Those amusing atheists
dh
quite amusing. There are several types of atheists.
I'm aware of two, and expect there probably are
members of a third group but I have yet to encounter
more than one, if any.
A.
Weak Atheists - don't have a true belief either way
whether a creator exists or not. I am a weak atheist
of what appears to be a very unique type since I
openly consider the possibility that a creator does
exist, more than the possibility that he does not.
B.
Strong Atheists ashamed of their faith - one of the
more amusing things I learned is that people who
ONLY give the indication that they *disbelieve* in
a creator, are also ashamed to admit their faith
in that being the correct possibility. I feel that I've
met a number of people who ARE strong atheists,
yet amusingly they are not willing to admit it.
C.
Strong Atheists not ashamed of their faith - as yet
that is still just a concept for me, since so far I
haven't encountered more than one--if any--strong
atheists who are willing to admit their own faith.
Weak atheists such as myself must consider
the possibility of a creator more than the possibility
that he doesn't exist, because there is much more
to consider since if a creator does not exist that's
as far as you can ever go in that direction, while if
a creator does there is no limit. People who claim
to be weak atheists but don't consider the possibility
of a creator, are fooling themselves.
There are a good number of people who give
every indication that they are strong atheists
except for one: That they deny it. Why? It's part
of the amusement, but it's also pathetic. Recently
we've seen from other threads that none of the
supposed atheists in several ngs are willing to admit
their faith. So what to think? They ridicule others
for considering the possibility of a creator, yet they
are also unwilling to admit their own faith that a
creator does not exist. It goes beyond that to the
point that such people are ashamed to admit their
faith in anything. That has been tested in several
ngs, and found to be true. Not only are strong
atheists ashamed of their own faith, but amusingly
it seems that some of them even consider themselves
to "free thinkers". It is hilarious that people who have
taken their mental refuge in that one extremely limiting
possibility, also consider themselves to be free thinkers!
Paul Hands
It's very simple : atheists are right; religionists are wrong.
John Locke
> The beliefs and behaviors of atheists are often
>quite amusing. There are several types of atheists.
>I'm aware of two, and expect there probably are
>members of a third group but I have yet to encounter
>more than one, if any.
>
You are an atheist or you are not. There are no
classifications. Period.
"It is far better to grasp the Universe
as it really is than to persist in delusion,
however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan
jcon
> The beliefs and behaviors of atheists are often
> quite amusing. There are several types of atheists.
> I'm aware of two, and expect there probably are
> members of a third group but I have yet to encounter
> more than one, if any.
>
> A.
> Weak Atheists - don't have a true belief either way
> whether a creator exists or not. I am a weak atheist
> of what appears to be a very unique type since I
> openly consider the possibility that a creator does
> exist, more than the possibility that he does not.
>
That sort of person is generally considered an
"agnostic", rather than an atheist.
> B.
> Strong Atheists ashamed of their faith - one of the
> more amusing things I learned is that people who
> ONLY give the indication that they *disbelieve* in
> a creator, are also ashamed to admit their faith
> in that being the correct possibility. I feel that I've
> met a number of people who ARE strong atheists,
> yet amusingly they are not willing to admit it.
>
If they are not willing to admit it, then how
do you know? Did you read their diaries?
Personally, I don't know of any atheist
who are ashamed to admit it.
> C.
> Strong Atheists not ashamed of their faith - as yet
> that is still just a concept for me, since so far I
> haven't encountered more than one--if any--strong
> atheists who are willing to admit their own faith.
>
Christopher Hitchens
Daniel Dennett
Richard Dawkins
Penn and Teller
James Randi
Isaac Asimov
Dave Barry
Richard Branson
me
...and hundreds more.
-jc
JohnN
>
> - Show quoted text -
In Definitions B and C, there is no atheist faith involved.
JohnN
Lee
<dh@.> wrote in message news:jo8gu35ci7ad4ohup...@4ax.com...
What catagory is it when you ROFL at silly buggers dressed in daft hats,
gowns or other items of fancy dress saying magic spells to thin air hoping
it will answer them back?
Then to add to the merryment they argue endlessly about whose bit of thin
air is real and look down on people that see thin air as nothing more than a
mixture of gases.
Geoff
> The beliefs and behaviors of atheists are often
> quite amusing.
As wew see, you are easily amused.
> There are several types of atheists.
> I'm aware of two, and expect there probably are
> members of a third group but I have yet to encounter
> more than one, if any.
>
> A.
> Weak Atheists - don't have a true belief either way
> whether a creator exists or not. I am a weak atheist
Bullshit. You are a believer.
> of what appears to be a very unique type since I
> openly consider the possibility that a creator does
> exist, more than the possibility that he does not.
>
> B.
> Strong Atheists ashamed of their faith
Confirmed. I have no faith to be ashamed of. Only a theist would say
something so stupid.
> one of the
> more amusing things I learned is that people who
> ONLY give the indication that they *disbelieve* in
> a creator, are also ashamed to admit their faith
> in that being the correct possibility.
I have no problem considering it a possibility any more than I have a
problem believing it is possible that a beautiful alien female will take me
away and bang the bejesus out of me. Neither are likely so I don't even
consider them.
> I feel that I've
> met a number of people who ARE strong atheists,
> yet amusingly they are not willing to admit it.
Consider us introduced.
> Weak atheists such as myself must consider
> the possibility of a creator more than the possibility
> that he doesn't exist, because there is much more
> to consider since if a creator does not exist that's
> as far as you can ever go in that direction, while if
> a creator does there is no limit. People who claim
> to be weak atheists but don't consider the possibility
> of a creator, are fooling themselves.
Ergo...you are not an atheist.
Elf M. Sternberg
> Strong Atheists not ashamed of their faith - as yet
> that is still just a concept for me, since so far I
> haven't encountered more than one--if any--strong
> atheists who are willing to admit their own faith.
Fine. Meet another.
Strong atheism is, in fact, the only valid possibility.
Anything else is incoherent. Any description of deity that is not
automatically suspect because of its universal moral, evidentiary, and
historical contradiction is indistinguishable from atheological
concepts.
Elf
--
Elf M. Sternberg, Immanentizing the Eschaton since 1988
http://www.pendorwright.com/
Elf's latest stories are available in paperback! Buy
the genderbending novel _Sterlings_, available
now from http://stores.lulu.com/elfsternberg
Christopher A. Lee
<e...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>dh@. writes:
>
>> Strong Atheists not ashamed of their faith - as yet
>> that is still just a concept for me, since so far I
>> haven't encountered more than one--if any--strong
>> atheists who are willing to admit their own faith.
>
> Fine. Meet another.
>
> Strong atheism is, in fact, the only valid possibility.
>Anything else is incoherent. Any description of deity that is not
>automatically suspect because of its universal moral, evidentiary, and
>historical contradiction is indistinguishable from atheological
>concepts.
Only if you even see a deity-belief called "God" differently than
Zeus, Odin and all the others.
For those who don't, it's a cultural phenomenon. A religious belief.
Not something that has any meaning beyond that.
> Elf
Josef Balluch
> The beliefs and behaviors of atheists are often
> quite amusing.
Theists are quite amusing as well:
http://www.buzzfeed.com/buzz/Modern_Crucifixion
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/jim_forest/fools.htm
http://www.religionfacts.com/mayan_religion/index.htm
Regards,
Josef
Religions vary in their degree of idiocy, but I reject them all.
-- Gene Roddenberry
Elf M. Sternberg
> On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 13:25:31 -0700, Elf M. Sternberg
> <e...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>
>>dh@. writes:
>>
>>> Strong Atheists not ashamed of their faith - as yet
>>> that is still just a concept for me, since so far I
>>> haven't encountered more than one--if any--strong
>>> atheists who are willing to admit their own faith.
>>
>> Fine. Meet another.
>>
>> Strong atheism is, in fact, the only valid possibility.
>>Anything else is incoherent. Any description of deity that is not
>>automatically suspect because of its universal moral, evidentiary, and
>>historical contradiction is indistinguishable from atheological
>>concepts.
> Only if you even see a deity-belief called "God" differently than
> Zeus, Odin and all the others.
I'm not parsing your argument. Are you claiming that the Zeus
and Odin concepts aren't rife with moral, evidentiary, and historical
contradictions?
Mark K. Bilbo
jo8gu35ci7ad4ohup...@4ax.com, dh@. wrote:
> The beliefs and behaviors of atheists are often
> quite amusing.<snip>
Oh my.
Do the words "arrogant prick" mean anything to you?
--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
“The worst government is often the most moral.
One composed of cynics is often very tolerant and humane.
But when fanatics are on top there is no limit to oppression.”
- H. L. Mencken
Robibnikoff
"Mark K. Bilbo" <gm...@com.mkbilbo> wrote in message
news:m2olb5-...@75-104-203-76.cust.wildblue.net...
> On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 10:59:05 -1100 in
> jo8gu35ci7ad4ohup...@4ax.com, dh@. wrote:
>
>> The beliefs and behaviors of atheists are often
>> quite amusing.<snip>
>
> Oh my.
>
> Do the words "arrogant prick" mean anything to you?
They should. They describe what he is as well as what he doesn't have.
--
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
BAAWA Knight!
#1557
Christopher A. Lee
<e...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net> writes:
>
>> On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 13:25:31 -0700, Elf M. Sternberg
>> <e...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>>
>>>dh@. writes:
>>>
>>>> Strong Atheists not ashamed of their faith - as yet
>>>> that is still just a concept for me, since so far I
>>>> haven't encountered more than one--if any--strong
>>>> atheists who are willing to admit their own faith.
>>>
>>> Fine. Meet another.
>>>
>>> Strong atheism is, in fact, the only valid possibility.
>>>Anything else is incoherent. Any description of deity that is not
>>>automatically suspect because of its universal moral, evidentiary, and
>>>historical contradiction is indistinguishable from atheological
>>>concepts.
>
>> Only if you even see a deity-belief called "God" differently than
>> Zeus, Odin and all the others.
>
> I'm not parsing your argument. Are you claiming that the Zeus
>and Odin concepts aren't rife with moral, evidentiary, and historical
>contradictions?
Sigh.
A deity-belief called "God" is only different from all the others to
its followers.
Everybody sees Zeus, Odin, Thor etc as cultural or anthropological
phenomena: something people believed as part of their religion,
performed rituals of supplication, told stories etc.
If you're not Christian, Muslim or Jewish that's all one called "God"
is.
It's not something that could or could not exist.
Any more than the Starship Enterprise is.
Or any of the characters in your stories.
> Elf
chibiabos
> C.
> Strong Atheists not ashamed of their faith
You got me, cocksucker.
-chib
--
Member of S.M.A.S.H.
Sarcastic Middle-aged Atheists with a Sense of Humor
Whatsanike
> The beliefs and behaviors of atheists are often
> quite amusing. There are several types of atheists.
> I'm aware of two, and expect there probably are
> members of a third group but I have yet to encounter
> more than one, if any.
This is a mathematically very strange statement. It boggles the mind
just to consider "more than one, if any".
>
> A.
> Weak Atheists - don't have a true belief either way
> whether a creator exists or not. I am a weak atheist
> of what appears to be a very unique type since I
> openly consider the possibility that a creator does
> exist, more than the possibility that he does not.
>
Wait, you encountered an atheist like this? Or this is you, and if so
did "more than one, if any" mean that you only encountered yourself?
> B.
> Strong Atheists ashamed of their faith - one of the
> more amusing things I learned is that people who
> ONLY give the indication that they *disbelieve* in
> a creator, are also ashamed to admit their faith
> in that being the correct possibility. I feel that I've
> met a number of people who ARE strong atheists,
> yet amusingly they are not willing to admit it.
>
Ashamed of what faith? I thought Atheists didn't have a faith or if so,
faith in what?
> C.
> Strong Atheists not ashamed of their faith - as yet
> that is still just a concept for me, since so far I
> haven't encountered more than one--if any--strong
> atheists who are willing to admit their own faith.
(See previous comment.) By the way, I now see that A, B, and C total 3
items. Now I am really confused about your first sentence, in addition
to your second sentence. At least you have formed actual sentences. That
could be a plus..
>
> Weak atheists such as myself must consider
> the possibility of a creator more than the possibility
> that he doesn't exist, because there is much more
> to consider since if a creator does not exist that's
> as far as you can ever go in that direction, while if
> a creator does there is no limit. People who claim
> to be weak atheists but don't consider the possibility
> of a creator, are fooling themselves.
I'll have to take your word for that, as I haven't much of a clue.
>
> There are a good number of people who give
> every indication that they are strong atheists
> except for one: That they deny it. Why? It's part
> of the amusement, but it's also pathetic.
Pathetic amusement, eh? FOTFL
Recently
> we've seen from other threads that none of the
> supposed atheists in several ngs are willing to admit
> their faith. So what to think? They ridicule others
> for considering the possibility of a creator, yet they
> are also unwilling to admit their own faith that a
> creator does not exist. It goes beyond that to the
> point that such people are ashamed to admit their
> faith in anything. That has been tested in several
> ngs, and found to be true. Not only are strong
> atheists ashamed of their own faith, but amusingly
> it seems that some of them even consider themselves
> to "free thinkers". It is hilarious that people who have
> taken their mental refuge in that one extremely limiting
> possibility, also consider themselves to be free thinkers!
>
>
I'm not a free thinker, in that I do accept gratuities.
Proud Yankee
> It goes beyond that to the
> point that such people are ashamed to admit their
> faith in anything.
I have faith that organized religion will always attract con artists.
Elf M. Sternberg
> On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 15:10:41 -0700, Elf M. Sternberg
> <e...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>
>>>> Strong atheism is, in fact, the only valid possibility.
>>>>Anything else is incoherent. Any description of deity that is not
>>>>automatically suspect because of its universal moral, evidentiary, and
>>>>historical contradiction is indistinguishable from atheological
>>>>concepts.
> A deity-belief called "God" is only different from all the others to
> its followers.
> Everybody sees Zeus, Odin, Thor etc as cultural or anthropological
> phenomena: something people believed as part of their religion,
> performed rituals of supplication, told stories etc.
> If you're not Christian, Muslim or Jewish that's all one called
> "God" is.
I think it's quite unfair and disengenious of you to claim
that I can't have a dialogue with someone who *is* a Christian,
Muslim, or Jew because they have an affirmative belief that I lack.
Of course I can. And I can attack their belief on the grounds that
what they believe in is historically suspect, evidently vacuous, and
morally repugnant.
In the meantime, nobody (and I mean *nobody*) has yet shown me
any reason at all to suspect that the universe is anything other than
a vast accident of which we are a tiny component, as irrelevant to the
vast stochastic thing that is the universe as ants are to the gears of
Big Ben. Until and unless I have reason to change my thinking, my
knowledge falls back to the default position: there does not exist,
anywhere and at any time, beings not subject to the ordinary and
regular processes of the universe, who are interested in and have
power over those processes. (In fact, I'll go so far as to claim that
the belief that such beings *might* exist is a morally repugnant
claim.)
If that's not strong atheism, what is?
Michael Gray
<e...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net> writes:
>
>> On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 15:10:41 -0700, Elf M. Sternberg
>> <e...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>>
>>>>> Strong atheism is, in fact, the only valid possibility.
>>>>>Anything else is incoherent. Any description of deity that is not
>>>>>automatically suspect because of its universal moral, evidentiary, and
>>>>>historical contradiction is indistinguishable from atheological
>>>>>concepts.
>
>> A deity-belief called "God" is only different from all the others to
>> its followers.
>
>> Everybody sees Zeus, Odin, Thor etc as cultural or anthropological
>> phenomena: something people believed as part of their religion,
>> performed rituals of supplication, told stories etc.
>
>> If you're not Christian, Muslim or Jewish that's all one called
>> "God" is.
>
> I think it's quite unfair and disengenious of you to claim
>that I can't have a dialogue with someone who *is* a Christian,
>Muslim, or Jew because they have an affirmative belief that I lack.
I fail to see where Mr. Lee did such a thing.
Elf M. Sternberg
>>> Everybody sees Zeus, Odin, Thor etc as cultural or anthropological
>>> phenomena: something people believed as part of their religion,
>>> performed rituals of supplication, told stories etc.
>>> If you're not Christian, Muslim or Jewish that's all one called
>>> "God" is.
>> I think it's quite unfair and disengenious of you to claim
>>that I can't have a dialogue with someone who *is* a Christian,
>>Muslim, or Jew because they have an affirmative belief that I lack.
> I fail to see where Mr. Lee did such a thing.
Mr. Lee seems to be saying (and he can correct me if I'm
wrong) that when I say "There is no god," I am using that last word
with an understanding so very different from that of a theistic
listener that the communication is meaningless.
I disagree, both in the particulars (the Christian God, the
Jewish God, etc) and in the abstract sense of *any* supernatural
influence.
Christopher A. Lee
<e...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>Michael Gray <mike...@newsguy.com> writes:
>
>>>> Everybody sees Zeus, Odin, Thor etc as cultural or anthropological
>>>> phenomena: something people believed as part of their religion,
>>>> performed rituals of supplication, told stories etc.
>
>>>> If you're not Christian, Muslim or Jewish that's all one called
>>>> "God" is.
>
>>> I think it's quite unfair and disengenious of you to claim
>>>that I can't have a dialogue with someone who *is* a Christian,
>>>Muslim, or Jew because they have an affirmative belief that I lack.
>
>> I fail to see where Mr. Lee did such a thing.
I didn't.
> Mr. Lee seems to be saying (and he can correct me if I'm
>wrong) that when I say "There is no god," I am using that last word
>with an understanding so very different from that of a theistic
>listener that the communication is meaningless.
You're wrong.
You said that strong atheism was the only reasonable atheism. Or words
to that effect.
> I disagree, both in the particulars (the Christian God, the
>Jewish God, etc) and in the abstract sense of *any* supernatural
>influence.
Why do atheists have to be inside the theist paradigm to see the
theist's gods in the light theists do?
> Elf
Elf M. Sternberg
> You said that strong atheism was the only reasonable atheism. Or words
> to that effect.
No, I said strong atheism is the only reasonable stance to
take *at all*. Theists are simply wrong. Weak atheists hold to a
peculiar agnosticism.
>> I disagree, both in the particulars (the Christian God, the
>>Jewish God, etc) and in the abstract sense of *any* supernatural
>>influence.
> Why do atheists have to be inside the theist paradigm to see the
> theist's gods in the light theists do?
I don't believe I said that they did. In fact, you're the one
arguing that they do:
> Everybody sees Zeus, Odin, Thor etc as cultural or anthropological
> phenomena: something people believed as part of their religion,
> performed rituals of supplication, told stories etc. If you're not
> Christian, Muslim or Jewish that's all one called "God" is.
What are you claiming in this paragraph? As I read it, you're
claiming that the atheist, because he's not a Christian, Muslim, or
Jew, can only see the theist's god as a cultural or anthropological
phenomena, not "the theist's gods in the light theists do."
Christopher A. Lee
<e...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net> writes:
>
>> You said that strong atheism was the only reasonable atheism. Or words
>> to that effect.
>
> No, I said strong atheism is the only reasonable stance to
>take *at all*. Theists are simply wrong. Weak atheists hold to a
>peculiar agnosticism.
No they don't. Because they don't have anything to be agnostic about.
But then I suspect you know this.
And I said it's merely somebody else's religious belief. Outside that
it's a character in a story.
There's nothing to "believe doesn't exist" - which is what a strong
atheist is supposed to be.
Because that's not what gods are outside the theist's beliefs.
All an atheist is, is somebody who isn't theist.
Mark K. Bilbo
"Robibnikoff" <witc...@broomstick.com> wrote:
> "Mark K. Bilbo" <gm...@com.mkbilbo> wrote in message
> news:m2olb5-...@75-104-203-76.cust.wildblue.net...
>> On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 10:59:05 -1100 in
>> jo8gu35ci7ad4ohup...@4ax.com, dh@. wrote:
>>
>>> The beliefs and behaviors of atheists are often
>>> quite amusing.<snip>
>>
>> Oh my.
>>
>> Do the words "arrogant prick" mean anything to you?
>
> They should. They describe what he is as well as what he doesn't have.
Well, his may be arrogant but without warrant...
--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
"Morality is doing what is right, no matter what you're
told. Religion is doing what you're told, not matter what
is right."
- Jerry Sturdivant
Michael Gray
<e...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>Michael Gray <mike...@newsguy.com> writes:
>
>>>> Everybody sees Zeus, Odin, Thor etc as cultural or anthropological
>>>> phenomena: something people believed as part of their religion,
>>>> performed rituals of supplication, told stories etc.
>
>>>> If you're not Christian, Muslim or Jewish that's all one called
>>>> "God" is.
>
>>> I think it's quite unfair and disengenious of you to claim
>>>that I can't have a dialogue with someone who *is* a Christian,
>>>Muslim, or Jew because they have an affirmative belief that I lack.
>
>> I fail to see where Mr. Lee did such a thing.
>
> Mr. Lee seems to be saying (and he can correct me if I'm
>wrong) that when I say "There is no god," I am using that last word
Are you able to provide a quote from him with message id to that
effect?
I cannot recall his saying such a thing.
Elf M. Sternberg
> On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 10:07:40 -0700, Elf M. Sternberg
> <e...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>
>>Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net> writes:
>>
>>> You said that strong atheism was the only reasonable atheism. Or words
>>> to that effect.
> All an atheist is, is somebody who isn't theist.
Okay, I accept that. Now the $64,000 question:
"What is a theist?"
Christopher A. Lee
<e...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net> writes:
>
>> On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 10:07:40 -0700, Elf M. Sternberg
>> <e...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>>
>>>Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net> writes:
>>>
>>>> You said that strong atheism was the only reasonable atheism. Or words
>>>> to that effect.
>
>> All an atheist is, is somebody who isn't theist.
>
> Okay, I accept that. Now the $64,000 question:
>
> "What is a theist?"
Not my problem.
> Elf
Michael Gray
<e...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net> writes:
>
>> On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 10:07:40 -0700, Elf M. Sternberg
>> <e...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>>
>>>Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net> writes:
>>>
>>>> You said that strong atheism was the only reasonable atheism. Or words
>>>> to that effect.
>
>> All an atheist is, is somebody who isn't theist.
>
> Okay, I accept that. Now the $64,000 question:
>
> "What is a theist?"
Let those who claim such a state explain that.
Azure
>
> On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 10:59:05 -1100 in
> jo8gu35ci7ad4ohup...@4ax.com, dh@. wrote:
>
> > The beliefs and behaviors of atheists are often
> > quite amusing.<snip>
>
> Oh my.
>
> Do the words "arrogant prick" mean anything to you?
YES, means People with A.A. Serial Numbers
Azure
>
> Michael Gray <mike...@newsguy.com> writes:
>
> >>> Everybody sees Zeus, Odin, Thor etc as cultural or anthropological
> >>> phenomena: something people believed as part of their religion,
> >>> performed rituals of supplication, told stories etc.
FEW have records proving their family is the Descendants of Zeus, or
Odin.
Fewer Yet can Prove there Father was the House of Zeus and the Mother
was the House of Odin!
Regardless of your Atheistic Lies!
I "AM".
dh
>On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 10:59:05 -1100, dh@. wrote:
>
>> The beliefs and behaviors of atheists are often
>>quite amusing. There are several types of atheists.
>>I'm aware of two, and expect there probably are
>>members of a third group but I have yet to encounter
>>more than one, if any.
>>
>You are an atheist or you are not.
I am a weak atheist. I don't like the title, but I didn't
get to name it.
>There are no classifications. Period.
_________________________________________________________
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weak_and_strong_atheism
. . .
Strong atheism is a term generally used to describe atheists who accept
as true the proposition, "gods do not exist". Weak atheism refers to any
type of non-theism which falls short of this standard.
Because of flexibility in the term "god", it is understood that a person could
be a strong atheist in terms of certain portrayals of gods, while remaining a
weak atheist in terms of others.
Historically, the terms negative and positive atheism have been used to
denote this distinction. Within negative or weak atheism, philosopher
Anthony Kenny distinguishes between agnostics, who find the claim
"God exists" uncertain, and theological noncognitivists, who consider
all God-talk to be meaningless.[1]
Since many self-described agnostics specifically distinguish their stance
from that of atheists, yet would also fit the general definition of "weak
atheism," the validity of this categorisation is disputed. Another problem
is whether "strong" atheists must consider themselves able to prove
authoritatively that a god does not exist, or rather, if they must only
disbelieve in such a god in order to qualify.
. . .
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
dh
>On Mar 24, 4:59 pm, dh@. wrote:
>> The beliefs and behaviors of atheists are often
>> quite amusing. There are several types of atheists.
>> I'm aware of two, and expect there probably are
>> members of a third group but I have yet to encounter
>> more than one, if any.
>>
>> A.
>> Weak Atheists - don't have a true belief either way
>> whether a creator exists or not. I am a weak atheist
>> of what appears to be a very unique type since I
>> openly consider the possibility that a creator does
>> exist, more than the possibility that he does not.
>>
>
>That sort of person is generally considered an
>"agnostic", rather than an atheist.
>
>> B.
>> Strong Atheists ashamed of their faith - one of the
>> more amusing things I learned is that people who
>> ONLY give the indication that they *disbelieve* in
>> a creator, are also ashamed to admit their faith
>> in that being the correct possibility. I feel that I've
>> met a number of people who ARE strong atheists,
>> yet amusingly they are not willing to admit it.
>>
>
>If they are not willing to admit it, then how
>do you know? Did you read their diaries?
>
>Personally, I don't know of any atheist
>who are ashamed to admit it.
>
>> C.
>> Strong Atheists not ashamed of their faith - as yet
>> that is still just a concept for me, since so far I
>> haven't encountered more than one--if any--strong
>> atheists who are willing to admit their own faith.
>>
>
>Christopher Hitchens
>Daniel Dennett
>Richard Dawkins
>Penn and Teller
>James Randi
>Isaac Asimov
>Dave Barry
>Richard Branson
>me
If you're willing to admit your faith that a creator does
not exist, then go ahead and do it.
>...and hundreds more.
That's the sort of thing I expected, so when I found that
none of them were willing to admit their faith it was surprising,
amusing, and pathetic to me.
dh
>> ...and hundreds more.
>>
>> -jc
>>
>>
>>
>> > Weak atheists such as myself must consider
>> > the possibility of a creator more than the possibility
>> > that he doesn't exist, because there is much more
>> > to consider since if a creator does not exist that's
>> > as far as you can ever go in that direction, while if
>> > a creator does there is no limit. People who claim
>> > to be weak atheists but don't consider the possibility
>> > of a creator, are fooling themselves.
>>
>> > There are a good number of people who give
>> > every indication that they are strong atheists
>> > except for one: That they deny it. Why? It's part
>> > of the amusement, but it's also pathetic. Recently
>> > we've seen from other threads that none of the
>> > supposed atheists in several ngs are willing to admit
>> > their faith. So what to think? They ridicule others
>> > for considering the possibility of a creator, yet they
>> > are also unwilling to admit their own faith that a
>> > creator does not exist. It goes beyond that to the
>> > point that such people are ashamed to admit their
>> > faith in anything. That has been tested in several
>> > ngs, and found to be true. Not only are strong
>> > atheists ashamed of their own faith, but amusingly
>> > it seems that some of them even consider themselves
>> > to "free thinkers". It is hilarious that people who have
>> > taken their mental refuge in that one extremely limiting
>> > possibility, also consider themselves to be free thinkers!- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>In Definitions B and C, there is no atheist faith involved.
>
>JohnN
You have it completely backwards. Strong atheists
have faith, and weak ones do not. That IS the difference
between the two.
_________________________________________________________
. . .
Strong atheism is a term generally used to describe atheists who accept
as true the proposition, "gods do not exist". Weak atheism refers to any
type of non-theism which falls short of this standard.
. . .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weak_and_strong_atheism
ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
dh
>dh@. wrote:
>> The beliefs and behaviors of atheists are often
>> quite amusing.
>
>As wew see, you are easily amused.
>
>> There are several types of atheists.
>> I'm aware of two, and expect there probably are
>> members of a third group but I have yet to encounter
>> more than one, if any.
>>
>> A.
>> Weak Atheists - don't have a true belief either way
>> whether a creator exists or not. I am a weak atheist
>
>Bullshit. You are a believer.
>
>> of what appears to be a very unique type since I
>> openly consider the possibility that a creator does
>> exist, more than the possibility that he does not.
>>
>> B.
>> Strong Atheists ashamed of their faith
>
>Confirmed. I have no faith to be ashamed of. Only a theist would say
>something so stupid.
>
>> one of the
>> more amusing things I learned is that people who
>> ONLY give the indication that they *disbelieve* in
>> a creator, are also ashamed to admit their faith
>> in that being the correct possibility.
>
>I have no problem considering it a possibility any more than I have a
>problem believing it is possible that a beautiful alien female will take me
>away and bang the bejesus out of me. Neither are likely so I don't even
>consider them.
>
>> I feel that I've
>> met a number of people who ARE strong atheists,
>> yet amusingly they are not willing to admit it.
>
>Consider us introduced.
If you're willing to admit your faith that a creator does not
exist, then just do it.
>> Weak atheists such as myself must consider
>> the possibility of a creator more than the possibility
>> that he doesn't exist, because there is much more
>> to consider since if a creator does not exist that's
>> as far as you can ever go in that direction, while if
>> a creator does there is no limit. People who claim
>> to be weak atheists but don't consider the possibility
>> of a creator, are fooling themselves.
>
>Ergo...you are not an atheist.
I'm a weak atheist, so I consider the possibility
that a creator does exist. If you don't then you're
a strong atheist, whether you admit it or deny it.
dh
>
><dh@.> wrote in message news:jo8gu35ci7ad4ohup...@4ax.com...
>> The beliefs and behaviors of atheists are often
>> quite amusing. There are several types of atheists.
>> I'm aware of two, and expect there probably are
>> members of a third group but I have yet to encounter
>> more than one, if any.
>>
>> A.
>> Weak Atheists - don't have a true belief either way
>> whether a creator exists or not. I am a weak atheist
>> of what appears to be a very unique type since I
>> openly consider the possibility that a creator does
>> exist, more than the possibility that he does not.
>>
>> B.
>> Strong Atheists ashamed of their faith - one of the
>> more amusing things I learned is that people who
>> ONLY give the indication that they *disbelieve* in
>> a creator, are also ashamed to admit their faith
>> in that being the correct possibility. I feel that I've
>> met a number of people who ARE strong atheists,
>> yet amusingly they are not willing to admit it.
>>
>> C.
>> Strong Atheists not ashamed of their faith - as yet
>> that is still just a concept for me, since so far I
>> haven't encountered more than one--if any--strong
>> atheists who are willing to admit their own faith.
>>
>> Weak atheists such as myself must consider
>> the possibility of a creator more than the possibility
>> that he doesn't exist, because there is much more
>> to consider since if a creator does not exist that's
>> as far as you can ever go in that direction, while if
>> a creator does there is no limit. People who claim
>> to be weak atheists but don't consider the possibility
>> of a creator, are fooling themselves.
>>
>> There are a good number of people who give
>> every indication that they are strong atheists
>> except for one: That they deny it. Why? It's part
>> of the amusement, but it's also pathetic. Recently
>> we've seen from other threads that none of the
>> supposed atheists in several ngs are willing to admit
>> their faith. So what to think? They ridicule others
>> for considering the possibility of a creator, yet they
>> are also unwilling to admit their own faith that a
>> creator does not exist. It goes beyond that to the
>> point that such people are ashamed to admit their
>> faith in anything. That has been tested in several
>> ngs, and found to be true. Not only are strong
>> atheists ashamed of their own faith, but amusingly
>> it seems that some of them even consider themselves
>> to "free thinkers". It is hilarious that people who have
>> taken their mental refuge in that one extremely limiting
>> possibility, also consider themselves to be free thinkers!
>>
>
>What catagory is it when you ROFL
Do you have faith that a creator does not exist?
If so, are you willing to admit it? Do you think other
people should, or should not?
dh
>dh@. writes:
>
>> Strong Atheists not ashamed of their faith - as yet
>> that is still just a concept for me, since so far I
>> haven't encountered more than one--if any--strong
>> atheists who are willing to admit their own faith.
>
> Fine. Meet another.
If you're willing to admit your faith that a creator
does not exist, then just do it.
>
> Strong atheism is, in fact, the only valid possibility.
>Anything else is incoherent. Any description of deity that is not
>automatically suspect because of its universal moral, evidentiary, and
>historical contradiction
Human screw ups in interpretation don't have anything to
do with whether or not a creator exists. You yourself are a
perfect example if he does. If a creator does exist, none are
more wrong and more clueless than strong atheists.
>is indistinguishable from atheological
>concepts.
>
> Elf
dh
>On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 13:25:31 -0700, Elf M. Sternberg
><e...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>
>>dh@. writes:
>>
>>> Strong Atheists not ashamed of their faith - as yet
>>> that is still just a concept for me, since so far I
>>> haven't encountered more than one--if any--strong
>>> atheists who are willing to admit their own faith.
>>
>> Fine. Meet another.
>>
>> Strong atheism is, in fact, the only valid possibility.
>>Anything else is incoherent. Any description of deity that is not
>>automatically suspect because of its universal moral, evidentiary, and
>>historical contradiction is indistinguishable from atheological
>>concepts.
>
>Only if you even see a deity-belief called "God" differently than
>Zeus, Odin and all the others.
>
>For those who don't, it's a cultural phenomenon. A religious belief.
>Not something that has any meaning beyond that.
>
>> Elf
If "God" does exist, then all who refer to him are referring to
the same being regardless of what they call him or what they
think about him.
dh
>On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 10:59:05 -1100 in
>jo8gu35ci7ad4ohup...@4ax.com, dh@. wrote:
>
>> The beliefs and behaviors of atheists are often
>> quite amusing.<snip>
>
>Oh my.
>
>Do the words "arrogant prick" mean anything to you?
LOL!!!
dh
>In article <jo8gu35ci7ad4ohup...@4ax.com>, <dh@.> wrote:
>
>> C.
>> Strong Atheists not ashamed of their faith
>
>You got me, cocksucker.
>
>-chib
If you're willing to admit your faith that a creator does not
dh
>dh@. wrote in news:jo8gu35ci7ad4ohup...@4ax.com:
>
>> The beliefs and behaviors of atheists are often
>> quite amusing. There are several types of atheists.
>> I'm aware of two, and expect there probably are
>> members of a third group but I have yet to encounter
>> more than one, if any.
>
>This is a mathematically very strange statement. It boggles the mind
>just to consider "more than one, if any".
It means I might have encountered one, but not
more than one if so.
>> A.
>> Weak Atheists - don't have a true belief either way
>> whether a creator exists or not. I am a weak atheist
>> of what appears to be a very unique type since I
>> openly consider the possibility that a creator does
>> exist, more than the possibility that he does not.
>>
>
>Wait, you encountered an atheist like this? Or this is you,
That's me. The possible one I referred to is in C.
>and if so
>did "more than one, if any" mean that you only encountered yourself?
>
>> B.
>> Strong Atheists ashamed of their faith - one of the
>> more amusing things I learned is that people who
>> ONLY give the indication that they *disbelieve* in
>> a creator, are also ashamed to admit their faith
>> in that being the correct possibility. I feel that I've
>> met a number of people who ARE strong atheists,
>> yet amusingly they are not willing to admit it.
>>
>
>Ashamed of what faith?
Their faith that a creator does not exist.
>I thought Atheists didn't have a faith
Weak atheists do not. Strong atheists do.
>or if so, faith in what?
_________________________________________________________
. . .
Strong atheism is a term generally used to describe atheists who accept
as true the proposition, "gods do not exist". Weak atheism refers to any
type of non-theism which falls short of this standard.
. . .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weak_and_strong_atheism
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
>> C.
>> Strong Atheists not ashamed of their faith - as yet
>> that is still just a concept for me, since so far I
>> haven't encountered more than one--if any--strong
>> atheists who are willing to admit their own faith.
>
>(See previous comment.) By the way, I now see that A, B, and C total 3
>items. Now I am really confused about your first sentence, in addition
>to your second sentence. At least you have formed actual sentences. That
>could be a plus..
>
>>
>> Weak atheists such as myself must consider
>> the possibility of a creator more than the possibility
>> that he doesn't exist, because there is much more
>> to consider since if a creator does not exist that's
>> as far as you can ever go in that direction, while if
>> a creator does there is no limit. People who claim
>> to be weak atheists but don't consider the possibility
>> of a creator, are fooling themselves.
>
>I'll have to take your word for that, as I haven't much of a clue.
>>
>> There are a good number of people who give
>> every indication that they are strong atheists
>> except for one: That they deny it. Why? It's part
>> of the amusement, but it's also pathetic.
>
>Pathetic amusement, eh? FOTFL
There are many pathetic situations which are also
amusing, and many of them exist in news groups.
>Recently
>> we've seen from other threads that none of the
>> supposed atheists in several ngs are willing to admit
>> their faith. So what to think? They ridicule others
>> for considering the possibility of a creator, yet they
>> are also unwilling to admit their own faith that a
>> creator does not exist. It goes beyond that to the
>> point that such people are ashamed to admit their
>> faith in anything. That has been tested in several
>> ngs, and found to be true. Not only are strong
>> atheists ashamed of their own faith, but amusingly
>> it seems that some of them even consider themselves
>> to "free thinkers". It is hilarious that people who have
>> taken their mental refuge in that one extremely limiting
>> possibility, also consider themselves to be free thinkers!
>
>I'm not a free thinker, in that I do accept gratuities.
They're not free thinkers, in that they limit their thinking.
dh
I have faith in that too. Do you have faith that a creator
does not exist? I don't.
Lord Vetinari
news:13uo2lg...@corp.supernews.com...
> Goo - Fuckwit David Harrison, THE GOOBER, a colossally stupid fuckwit and
> a credulous believer - lied and presented no challenge:
[snip]
>> You have it completely backwards. Strong atheists
>> have faith,
>
> "win" a typically stupid Fuckwit point.
I'll just have to say that he has _earned_ a stupid Fuckwit point. Now, of
what value _are_ these "points"?
Lord Vetinari
[snip]
> Do you have faith that a creator does not exist?
> If so, are you willing to admit it? Do you think other
> people should, or should not?
Amazing, isn't it? Referring, of course, to these cretins with low IQs who
cannot recognize their position, intellectually & educationally speaking.
So, why don't you just give it up, cretin? We can clearly see the strings
that control you, you know.
Lord Vetinari
Pointless, cretin, pointless. Careful now, I might just take back your
"stupid Fuckwit point".
How about a nice quote?
The one permanent emotion of the inferior man is fear - fear of the unknown,
the complex, the inexplicable. What he wants above everything else is
safety.
- H. L. Mencken
Your odor is giving you away...If you've got nothing to hide, you have
nothing to fear.
Lord Vetinari
If only you had a dictionary, and knew how to use it.......
Here's a thought, why don't you go find a dictionary somewhere? You could
look up words like "faith" and "dissemble" and......of course, you'll need
to find an adult to explain the definitions to you.
Mr.Smartypants
> Goo - Fuckwit David Harrison, THE GOOBER, a colossally
> stupid fuckwit and a credulous believer - lied and
> presented no challenge:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >> On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 13:25:31 -0700, Elf M. Sternberg
> >> <e...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>
>
> >>>> that is still just a concept for me, since so far I
> >>>> haven't encountered more than one--if any--strong
> >>>> atheists who are willing to admit their own faith.
> >>> Fine. Meet another.
>
> >>> Strong atheism is, in fact, the only valid possibility.
> >>> Anything else is incoherent. Any description of deity that is not
> >>> automatically suspect because of its universal moral, evidentiary, and
> >>> historical contradiction is indistinguishable from atheological
> >>> concepts.
> >> Only if you even see a deity-belief called "God" differently than
> >> Zeus, Odin and all the others.
>
> >> For those who don't, it's a cultural phenomenon. A religious belief.
> >> Not something that has any meaning beyond that.
>
> >>> Elf
>
> > If "God" does exist,
>
> one is fooled
What's wrong with that Goobs?
Azure
>
> Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net> writes:
>
> > On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 10:07:40 -0700, Elf M. Sternberg
> > <e...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
> >
> >>Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net> writes:
> >>
> >>> You said that strong atheism was the only reasonable atheism. Or words
> >>> to that effect.
>
> > All an atheist is, is somebody who isn't theist.
>
> Okay, I accept that. Now the $64,000 question:
>
> "What is a theist?"
>
> Elf
>
> --
> Elf M. Sternberg, Immanentizing the Eschaton since 1988
> http://www.pendorwright.com/
>
> Elf's latest stories are available in paperback! Buy
> the genderbending novel _Sterlings_, available
> now from http://stores.lulu.com/elfsternberg
Elf as in ELPH or E.L.F.????????
ELPH maybe I am interested.
Seems you reference Dyionisian Ways, but is it Apollo?
What do you call an Ear of Corn??
Do you understand Midian, Jethro, Domnald, Amergin.
I love that one, a "Shape Shifter" who told one of the most Beautiful
Women in the World "NO"!
Azure
>
> On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 14:16:29 -0700, Elf M. Sternberg
> <e...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>
> >Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net> writes:
> >
> >> On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 10:07:40 -0700, Elf M. Sternberg
> >> <e...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>>Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net> writes:
> >>>
> >>>> You said that strong atheism was the only reasonable atheism. Or words
> >>>> to that effect.
> >
> >> All an atheist is, is somebody who isn't theist.
> >
> > Okay, I accept that. Now the $64,000 question:
> >
> > "What is a theist?"
>
Would not an Atheist also be a Theist, as in example the use "A"
Typical?
Free Lunch
Azure <laddie'o'lugh@gall's.org> wrote in
<13urfm1...@corp.supernews.com>:
An atheist would not be a theist.
Azure
>
> dh@. wrote:
>
> > Weak atheists such as myself
>
> stupid lying pimply-ass Southern Baptist cracker trying
> to play another of your loser fuckwitted word games,
> and of course, you are losing, again.
>
> Since by now even you should be aware of the FACT
> that if God exists he won't allow proof of his
> existence,
>
> Fuckwit David Harrison
> 27 Mar 2007
> http://tinyurl.com/2rgks2
>
> But earlier:
>
> I was raised to believe in God, and didn't want to
> be an "atheist"...in fact never even considered the
> idea. Now I am a weak atheist, and expect to remain
> one the rest of my life unless God lets me know he
> does exist at some point.
> Fuckwit David Harrison
> 11 Feb 2007
> http://tinyurl.com/22shdh
>
> So what you've said, Fuckwit, is that you will remain
> an atheist *EVEN IF* "god" lets you know that he
> exists, because according to you, if "god" does exist,
> he won't allow proof of his existence, so you would
> necessarily view any sign or signal that he does exist
> to be inauthentic, based on your statement above of
> what is allegedly a "FACT".
>
> You are so crushingly stupid, Fuckwit, it's amazing you
> can even feed yourself or tie your own shoes.
Jesus replaced God, therefore God can not be proven.
If one proves God, they will attack to shut you up.
Like Jacob found, they have severed the branches from the tree to
prevent the fruit from knowing its roots.
Mankind hates God so much, they attempted to "Lock God in a Mountain"!
Whining, Crying, Bawl
>
> > therefore God can not be proven.
>
>
> You are a fucking idiot.-
You believe in God, your Creator.
You know you do.
Sanity's Little Helper
news:66bca4fb-606a-498e...@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.com to
alt.atheism on 29 Mar 2008:
Nobody honestly believes in God.
--
David Silverman D.B.E.
BAAWA
aa #2208
Lord Mayor of Dis
Lawful copyright holder of the term "Earthquack".
Holder of rights to the stage musical "The Shining".
Not authentic without this signature.
ne...@buffy.sighup.org.uk
> Would not an Atheist also be a Theist, as in example the use "A"
> Typical?
Well, few if any christians believe in the Norse or Greek gods despite there
is exactly the same lack of evidence for existance. To claim that such
christians are "atheist" without qualification would be exceedingly
confusing and open to accusations of Humpty Dumptyism. Equally, to accuse
atheists in general of only disbelieving in the christian god but secretly
believing in some other god would be disingenuous without evidence.
--
Robert A Heinlein: Theology is never any help; it is searching in a dark
cellar at midnight for a black cat that isn't there.
J
wrote:
> "Whining, Crying, Bawl" <bunghole-jon...@lycos.com> wrote innews:66bca4fb-606a-498e...@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.comto
Do they dishonestly believe in God?
> --
> David Silverman D.B.E.
> BAAWA
> aa #2208
> Lord Mayor of Dis
> Lawful copyright holder of the term "Earthquack".
> Holder of rights to the stage musical "The Shining".
>
> Not authentic without this signature.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Sanity's Little Helper
news:f42d29a3-58b1-4307...@e39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com
to alt.atheism on 29 Mar 2008:
> On Mar 29, 6:11 am, "Sanity's Little Helper" <elv...@noshpam.org>
> wrote:
>> "Whining, Crying, Bawl" <bunghole-jon...@lycos.com> wrote
>> innews:66bca4fb-
> 606a-498e-aa1...@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.comto
Ask me if I care.
dh
><dh@.> wrote in message news:j8bou3her0f6n29vr...@4ax.com...
>[snip]
>> Do you have faith that a creator does not exist?
>> If so, are you willing to admit it? Do you think other
>> people should, or should not?
>
>Amazing, isn't it? Referring, of course, to these cretins with low IQs who
>cannot recognize their position
There are idiots who refuse to admit their OBVIOUS faith in the
possibility that a creator does not exist. The question your point
immediately brings to mind is whether they are really too stupid to
understand, or they are lying deliberately trying to make people
believe they honestly are that stupid.
dh
Not to someone who can grasp the significance of it. Duh.
>cretin, pointless. Careful now, I might just take back your
>"stupid Fuckwit point".
>
>How about a nice quote?
>The one permanent emotion of the inferior man is fear - fear of the unknown,
>the complex, the inexplicable. What he wants above everything else is
>safety.
>
>- H. L. Mencken
That's why some people retreat to a little mental safety bubble
refusing to consider that God might exist, and from that position
they often deny being in it.
dh
><dh@.> wrote in message news:mdbou39l85p4ufd3o...@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 03:50:28 GMT, Proud Yankee <sd...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>dh@. wrote:
>>>
>>> > It goes beyond that to the
>>>> point that such people are ashamed to admit their
>>>> faith in anything.
>>>
>>>I have faith that organized religion will always attract con artists.
>>
>> I have faith in that too. Do you have faith that a creator
>> does not exist? I don't.
>
>If
Do you have faith that a creator does not exist? I don't.
Why do you think I should?
dh
>On Mar 27, 2:03 pm, Goo lied:
>
>> dh pointed out:
>>
>> > On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 16:32:38 -0400, Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net> wrote:
>>
>> >> On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 13:25:31 -0700, Elf M. Sternberg
>> >> <e...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>>
>> >>> dh pointed out:
>>
>> >>>> Strong Atheists not ashamed of their faith - as yet
>> >>>> that is still just a concept for me, since so far I
>> >>>> haven't encountered more than one--if any--strong
>> >>>> atheists who are willing to admit their own faith.
>> >>> Fine. Meet another.
>>
>> >>> Strong atheism is, in fact, the only valid possibility.
>> >>> Anything else is incoherent. Any description of deity that is not
>> >>> automatically suspect because of its universal moral, evidentiary, and
>> >>> historical contradiction is indistinguishable from atheological
>> >>> concepts.
>> >> Only if you even see a deity-belief called "God" differently than
>> >> Zeus, Odin and all the others.
>>
>> >> For those who don't, it's a cultural phenomenon. A religious belief.
>> >> Not something that has any meaning beyond that.
>>
>> >>> Elf
>>
>> > If "God" does exist,
>>
>> Cut the bullshit, Fuckwit. You believe in "god". No
>> one is fooled
>
>
>What's wrong with that Goobs?
I'm guessing the Goober is one who disbelieves in God, and
is ashamed to admit his faith in that. It's also likely Goo will try
to pretend he has somehow "learned" that God does not exist,
even as he tries to deny having faith that his supposed
"knowledge" is correct. Such idiocy is ceartainly a job for Goo.
Antares 531
National Atheist's Day.
On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 10:59:05 -1100, dh@. wrote:
> The beliefs and behaviors of atheists are often
>quite amusing. There are several types of atheists.
>I'm aware of two, and expect there probably are
>members of a third group but I have yet to encounter
>more than one, if any.
>
>A.
>Weak Atheists - don't have a true belief either way
>whether a creator exists or not. I am a weak atheist
>of what appears to be a very unique type since I
>openly consider the possibility that a creator does
>exist, more than the possibility that he does not.
>
>B.
>Strong Atheists ashamed of their faith - one of the
>more amusing things I learned is that people who
>ONLY give the indication that they *disbelieve* in
>a creator, are also ashamed to admit their faith
>in that being the correct possibility. I feel that I've
>met a number of people who ARE strong atheists,
>yet amusingly they are not willing to admit it.
>
>C.
>Strong Atheists not ashamed of their faith - as yet
>that is still just a concept for me, since so far I
>haven't encountered more than one--if any--strong
>atheists who are willing to admit their own faith.
>
> Weak atheists such as myself must consider
>the possibility of a creator more than the possibility
>that he doesn't exist, because there is much more
>to consider since if a creator does not exist that's
>as far as you can ever go in that direction, while if
>a creator does there is no limit. People who claim
>to be weak atheists but don't consider the possibility
>of a creator, are fooling themselves.
>
> There are a good number of people who give
>every indication that they are strong atheists
>except for one: That they deny it. Why? It's part
>of the amusement, but it's also pathetic. Recently
>we've seen from other threads that none of the
>supposed atheists in several ngs are willing to admit
>their faith. So what to think? They ridicule others
>for considering the possibility of a creator, yet they
>are also unwilling to admit their own faith that a
>creator does not exist. It goes beyond that to the
>point that such people are ashamed to admit their
>faith in anything. That has been tested in several
>ngs, and found to be true. Not only are strong
>atheists ashamed of their own faith, but amusingly
>it seems that some of them even consider themselves
>to "free thinkers". It is hilarious that people who have
>taken their mental refuge in that one extremely limiting
>possibility, also consider themselves to be free thinkers!
>
Christopher A. Lee
<gordonl...@swbell.net> wrote:
>Please hold your cross-fire for the next 7 1/2 hours. Tomorrow is
>National Atheist's Day.
What a fucking moron.
Free Lunch
dh@. wrote in <6ft0v3dnv51tgr2nu...@4ax.com>:
Keep saying whatever you like. It won't be true, but you don't care
whether you are honest, do you.
Azure
You picked it up on Atheist which figures!
ne...@buffy.sighup.org.uk wrote:
>
> In alt.religion.hindu Azure <laddie'o'lugh@gall's.org> wrote:
> > Would not an Atheist also be a Theist, as in example the use "A"
> > Typical?
>
> Well, few if any christians believe in the Norse or Greek gods despite there
> is exactly the same lack of evidence for existance.
WRONG!
The KJV, directly identifies 2 Paths, Rev 12: tells the story of Lugh or
ODIN, and the Arianhod.
Most Christians do not believe in the Cave of the North Wind,
Pethagorise was a Myth Spinner only, a nut with no social basis.
I was Born, my family does exist.
Jehovah is "The Cave of the North Wind" not the name of God, the House
of the "Rainbow Bridge" the way to the "House of God"!
Jera is the name of the Mountain where the Cave to the Underground
Kingdom, Hel, Abadon, where the "Silver Wheel" is!!!!!!
To claim that such
> christians are "atheist" without qualification would be exceedingly
> confusing
Read the Bible, they "HATE GOD".
Letter to Titus, they replaced God, with Jesus.
Karmic Law is Impossible so Man replaced GOD with Jesus.
Tried to "Lock God in a Mountain", because God would come back every
2,000 years to check in.
Jacob found they had "Severed the Branches from the Tree to prevent the
Fruit from knowing their Roots.
Satan is the "Prince", Gods Heir!!!!!!!!!!!
Jesus had to be Satan, to be Gods Son.
When the one who is Born the Heir comes forth man will Kill him, Rev
11:3.
The Beast is Gods "CHOSEN", Deu 33:!
Paul the "Roman" cursed Gaul for having a different covenant and
teaching, they in turn tried to hang him for Blasphemy.
Azure
No, they are engaging in a Major Flame War trying to prove to the Beast
why he is a Liar.
Started on Angels, when I caught the Sassers.
Hacker Pricks!!!!!!!!!
So they sicked their "Gang" on me.
Been a Growing Cross Posted Flame War ever since.
Won't stop, because the Governments are "Assisting" the "Hackers"!
You like spam and Viruses don't you.
Your not a Corporation so we can beta test our programs on your systems.
Won't hurt anyone that way.
Who cares of Grandma can't get back on line.
Let her take a course in Computer Programming.
Michael Gray
wrote:
Oh, but he does care!
If he is inadvertantly honest, he chastises himself for weaks!
Derek
>Goo - Fuckwit David Harrison, THE GOOBER, a colossally
>stupid fuckwit and a stupid credulous Southern Baptist
>shitworm - lied and presented no challenge:
[..]
>> I'm guessing Rudy is one who disbelieves in God, and
>> is ashamed to admit his faith in that.
>
>Fuckwit, you keep repeating that meaningless nugget of
>bullshit about people being "ashamed of their faith" in
>the lack of existence of god, and it's bullshit. You
>are misusing the word "faith", a word you don't really
>know or understand.
>
>You are a stupid dirty CJD-suffering god-believer, Goo.
>You hold an exceptionally stupid, low-brow, vulgar,
>cretinous belief in "god".
Now that you've described his belief in god in that way
I'm more inclined to accept it, because I don't think he
has any real faith in god at all, and I don't think he
understands what faith really is.
Initially, Harrison claimed to believe that if god exists,
there's no reason to believe that he hasn't, can't or
won't show proof of his existence by making himself
known.
"If God does exist, then it is likely enough that he has
made himself known to some people."
David Harrison 20 Dec 1999 http://tinyurl.com/2cvs9d
"If God does exist, then there is certainly no reason to
believe that he doesn't let some people know it for a
fact.
....
If he does exist, there is no reason to believe he doesn't
make himself that known to some people.
....
If God does exist, each person who says that they know
God exists is likely to know it for a fact, because God has
given them that knowledge for his own particular reasons."
David Harrison 22 Nov 1999 http://tinyurl.com/yoo446
But now, nearly a decade later, he explains "that if God
exists he won't allow proof of his existence."
"..... by now even you should be aware of the FACT that
if God exists he won't allow proof of his existence."
David Harrison 27 Mar 2008 http://tinyurl.com/2rgks2
This contradiction can only mean one thing; those theists
previously referred to who "know it for a fact, because
God has given them that knowledge" must be lying. Why,
then, does Harrison wait around hoping for proof of god's
existence while understanding that any proof or evidence
of it would be a lie, and not show that god exists at all?
He writes,
"I was raised to believe in God, and didn't want to be an
"atheist"...in fact never even considered the idea. Now I
am a weak atheist, and expect to remain one the rest of
my life unless God lets me know he does exist at some
point."
David Harrison 11 Feb 2007 http://tinyurl.com/22shdh
Clearly, if god "lets [Harrison] know he does exists at
some point" his belief in him would be based on a lie
because "of the FACT that if God exists he won't allow
proof of his existence." Every piece of evidence or proof
of god's existence Harrison hopes to find or become
known to him would actually push him further away from
believing he exists rather than toward it.
"[Harrison] was raised to believe in God and didn't want
to be an atheist", but because of his understanding of god
and his misunderstanding of the term "faith" he will always
be one, and all theists who claim to know god exists
because they see proof or evidence of his existence must
be liars. He has no faith. His belief system relies on logical
proof or weight of evidence, just like any other atheist's
belief system.
>Your statements about
>"faith" in the lack of existence of god are hilarious -
>stupid beyond belief, but funny.
True.
Whining, Crying, Bawl
>
> "If God does exist, then there is certainly no reason to
> believe that he doesn't let some people know it for a
> fact.
> ....
> If he does exist, there is no reason to believe he doesn't
> make himself that known to some people.
> ....
> If God does exist, each person who says that they know
> God exists is likely to know it for a fact, because God has
> given them that knowledge for his own particular reasons."
>
> But now, nearly a decade later, he explains "that if God
> exists he won't allow proof of his existence."
>
> "..... by now even you should be aware of the FACT that
> if God exists he won't allow proof of his existence."
>
> This contradiction can only mean one thing; those theists
> previously referred to who "know it for a fact, because
> God has given them that knowledge" must be lying. Why,
> then, does Harrison wait around hoping for proof of god's
> existence while understanding that any proof or evidence
> of it would be a lie, and not show that god exists at all?
> He writes,
>
> "I was raised to believe in God, and didn't want to be an
> "atheist"...in fact never even considered the idea. Now I
> am a weak atheist, and expect to remain one the rest of
> my life unless God lets me know he does exist at some
> point."
>
> Clearly, if god "lets [Harrison] know he does exists at
> some point" his belief in him would be based on a lie
> because "of the FACT that if God exists he won't allow
> proof of his existence." Every piece of evidence or proof
> of god's existence Harrison hopes to find or become
> known to him would actually push him further away from
> believing he exists rather than toward it.
>
> "[Harrison] was raised to believe in God and didn't want
> to be an atheist", but because of his understanding of god
> and his misunderstanding of the term "faith" he will always
> be one, and all theists who claim to know god exists
> because they see proof or evidence of his existence must
> be liars. He has no faith. His belief system relies on logical
> proof or weight of evidence, just like any other atheist's
> belief system.
>
> >Your statements about
> >"faith" in the lack of existence of god are hilarious -
> >stupid beyond belief, but funny.
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
He didn't make Himself known to you and that useless, stupid, Goober.
Rudy Canoza
That's just bullshit. Fuckwit is and always has been a dumb Southern
Baptist true believer. For some reason he thinks it's cute or
fashionable, in some goofy cracker way, to pose as a "weak atheist", but
he never was an atheist of any sort. He knows and recites biblical
passages chapter and verse, not because he has studied that crap
academically, but because he learned it all by rote as part of his
stupid cracker religious indoctrination.
Rudy Canoza
blew Fuckwit Harrison and then decided he wanted to *LOSE* some more and
lied:
Shut the fuck up, runny. You make a mockery of religion by capitalizing
"Himself". You're a profane, vile, hate-spewing misanthrope.
Kate
<ca...@optonline.net> wrote:
>On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 14:16:29 -0700, Elf M. Sternberg
><e...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>
>>Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net> writes:
>>
>>> On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 10:07:40 -0700, Elf M. Sternberg
>>> <e...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Christopher A. Lee <ca...@optonline.net> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> You said that strong atheism was the only reasonable atheism. Or words
>>>>> to that effect.
>>
>>> All an atheist is, is somebody who isn't theist.
>>
>> Okay, I accept that. Now the $64,000 question:
>>
>> "What is a theist?"
>
>Not my problem.
Interesting point and what I've always had a problem with Huxley. He
came up with a defintion.
Christopher A. Lee
Whining, Crying, Bawl
When referring to God, "Himself" is ALWAYS capitalized you incredibly
stupid Goober.
Derek
How can his belief in god be sola fide while he looks for logical
proof or weight of evidence of him? Surely, from what I wrote
below in my earlier post, he has no faith at all.
>For some reason he thinks it's cute or
>fashionable, in some goofy cracker way, to pose as a "weak atheist", but
>he never was an atheist of any sort. He knows and recites biblical
>passages chapter and verse, not because he has studied that crap
>academically, but because he learned it all by rote as part of his
>stupid cracker religious indoctrination.
You could probably recite most of our beloved AR literature
and play devil's advocate if you wanted to, and let's face it,
you'd be a hard nut to crack if you did. Remember this (below)?
"You could write a book defending AR if you wanted to do it .."
Karen, writing under the nym Glorfindel http://tinyurl.com/j89zl
I don't pretend to know why he posing as a "weak atheist"
while trying to aggravate other atheists, and I don't pretend to
know why he poses as someone who's considerate to animals
while trying to aggravate ARAs, but I do see a common
theme to his trolling going on here.
Rudy Canoza
Not if you're a filthy profane irreligious lying shitbag like you,
runny. You don't fool anyone.
Rudy Canoza
He doesn't have any legitimate faith, but he's trying to defend a
traditional Southern Baptist view, for whatever weird reason. It's much
like his involvement in discussion of "ar": he doesn't *really* have
any consideration for animals, despite his loathsome blabber to the
contrary; but he seems to think it's necessary to talk that way.
>
>> For some reason he thinks it's cute or
>> fashionable, in some goofy cracker way, to pose as a "weak atheist", but
>> he never was an atheist of any sort. He knows and recites biblical
>> passages chapter and verse, not because he has studied that crap
>> academically, but because he learned it all by rote as part of his
>> stupid cracker religious indoctrination.
>
> You could probably recite most of our beloved AR literature
> and play devil's advocate if you wanted to, and let's face it,
> you'd be a hard nut to crack if you did. Remember this (below)?
>
> "You could write a book defending AR if you wanted to do it .."
> Karen, writing under the nym Glorfindel http://tinyurl.com/j89zl
>
> I don't pretend to know why he posing as a "weak atheist"
> while trying to aggravate other atheists, and I don't pretend to
> know why he poses as someone who's considerate to animals
> while trying to aggravate ARAs, but I do see a common
> theme to his trolling going on here.
Exactly. Fuckwit is and always has been a stupid troll.
Mr.Smartypants
ALWAYS capitalized Goobs,..............ALWAYS.
Now shut your blabberflaps.
Rudy Canoza
Not when crapped into usenet by a filty, profane, irreligious
cocksucking fuck like you, runny.
Mr.Smartypants
From: "Laurie" <lau...@the-bitch.net>
Newsgroups: alt.food.vegan
Subject: Jonathan Ball
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 15:26:42 -0400
Message-ID: <uml05sk...@corp.supernews.com>
Jonathan Ball [Goo] is nothing more than a psychopathic, insulting
troll,
who can never support his claims, and specializes only in personal
insults,
vulgarity, name-calling, distortions of others' posts, and vicious
personal
attacks of unimaginable dimensions. He is, no doubt, the most
vulgar,
offensive, mentally-disturbed person on the Internet -- quite an
accomplishment considering the number of loonies with computers.
. . .
And here are some of his personal attacks:
Direct quotes form Ball's currently available Google Groups
postings on
alt.animal.ethics.vegetarian, alt.food.vegan, talk.politics.animals;
check
Google Groups for the archives re: jonb...@earthlink.ns.net
No, Fuckwit. , ignorant fuckwitted , Slutweed, You're full of shit.,
you
ignorant filthy twat., Fuckwit!, Fuckwit, illogical imbecile , What's
up
next, Fuckwit?, Fuckwit, you illiterate slag, pseudoscientific
blowhard.,
ignorant liar, No, Fuckwit, Fuckwit, Fuckwit, No, Fuckwit. Fuckwit.,
Everyone hates your guts., sleazy Larry, nutball, sleazy word
fiddling
sophist, you sleazy sophist, Ratweed, you sleazy pig, Ratsleazeweed,
you
sleazy shitbag, lying, sleazy, filthy totalitarian, you lying
shitbag,
Fuckwit, Fuckwit, you fucking moron, you slimy piece of shit, You're
a
colossally stupid piece of shit, You don't know your ass from your
face,
Slutweed, Slutweed, your shitty existence, Ratweed, sleazy
chickenshit
totalitarian extraordinaire, redneck cousin fucker, you stupid twit.
What
the fuck else would it be, you filthy slag, twit ~~Slutweed,
fucking
electrical engineer, for chrissake, Who gives a flying fuck?, You
filthy
fucking slag., slag, Slutweed, dogmatic asswipe, Slutweed, bullshit,
politically motivated lying fucks, just like you, "fruitarian" fuck,
You
sleazy, dishonest slag, Slutweed, Who the hell do you think you are to
be
posting bullshit - utter, ridiculous bullshit, Slutweed, It's
bullshit, you
filthy slag, you filthy slag, sack-o-crap, Slutweed, bullshit - utter
bullshit, Fuckwit, Fuckwit, stupid, irrational, syphilitic, cousin-
fucking
redneck you are, Fuckwit, Syphilis, Fuckwit, Fuckwit, Fuckwit, sleazy
fuckwitted purpose, fuckwitted beliefs, Sleazy, lying, cousin-
fucking,
rednecked Fuckwit, Slutweed, You fucking boneheaded slag, your
ignorant
redneck ass, Fuckwit, Fuckwit, Fucknuckle, Fuckwit, Fuckwit, ignorant
redneck Fuckwit, little pencildick redneck?, little fanatical
fucknuckle,
Fuckwit, Fuckwit, fucking, Fuckwit, you lying Fuckwit, Fuckwit,
Fuckwit,
Fuckwit, Fuckwit is an idiot. It's why his name is Fuckwit, Ratweed,
filthy
leftwing assholes like ~~Ratweed~~ and Sleazkowski., Shitbags like
~~Ratweed~~ and Sleazkowski, you're just too fucking stupid to do it.
You're too fucking stupid in general, Fuckwit. You're just...fucking
stupid., Fuckwit, Fucknuckle, Fuckwit, Fuckwit can scarcely write a
coherent
thought., plagiarizing slut?, Slutweed, No one gives a shit, you
ignorant
slut, What the fuck is the matter with you, you ignorant slut,
Slutweed, you
just shot yourself in your huge lard ass, paranoid conspiracy
bullshit,
You're a good little Fuckwit, you redneck shitbag, shitminded,
motherfucking
cocksucker, You're a fucking liar., You're just taking a shit,
stupid,
fuckwitted example, Fuckwit, your boneheadedness, Fuckwit, No,
Fuckwit,
You're an idiot., chronic, willful, sleazy liar, Slagweed, Slagweed,
nutballs, lard ass, Just fuck off., incoherent menopausal bitch,
Retard,
Nitwit, Ratweed, protofascist
trollop, Fuck you, you nazi shitbag, Ratguts, Bitch, Bitch, You really
are a
stupid shitbag., Bitch, Fuckwit, You're a fucking idiot, just fucking
awful,
horseshit, Fuckwit, fucking ignorant nonsense, Fuckwit, bullshit,
fucking,
Fuckwit, Fuckwit, Fuckwit, Fuckwit, bullshit, litigation lottery
whores,
pimp shitbag lawyers, redneck, Fuck off., Shitbag, fuck, jerking-
off,
bullshit, Shitbag, ratguts, bullshit, Go pound glass shards up your
flue,
Ratguts, sightless carbuncle of a life partner you hump, Nitwit,
You're an
idiot., Nitwit, Shitbag, fucked up, fucked, fuck, Shitbag, bastard,
garage
owner had *your* little raisin nuts clenched in his...thumb and
forefinger.,
Shitbag, too fucking bad, fuck-all, you're arrogant, bloodyminded,
stubborn, and a shitbag., Shitbag, Shitbag, Fuckwit, Shitbag,
Shitbag,
Shitbag, Shitbag, Shitbag, Shitbag, Shitbag, You lying scum:, you
lying
motherfucker, You filthy lying shitbag, you lying asshole, scum,
semi-literate horseshit, deliberately sleazy, lying propagandizing
asshole.,
bullshit, willfully lying asshole, you fucking swine., You're an
idiot.,
David Harrison is an idiot., You're too stupid., Fuckwit, You're an
idiot.,
you stinking liar, you sleazy fuck, asshole, asshole, bullshit, twit,
you
colossally ignorant fuck, union goon., dunderhead, union thug of a
father,
you ignorant stubborn fuck, you morally sleazy fuck, fucked up,
fucking
lunatic, ~~Illweed~~ is a fucking lunatic, Sleazeweed, morally
depraved
fuck, you fat fuck., fuck Sleazkowski, you're a stubborn shit, fucked,
fat
fuck, you're an arrogant cocksucker, you ignorant fat fuck, stupid
fucking,
Nitwit, Nitwit, you shitbag, stupid shitbag, you stupid fat fuck,
twit, you
ignorant shitbag., slutweed, you sleazy bastard, bunch of
[big snip]
shitwipes, you shitwipe pillock, you dumb fucking pillock, Fuckwit,
FirstFuckwit, SecondFuckwit, SecondFuckwit, you fucking ignorant
shitwipe,
You are as colossally fucking stupid, Get the fuck out of usenet,
shit-faced, goddamned sleazy lying shitbag., Ratweed, you senile cow,
blowing Fuckwit, You're an idiot, Fuck off., Ratweed, Ratweed,
Fuckwit,
You're just taking a piss., sleazy liar, sleazy sophist liars,
Ratweed,
raving leftwing maniac, Fuckwit, he's full of shit and doesn't know
his ass
from his face, fuckwittedly, bullshit, redneck, bullshit, pathetic
little
cousin fucking pencil-dick redneck, sleazy slag, You know that you're
only
taking a piss., Ratweed, Ratweed, venal lying slag, Ratweed, Ratweed,
you
filthy lying fucking slag, You're too fucking stupid, you fucking
lying pig,
you fucking pig., you filthy fucking pig, Ratweed, You are a sleazy,
low
paid hypocrite, Fuckwit, Fuckwit, Sleazkowsi the Pusillanimous, you
runnynosed little punk, your own little pencil dick, you sniveling
little
chickenshit., stupid, lying, chickenshit, redneck idiot., Fuckwit,
You
ignorant asswipe., Fuckwit, You're an idiot, you chickenshit redneck,
You're
a fucking idiot., Ratweed~~ the hypocritical fuck, read: mutual
masturbation, Ratweed, You're the sleazy hypocrite, ~~Ratweed, you
arrogant
fuck, You arrogant fuck., Ratguts, fucking, shut your fucking mouth,
shit-minded, Ratshit, bullshit, You're an idiot., You're an idiot.,
You're
an idiot., You're an idiot., You're an idiot., redneck cousin-poking,
Nitwit, FLYING FUCK, Ad hominem. You fucking swine., you sleazy
liar,
bullshit., you fucking sleaze, you sleazy liar, You stink., you filthy
liar,
Nitwit, nitwitted, Nitwit, You sleazy piece of fifth columnist crap,
shit,
lying punk, rat's ass, You ignorant ass, What a filthy stinking
hypocrite
you are!, Not bullshit, you ultimate bullshitter, chiseling liars, You
are
so incredibly stupid, ignorant fuckwit, Your comparison is shit,
fucking,
fucking, bullshit, shit, You fucking head in the sand ignoramus. How
fucking dare you, Fuckwit, Fuckwit, Fuckwit, You're a piece of crap.,
bullshit, shitty, shit, you fucking moron, If you were to perform an
auto-fuck with a red-hot fireplace poker, I think it would help a
lot,
fuckwitted, you lying asshole, you're stupid, fuckwit, Fuckwit, lousy
liar,
Fuck you., You're an ignorant slag, you unethical shitbag, You
idiot.,
Fuckwit, bullshit, You dishonest sleaze, bullshitting, bitchy,
Fuckwit,
shit, lying Fuckwit, Fuckwit, Fuckwit, fucking, Fuckwit, You're a
moron,
Fuckwit, she picked a shitbag for a husband, Fuckwit, Fuckwit,
Fuckwit,
Fuckwit, Fuckwit, fuckwitted, You're an incompetent fucking liar,
Fuckwit,
Fuckwit, you're an idiot for thinking it., you fucking incompetent
liar,
Fuckwit, fuckwit, Fuckwit, Fuckwit, Fuckwit, You stupid fuckwit,
shut
yourfucking ignorant redneck mouth, Fuckwit, You're an idiot,
Fuckwit,
Fuckwit, Nitwit, You're an idiot., You don't know what the fuck
you're
talking about., fuck, you, slag, You don't know your ass from your
face,
fuckwit, you senile shit. You fucked it up., senile auntie, you
filthy
liar, You don't know what the fuck you're talking about, senile
auntie.,
You're wrong, asshole, You don't know what the fuck you're talking
about,
you ignorant cow., I've shot your ignorant fucking head off, senile
auntie,
fucked up, Fuck off,, Fuck off, began licking "Gregory's" ass,
Fuckwit,
Fuckwit, Fuckwit, fucking, fucking, Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit,
senile
auntie, bullshit, your petulant Canuck inferiority, bullcrap, You are
a
stalinist fascist, You're a fascist., fuckwit, fuckwitting,
fuckwittisness,
fuckwit, fuckwit, fuckwittishness, fuckwitticism, fuckwit,
fuckwittedness,
fuckwits, elitist snot, bullshit, Feralshitforbrains, horseshit, He's
an
imbecile, Bullshit. Plain and pure and simple bullshit, What a
simp.,
bullshit, Piss off. Wussy little poofter., Nitwit, You're an
ignorant
redneck., Nitwit, horseshit, fuck, you saphead, stubborn and arrogant
old
crone, fucking, Nitwit, Nitwit, you're a stupid, uneducated cracker,
senile
auntie, you need to change your enema bag, nitwit, muddlefucking
dumbshit,
You moron, Get the fuck out., You're the biggest moron, bullshit,
bullshit,
fucking, Bullcrap, Who the fuck, filthy "ARA" hypocrite, Bullshit,
bullshit,
bullshit, redneck's, horseshit, horseshit, She's a religious
fundamentalist
idiot, just like you, You're an idiot., You're an idiot., Nitwit,
Nitwit,
You're just taking a piss., you're a liar, a smear artist, and an
ignorant
redneck shitbag,, nitwit, redneck cousin-fucking friend, dumbfuck,
your
dirt-floor redneck heaven, dumbfucks, you fucking idiot, asshole,
shit-for-brains redneck cousin-fucking hillbilly, hate-mongering
bullshit,
You're just too stupid, shit-shoveler, dimwits, Goddamn, Goddamn,
shitty,
you dumb fat fuck, You're a lying partisan hatemongering asshole,
your
willful blindness and deliberate, sleazing dishonesty, scumbag, you
blockhead, scumbag, you fat fuck, lying shitbag, you stupid-by-
choice
sleaze, shitbags, Goddamn, fuckwad, you are the lying bag of shit,
you
vocational rehab reject, He rubbed your face in your own shit,
nitpicking
dunce, you simpering juvenile asshole, the dirty slag ~~Illweed,
fucking,
You don't know your ass from your face., sack of crap, Hateweed,
Hateweed,
Hateweed, bullshit, bullshit, Bullshit, fuck, you hysterical
grandstanding
bitch, Karen is a lifelong fuckup, fuckup, fucked, Ratweed, delusional
punk,
Ratweed, Ratweed, RatHateWeed, RatHateWeed, lunatic, RatHateWeed's,
RatHateWeed's, Ratweed's, Ratweed's, Ratweed's, Ratweed, You're a
fuckup,
too goddamned stupid, without goddamned fucking ~~Ratweed~~, Jesus
fucking
christ, Fuckwit, You're an idiot, Ratweed, shit like you, bullshit,
RatHateWeed, You're a totalitarian statist, Ratweed, illogical
bullcrap,
crap, You're an idiot., dumbass, two-bit slag, Slagweed,
. . .
Michael Gray
But not of an atheist!
What has Huxley to do with a reasonable description of 'atheism'?
He coined the term for an agnostic, which is an entirely seperate
issue.
Agnosticsm is about knowledge.
Atheism is about belief.
dh
>Now that you've described his belief in god in that way
>I don't think he has any real faith in god at all,
I don't have a belief either way, 2goo. Goo does,
but is hilariously ashamed to admit it.
>and I don't think he
>understands what faith really is.
You have faith in something if you think you know
it's true.
dh
I only say it because it is true and it's something I consider to
be significant.
>but you don't care whether you are honest, do you.
Yes I do, and I wonder how honest other people are being
especially when it's hard to believe that they could be.
dh
>Free Lunch wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 31 Mar 2008 14:26:14 +0900, in alt.atheism
>> dh@. wrote in <6ft0v3dnv51tgr2nu...@4ax.com>:
>> >On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 12:06:09 -0500, "Lord Vetinari" <veti...@ameritech.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >><dh@.> wrote in message news:j8bou3her0f6n29vr...@4ax.com...
>> >>[snip]
>> >>> Do you have faith that a creator does not exist?
>> >>> If so, are you willing to admit it? Do you think other
>> >>> people should, or should not?
>> >>
>> >>Amazing, isn't it? Referring, of course, to these cretins with low IQs who
>> >>cannot recognize their position
>> >
>> > There are idiots who refuse to admit their OBVIOUS faith in the
>> >possibility that a creator does not exist. The question your point
>> >immediately brings to mind is whether they are really too stupid to
>> >understand, or they are lying deliberately trying to make people
>> >believe they honestly are that stupid.
>>
>> Keep saying whatever you like. It won't be true, but you don't care
>> whether you are honest, do you.
>
>No, they are engaging in a Major Flame War trying to prove to the Beast
>why he is a Liar.
If the Beast does exist he obviously got Howard to lie for him
in his Satanic Bible. That much couldn't be any more obvious.
dh
>On Apr 1, 1:48 am, Derek <usenet.em...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 31 Mar 2008, Goo wrote:
>> >Your statements about
>> >"faith" in the lack of existence of god are hilarious -
>> >stupid beyond belief, but funny.
>>
>> True.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>He didn't make Himself known to you and that useless, stupid, Goober.
As I predicted the Goober has faith that he is ashamed to
admit. I nailed that one before he even let us know for sure.
His shallowness and stupidity spread out into all aspects of
his valueless existence. What's the shallowest approach to
the possibility of a creator? Strong atheism. What's the lamest
and shallowest approach to that? Denial of faith in what one
believes. So that's what we can expect out of the Goos, and
that's what we get out of the Goos.
Mr.Smartypants
I believe that Goobs is on the cusp of another "pre-existence" dilema
in which he vehemently denies God but will make dozens of statements
showing he believes in God.
Kate
Definition of a god. Sorry if I was a bit vague. Lee's whole point
is it's the theist's responsibility to come up with a coherent god
definition and basically that's impossible.
Merlin
>
what literary character do you sound like in this post?
a washer woman down at the creek gossiping with the girls?
> I believe that Goobs is on the cusp of another "pre-existence" dilema
> in which he vehemently denies God but will make dozens of statements
> showing he believes in God.
this is the oddest pick-on-someone topic on christnet merlin has ever
seen.
where you girls from? not alt.christian?
in love with the living gay jesus,
merlin
Michael Gray
Agreed.
But the definition of a theist's belief has not a lot to do with
agnosticism.
Kate
<mike...@newsguy.com> wrote:
Agnosticism of what.... See the issue?