Atheists, smarter than religious people

I think that I'll get a friend, and the 2 of us will agree with 1 of you. THEN whoever we agree with will be part of a group thinking the same thing, thereby earning the title of LOSER of this pathetic quarrel.

Who wants our support for their opinion?

It's not pathetic Cyr. It brought forth your ace riposte which is a new one on me and quite rational.

The problem with thr rational is that it is fixed. There's only one rational. So as we group thinkers are by definition irrational in a myriad number of ways it follows that rational thinkers are in the biggest group on earth. Thus Rational Group Thinkers First Class with Knobs on are more irrational than ordinary group thinkers.

The reason it is new to me is that I have never had a chance to think it up because nobody ever addressed me before with such a drivellous stupidity. Had someone done so I still might not have thought it up off the cuff for laughing. But now I know it I can't wait for some twat in the pub to deliver himself of such an oration so that I may deploy it myself and possibly with a few stylish twists.

Why do you need those answers. As foolish as they are, what possible reason for wanting the answers could you have. Do you have a penis? You will have to prove it to us. Your asking if God has a penis is beyond rational thought.

The bible makes the claim that man is made in his image. Interesting concept; who did god have sex with? Or did he just masturbate.

I won't have to show it, because I have two children.

If you can't figure that one out, you're dumber than a rock.

You are certainly not a poster child for atheists. Since being smarter than anybody does not seem to be your forte. Fortunately, you are not representative of atheists that I know. That is a good thing for them. Your incessant name calling to people who disagree with you or to whom you have no rational reply is quite wearisome. No point in me lowering my intellectual self to your standards any longer.

I'm not a poster child for anybody except myself. I only ask questions that are very basic and understandable to anyone reading my post. It's not rocket science.

My questions are posed to people who claim to be christians, but are unable to answer the simplest of questions concerning their god. I'm curious to find out how anyone who profess to know their god can't describe him.

In my simple earthly world view, I usually depend on facts or evidence to believe something exists.

I'm not smarter than anyone, and have never claimed such a stupid idea.

Just say, curiosity, is my middle name. As north said on another thread, I'm only after the truth.

CI,
Can you describe what Socrates looked like? Plato? How about Aristotle? Were they real? Are you sure they are not made up? Are you sure that somebody else did not write in their name? Can you prove their existence, other than from their records?

No, I cannot describe their physical features, but there are many external/independent records of their life. I don't know how many of the classic personalities looked like in life, but there are many third party records of their life. I have seen Ramses II's mummified remains at the Cairo museum, but what he looks like today is nothing like what he looked like when he lived. The bible is the only book that must be used to prove the life of jesus. There is no other record of his life. I know the histories of Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan, and Temerlane; all great conquerors. There are many records of their life; I don't know what they really look like, but I have seen statues of all three men. I'm not sure how accurate their resemblance to the statues I have seen.

It's not logical or intelligent to use the same source to prove something. Have you never learned that simple logic?

I cannot decribe the physical features of Jesus either. I don't even know if God had physical features. I know their histories. There are records.

Why is it not logical or intelligent and why do you say I have never learned simple logic when you have given the same answer? Do you think before you write?

I suppose you would have to include yourself in the unintelligent and illogical that you describe.

Intrepid.
Quote... I cannot decribe the physical features of Jesus either. I don't even know if God had physical features. I know their histories. There are records... Unquote.
I presume your records are from your Bible, a book with so many authors and well after the supposed "facts"? took place... come on, sounds like a comment from a child at a Sunday school picnic.

You should really learn to use the quote function. It is really easy. Even a Sunday school child could do it.

You seem to take things out of context to fit your own agenda. So, you don't see the sameness in what I wrote to what CI claims?

By the way. That "book" that you describe is the biggest seller in the world.


It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.
Thomas Jefferson

Perhaps an atheist is more proficient at mastery of his own intellect than a theist. But intelligent and smart isn't the same thing, as I see it.

That is incorrect. There are two mentions of Jesus by Roman chroniclers. One is Tacitus I think. They are brief and almost inconsequential but they exist. The Bible is also a chronicle of sorts. It is a history of certain peoples.

When the history of our times is read 2,000 years hence I expect there will be the odd reference to the execution of Ethel Rosenberg and a few others of a similar nature. I hope the people of those times will be as perplexed at some of our doings as you seem to be at the doings of primitive, Pagan peoples of long ago living in circumstances you cannot even imagine.

I think it likely that it was a dummy of a mummy you saw in Egypt. Pilgrimages to such objects are getting very close to the religion of necrophilia.

A typical argument from someone with no care for the future despite being an influential writer of a set of rules which the future is then stuck with. What a self-serving remark. Those in England who use the cliched expression "**** you Jack, I'm alright" are prevented from writing constitutions.

"group think" is a psycological concept, google it.

I did at your bidding. It asked did I mean psychological?

I don't believe in group think. It is a stupid concept. It involves stereotypes of a very crude order.

Was the point about the train timetables not understood? How about wine tasting aesthetics? How many areas of life are you excluding to get to the concept?

What exactly do you mean by it? Is it anything more than a superior sneer from those lost for words but having a position to keep up?

spendi, There were many, many, Jesus, living during that time. No different than the Tom, Dick, and Harry's of today.

My good spendius, we have our differences. Usually people precive me as a cynically no good bastard that best be banned, and I'll say they'r right. The strange thing about me, is that I usually state what I observe, it's my awkward way to make the reciver aware of something of self, it's a compulsiv behaviour of mine.

HH, I believe that's my problem too! LOL

Look ci. Why don't you call a meeting of grandmothers and explain to them how to suck eggs?

If there were as many people called Jesus as there are today called John, nay--ten times as many, does that provide a satisfactory reason for demolishing all the Christian churches and forgetting that Christianity ever happened?

You are a very stupid person.

Just tell us all what you would like to happen regarding religion. Then we can consider your suggestions. Should we "unthink" the Jesus of the New Testament. Should we unthink Christianity simply out of some reason you have for wanting to do so? You wouldn't even want it if you had even a vague notion of what is involved in such a fatuity. You're a one man random blurting machine.

There is such a thing as Christian art. It can be seen at a glance when set beside Islamic art, Chinese art, Indian art, Classical art, Aztec art, Any other art you care to mention. It's the same with Christian science. And Christian dress. And Christian etiquette.

What point are you trying to make? You said only the the Bible records the existence of Jesus. You were wrong. Jesus is recorded in many ancient records only some of which made it into the Bible.