as to how we can "prove" that everyone is delusional and make changes for humanity...(but no atheist has yet)...(unless one thinks everyone is delusional, and there is nothing anyone can do) to fully understand why everyone thinks they are delusional, and chose to freely seek God, means it has ALL to do with their own thinking, and NOTHING at all to do with "God" himself...That is how one knows that if they keep the faith in it...It is also not "delusional" to follow it...(even if others subjectively think it is)...because it is all about what one personally believes, or has faith in themselves...and is self-honest about...since the answers are always self revelations anyways...Or a higher understanding of why they chose to believe that their ways could be wrong...If one thinks that they are not delusional...but by doing this will make them delusional (= rejections) then they would surely go back to thinking their own ways and reject this notion of "God" Or revelations of how they could be incorrect (unfounded superiority) ...Which means that atheists provide the "proof" we all are deluded...is being deluded just an opinion one has in thinking it is wrong to think that someone else knows the answer rather than what their own brain can come up with? Or is it really about the notion of "God"? (no need to answer either, those were rhetorics, not my question(s)...How much one would like to know, is totally dependant on how honest they are when they admit that they think they could be wrong...and why...and how they find the answers to the questions they honestly admit they think they could be incorrect about...and why they say they are, or why they want to look for another answer...


Very interesting, but I see nothing in there that shows with absolute certainty that the supposed conversations with GOD are NOT delusions.

Could you please tell us what you discovered during your considerations that shows with absolute certainty that the supposed conversations with GOD are not delusions.


Quote:


My next question...

Do you agree with what I have just said, disagree, or are unsure, and if you can honestly say that you disagree or are unsure, then can you please explain to me exactly why you think you disagree or unsure?


Just as soon as you answer my question.
FBM
 
  1  
Reply Sat 6 Apr, 2013 06:11 am
http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb192/DinahFyre/544046_266673020135692_560013256_n.jpg
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Sat 6 Apr, 2013 06:28 am
@FBM,
Evasion. Ad hom. The whole bag of tricks.
FBM
 
  1  
Reply Sat 6 Apr, 2013 06:40 am
@spendius,
Boredom. Say something interesting instead of the same old empty rhetoric. http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb192/DinahFyre/bored.gif
FBM
 
  2  
Reply Sat 6 Apr, 2013 06:59 am
http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb192/DinahFyre/536785_469086483161569_437226883_n.jpg
 

Related Topics

Atheism - Discussion by littlek
American Atheists Barred from holding Office - Discussion by edgarblythe
Richard Dawkins doesn't exist! - Question by Jay2know
The New State Religion: Atheism - Question by Expert2
Is Atheism the New Age Religion? - Question by Expert2
Critical thinking on the existence of God - Discussion by Susmariosep
Are evolution and the big bang true? - Discussion by Johnjohnjohn
To the people .. - Question by Johnjohnjohn
 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 01/27/2022 at 08:59:25