Atheists make fools of themselves - AGAIN
TehGhodTrole
>>>> The Top 10 Biggest Fools On Earth
>>>> 1. "God exists in reality."
>>>> Free Clues! There are some common elements in all these items,
>>>> some of which include:
>>>> belief.
>>>> belief.
>>>> belief
>>>> belief.
>>>> belief
Can anyone spot the absurdity? Apparently atheists can't.
Reality \Re*al"i*ty\, n.; pl. Realities. [Cf. F.
r['e]alit['e], LL. realitas. See 3d Real. and cf. 2d
Realty.]
1. The state or quality of being real; actual being or
existence of anything, in distinction from mere
appearance; fact.
2. That which is real; an actual existence; that which is not
imagination, fiction, or pretense and is not merely an idea.
Belief \Be*lief"\, n. [OE. bileafe, bileve; cf. AS. gele['a]fa.
See Believe.]
1. Assent to a proposition or affirmation, or the acceptance
of a fact, opinion, or assertion as real or true, without
immediate personal knowledge.
>>> Nominated portion: <Steve Makohin>
>> Heartily seconded! <Woden>
> Recorded. Extra group snipped. <*nemo*>
--
TehGhodTrole: Trolling, for God's sake.
Your Free Insult: Jesus loves you.
Phÿltêr
news:MGdSNIcWz31Z47BFA399...@kadaitcha.cx:
> *nemo* wrote:
>
>>>>> The Top 10 Biggest Fools On Earth
>
>>>>> 1. "God exists in reality."
>
>>>>> Free Clues! There are some common elements in all these items,
>>>>> some of which include:
>
>>>>> belief.
>>>>> belief.
>>>>> belief
>>>>> belief.
>>>>> belief
>
> Can anyone spot the absurdity?
I'm reading his post
--
Phÿltêr
Denizen of Darkness #44 & AFJC Antipodean Attaché
http://www.rudraigh.com/afjc/regulars.html
Change "freeway" to "hotmail" to respond
Paul Hume
> *nemo* wrote:
>
> >>>> The Top 10 Biggest Fools On Earth
>
> >>>> 1. "God exists in reality."
>
> >>>> Free Clues! There are some common elements in all these items,
> >>>> some of which include:
>
> >>>> belief.
> >>>> belief.
> >>>> belief
> >>>> belief.
> >>>> belief
>
> Can anyone spot the absurdity? Apparently atheists can't.
>
I am sure it was unintentional, but you have missed the use of satire
in the post you are critiqueing. Mind you, it was heavy handed, clumsy
satire.
The absurdity to which you quite properly refer was the
juxtapositional element intended to present the posters position
(which is, actually, you see, a claim that God does NOT exist) while
framing it in language which, at face value, claimed that God does
exist. Thus satire (I don't think it was deft enough to count as
irony). This is a subset of a means of expression often referred to as
humor, though the apparent humorous content of a given message
(sometimes referred to as a "joke," to use the technical term) varies
widely across any given sample of recipients.
Thus you are correct in identifying a central absurdity in the text,
illustrated by your deft references to the dictionary, but you
overlooked the literary mechanism being employed. Far better use of
the satirical literary form on this question can be found in the works
of far better writers, viz. Samuel Langhorne Clemens.
Paul
TehGhodTrole
> "TehGhodTrole" <nos...@rainx.cjb.net> wrote in message
> news:<MGdSNIcWz31Z47BFA399...@kadaitcha.cx>...
>> *nemo* wrote:
>>
>>>>>> The Top 10 Biggest Fools On Earth
>>
>>>>>> 1. "God exists in reality."
>>
>>>>>> Free Clues! There are some common elements in all these items,
>>>>>> some of which include:
>>
>>>>>> belief.
>>>>>> belief.
>>>>>> belief
>>>>>> belief.
>>>>>> belief
>>
>> Can anyone spot the absurdity? Apparently atheists can't.
>>
>
I am sure it was unwitting.
JessHC
> Paul Hume wrote:
> > "TehGhodTrole" <nos...@rainx.cjb.net> wrote in message
> > news:<MGdSNIcWz31Z47BFA399...@kadaitcha.cx>...
> >> *nemo* wrote:
> >>
> >>>>>> The Top 10 Biggest Fools On Earth
>
> >>>>>> 1. "God exists in reality."
>
> >>>>>> Free Clues! There are some common elements in all these items,
> >>>>>> some of which include:
>
> >>>>>> belief.
> >>>>>> belief.
> >>>>>> belief
> >>>>>> belief.
> >>>>>> belief
> >>
> >> Can anyone spot the absurdity? Apparently atheists can't.
> >>
> >
> > I am sure it was unintentional.
>
> I am sure it was unwitting.
Probably like your unwitting replacement of all that text, starting
with the comma after "unintentional," with a period.
David V.
> *nemo* wrote:
>
>>>>> The Top 10 Biggest Fools On Earth
>
>>>>> 1. "God exists in reality."
>
>
> That which is real.
>
> Belief : 1. Assent to a proposition or affirmation, or
> the acceptance of a fact, opinion, or assertion as real
> or true, without immediate personal knowledge.
Yes, the absurdity is that theists think that just by
believing "without immediate personal knowledge" that their
gods are a reality.
--
David V.
Yosemite Llama Ranch
UDP for WebTV
Paul Hume
> >
> > I am sure it was unwitting.
>
> Probably like your unwitting replacement of all that text, starting
> with the comma after "unintentional," with a period.
While it showed a flash of word play, TGT is still coming across as irony-impaired.
Paul
TehGhodTrole
So, let's get this right... I turn the irony about by 180 degrees so
that it points directly at atheists, then amplify it therefore I am
irony-impaired? Pardon me for a moment, please...
BWAHAHAGAAHAHAHAH!!! *WHEEZE* *CHOKE* *GURGLE* *COUGH* *SPLUTTER*
David V.
> Paul Hume wrote:
>
>>>>> I am sure it was unintentional.
>>>>
>>>> I am sure it was unwitting.
>>>
>>> Probably like your unwitting replacement of all that
>>> text, starting with the comma after "unintentional,"
>>> with a period.
>>
>> While it showed a flash of word play, TGT is still
>> coming across as irony-impaired.
>
>
> So, let's get this right... I turn the irony about by 180
> degrees so that it points directly at atheists
And you make a fool of yourself in the process.
Paul Hume
> > irony-impaired.
>
> So, let's get this right... I turn the irony about by 180 degrees so
> that it points directly at atheists, then amplify it therefore I am
> irony-impaired? Pardon me for a moment, please...
>
Ah, my error. Say rather, incredibly bad at it.
Kadaitcha Man
>>> While it showed a flash of word play, TGT is still coming across as
>>> irony-impaired.
>>
>> So, let's get this right... I turn the irony about by 180 degrees so
>> that it points directly at atheists, then amplify it therefore I am
>> irony-impaired? Pardon me for a moment, please...
>>
>
> Ah, my error.
I will accept that as a grovelling apology.
Mr. Peterborough
>
> Yes, the absurdity is that theists think that just by
> believing "without immediate personal knowledge" that their
> gods are a reality.
What about experiences, like heart-felt experiences or claims that
they met him or that they were there, etc?
Paul Hume
>
> I will accept that as a grovelling apology.
I will accept that as an indication that you are a cretin.
Kadaitcha Man
>>> Ah, my error.
>>
>> I will accept that as a grovelling apology.
>
Thank you.
ZenIsWhen
"Mr. Peterborough" <highle...@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
news:a5676bf8.04030...@posting.google.com...
We are to believe that every time a zealot gets heartburn - or has a
climax - they're experience (and validating) god?
Paul Hume
I've always wondered about psychology of usenet correspondents who
have to rewrite the posts to make them come out the way they want.
What in heaven's name does that gain you?
It does seem to prove my original point, I admit, so thanks in return,
bumpkin.
Mr. Peterborough
>
> We are to believe that every time a zealot gets heartburn - or has a
> climax - they're experience (and validating) god?
Well, what do you call it then?
I almost always get what I pray for.
Kadaitcha Man
> "Kadaitcha Man" <nos...@kadaitcha.cx> wrote in message
> news:<XwQuikLrwYwl675A3862...@kadaitcha.cx>...
>> Paul Hume wrote:
>>>>> Ah, my error.
>>>>
>>>> I will accept that as a grovelling apology.
>>>
>>> I will accept that as an indication that you are a genius.
>>
>> Thank you.
>
> I've always wondered about psychology of usenet correspondents who
> have to rewrite the posts to make them come out the way they want.
> What in heaven's name does that gain you?
It depends on what the action in question cost you.
Now, be honest. When this latest round of wonderment hit your head,
what was the psychological and/or emotional cost to you?
And don't say "nothing much" or "nothing at all" because the very fact that
you even bothered to read my reply implies a cost to you in one form or
another.
When you get around to actually understanding that your psychology is being
poked, prodded and teased, and realise that it is me, a master of Usenet
psychology, who is invoking your wonderment and causing you to express such
wonderment, then you're on your way to being on a level playing field,
maybe. Until then, don't bother raising the spectre of psychology. It'll
only make you look like the incompetent oaf that you are.
William Klee
Peterborough <highle...@yahoo.ca> wrote:
How's that prayer for our respect going, then?
--
...and in elder days there were wars in the Heavens between the Ibemmeraphim
and the Angels of the Apple of Knowledge...