|
Post by cupcakes on May 30, 2017 11:50:58 GMT
tpfkar I think you're a halfwit desperately trying to prop up his feelings of inferiority with some of the most insipidly groanworthy posts found on this message board. People of God did not have to kill them either because God killed them for us. The point remains that homosexuals are dumb, senseless animals that might need to be killed.
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on May 30, 2017 11:55:30 GMT
tpfkar I think you're a halfwit desperately trying to prop up his feelings of inferiority with some of the most insipidly groanworthy posts found on this message board. People of God did not have to kill them either because God killed them for us. The point remains that homosexuals are dumb, senseless animals that might need to be killed. I think you're trying to prove you are a half wit trying to prop up his feelings of inferiority with insipid comments. This time you were far more successful, congratulations.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on May 30, 2017 12:03:58 GMT
tpfkar I'm not so obliviously ironic to be an idiot playtiming for years that his semi-coherent amateur blog has the keys to overturning a Supreme Court decision while simultaneously snorting about others with less brains than geese. People of God did not have to kill them either because God killed them for us. The point remains that homosexuals are dumb, senseless animals that might need to be killed.
|
|
|
Post by johnblutarsky on May 30, 2017 12:28:10 GMT
I'm trying to follow this as it pertains to atheism. Maybe I'm missing something. Atheism is simply a lack of belief in god or gods. Anything beyond that is outside the scope of atheism. The issues involved here can be abstract and confusing, but one thing that should be clear to almost everyone is that a person who "lacks" belief is an agnostic. An "atheist" is a person who "lacks" the brains God gave geese. Putting your silly comment about geese aside... Gnosticism deals with knowledge. Either you KNOW a god exists or you don't. If people were truly honest with themselves, they would all consider themselves agnostic. Theism deals with belief. Either you BELIEVE the claims that a god exists or you don't. The two terms aren't mutually exclusive. You can be an agnostic atheist, an agnostic theist, etc. I may not believe that you found $1M and anonymously donated the money to charity, but I don't know for sure.
|
|
|
Post by johnblutarsky on May 30, 2017 12:31:05 GMT
Is it really a lacking, or just a fear to use what was given to them? Geese can be excused. After all, they're just geese. What (most) people have is the ability to reason. Too bad it's not always used.
|
|
|
Post by johnblutarsky on May 30, 2017 12:35:42 GMT
Is it really a lacking, or just a fear to use what was given to them? Geese can be excused. After all, they're just geese. Part of it could be a lack of intelligence, but I agree part of it is something else. I think that they were born into a family with little or no tradition puts them at a disadvantage understanding tradition. Even intelligent people with good family support can find it difficult. The atheists here are a mere shadow of their former selves though, aren't they? Where's skyhawk0? It's slow board without them. Strawmens to the left of me....strawmens to the right. Many people who are atheists (including myself) started off with a religious background. I went to church every Sunday. I went to a religious school for 12-years. I currently have a Masters Degree. So....what were you saying about intelligence and little to no tradition?
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on May 30, 2017 12:36:25 GMT
Is it really a lacking, or just a fear to use what was given to them? Geese can be excused. After all, they're just geese. What (most) people have is the ability to reason. Too bad it's not always used. You reason that if it exists, you would certainly understand it, and if you don't understand it, then it must not exist.
|
|
|
Post by johnblutarsky on May 30, 2017 12:38:06 GMT
I'm trying to follow this as it pertains to atheism. Maybe I'm missing something. Atheism is simply a lack of belief in god or gods. Anything beyond that is outside the scope of atheism. The issues involved here can be abstract and confusing, but one thing that should be clear to almost everyone is that a person who "lacks" belief is an agnostic. An "atheist" is a person who "lacks" the brains God gave geese. By the way, I was simply asking for clarification in your earlier post. Rather than take a moment and provide follow-up information, you went on a silly rant that wasn't helpful.
|
|
|
Post by johnblutarsky on May 30, 2017 12:42:24 GMT
What (most) people have is the ability to reason. Too bad it's not always used. You reason that if it exists, you would certainly understand it, and if you don't understand it, then it must not exist. "You reason that if it exists, you would certainly understand it, and if you don't understand it, then it must not exist." What does "it" in your reply mean?
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on May 30, 2017 12:48:31 GMT
You reason that if it exists, you would certainly understand it, and if you don't understand it, then it must not exist. "You reason that if it exists, you would certainly understand it, and if you don't understand it, then it must not exist." What does "it" in your reply mean? Anything that isn't tangible, weighable, spendable, material. Arlon hit the nail on the head back on the old board. Atheism is materialism. And yet.......you can't simply go off and enjoy your materialism elsewhere. For some reason you have to bring it here and evangelize.
|
|
|
Post by johnblutarsky on May 30, 2017 12:59:49 GMT
"You reason that if it exists, you would certainly understand it, and if you don't understand it, then it must not exist." What does "it" in your reply mean? Anything that isn't tangible, weighable, spendable, material. Arlon hit the nail on the head back on the old board. Atheism is materialism. And yet.......you can't simply go off and enjoy your materialism elsewhere. For some reason you have to bring it here and evangelize. Actually, I asked for clarification on a post and received a lot of nonsensical statements rather than receiving additional information. Ateism is the lack of belief in a god claim. You're tacking other things onto it (like materialism, etc.) However, if you really want to talk about materialism, let's look at these fine Christian examples... Yeah. Right. Atheism is materialism.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on May 30, 2017 13:04:38 GMT
Anything that isn't tangible, weighable, spendable, material. Arlon hit the nail on the head back on the old board. Atheism is materialism. And yet.......you can't simply go off and enjoy your materialism elsewhere. For some reason you have to bring it here and evangelize. Actually, I asked for clarification on a post and received a lot of nonsensical statements rather than receiving additional information. Ateism is the lack of belief in a god claim. You're tacking other things onto it (like materialism, etc.) However, if you really want to talk about materialism, let's look at these fine Christian examples... Yeah. Right. Atheism is materialism. Those photos depict ostentatiousness, not materialism. Materialism is the childish notion that atomic weight is a prerequisite to "reality."
|
|
|
Post by johnblutarsky on May 30, 2017 13:06:40 GMT
So if I own a mansion, a jet, a yacht, etc......that's not materialism?
|
|
|
Post by Edward-Elizabeth-Hitler on May 30, 2017 14:52:03 GMT
faustus5
Name calling,...now who is the idiot, eh?
Read a couple of books......WOW.
Perhaps he should have just lied and made up a degree in the subject, as is your habit?
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on May 30, 2017 15:54:24 GMT
Part of it could be a lack of intelligence, but I agree part of it is something else. I think that they were born into a family with little or no tradition puts them at a disadvantage understanding tradition. Even intelligent people with good family support can find it difficult. The atheists here are a mere shadow of their former selves though, aren't they? Where's skyhawk0? It's slow board without them. Strawmens to the left of me....strawmens to the right. Many people who are atheists (including myself) started off with a religious background. I went to church every Sunday. I went to a religious school for 12-years. I currently have a Masters Degree. So....what were you saying about intelligence and little to no tradition? Lots of people have degrees who aren't any good at anything. To repeat, even intelligent people with good family support can find it difficult.
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on May 30, 2017 15:58:07 GMT
The issues involved here can be abstract and confusing, but one thing that should be clear to almost everyone is that a person who "lacks" belief is an agnostic. An "atheist" is a person who "lacks" the brains God gave geese. Putting your silly comment about geese aside... Gnosticism deals with knowledge. Either you KNOW a god exists or you don't. If people were truly honest with themselves, they would all consider themselves agnostic. Theism deals with belief. Either you BELIEVE the claims that a god exists or you don't. The two terms aren't mutually exclusive. You can be an agnostic atheist, an agnostic theist, etc. I may not believe that you found $1M and anonymously donated the money to charity, but I don't know for sure. As has already been pointed out to you many times there is no generally recognized definition of "knowledge" of god and the only meaning the word "gnostic" can have is to your little private play group where you agree what that means. What is your degree in? Baby talk?
|
|
|
Post by johnblutarsky on May 30, 2017 16:14:17 GMT
Putting your silly comment about geese aside... Gnosticism deals with knowledge. Either you KNOW a god exists or you don't. If people were truly honest with themselves, they would all consider themselves agnostic. Theism deals with belief. Either you BELIEVE the claims that a god exists or you don't. The two terms aren't mutually exclusive. You can be an agnostic atheist, an agnostic theist, etc. I may not believe that you found $1M and anonymously donated the money to charity, but I don't know for sure. As has already been pointed out to you many times there is no generally recognized definition of "knowledge" of god and the only meaning the word "gnostic" can have is to your little private play group where you agree what that means. What is your degree in? Baby talk? You didn't point out to me that there's no generally definition of "knowledge." However, if you did, you would be wrong. gnostic [nos-tik] adjective, Also, gnostical 1. pertaining to knowledge. 2.possessing knowledge, especially esoteric knowledge of spiritual matters. 3. (initial capital letter) pertaining to or characteristic of the Gnostics. noun 4. (initial capital letter) a member of any of certain sects among the early Christians who claimed to have superior knowledge of spiritual matters, and explained the world as created by powers or agencies arising as emanations from the Godhead. If you look on a variety of sites, you can find similar definitions. During my first response, I simply and honestly asked for clarification on your terms. I wasn't criticizing or demeaning at all. However, rather than providing additional information to me, you had an unnecessary knee-jerk reaction and resorted to personal attacks, straw man statements and nonsense. Silly me for expecting an adult conversation.
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on May 30, 2017 16:27:20 GMT
As has already been pointed out to you many times there is no generally recognized definition of "knowledge" of god and the only meaning the word "gnostic" can have is to your little private play group where you agree what that means. What is your degree in? Baby talk? You didn't point out to me that there's no generally definition of "knowledge." However, if you did, you would be wrong. gnostic [nos-tik] adjective, Also, gnostical 1. pertaining to knowledge. 2.possessing knowledge, especially esoteric knowledge of spiritual matters. 3. (initial capital letter) pertaining to or characteristic of the Gnostics. noun 4. (initial capital letter) a member of any of certain sects among the early Christians who claimed to have superior knowledge of spiritual matters, and explained the world as created by powers or agencies arising as emanations from the Godhead. If you look on a variety of sites, you can find similar definitions. During my first response, I simply and honestly asked for clarification on your terms. I wasn't criticizing or demeaning at all. However, rather than providing additional information to me, you had an unnecessary knee-jerk reaction and resorted to personal attacks, straw man statements and nonsense. Silly me for expecting an adult conversation. First of all "you" was plural. If "you" singular missed out, here you go. The Pope, the Dalai Lama, the various Imams, Franklin Graham and any other religious leader you can imagine all refrain from claiming to be "gnostic" despite being quite familiar with the divine. That's because there is no generally accepted and certainly is no generally understood definition of "gnosis" just as I said. If they don't claim to be "gnostic" how do you get off claiming to know what one is?
|
|
|
Post by johnblutarsky on May 30, 2017 16:42:00 GMT
You didn't point out to me that there's no generally definition of "knowledge." However, if you did, you would be wrong. gnostic [nos-tik] adjective, Also, gnostical 1. pertaining to knowledge. 2.possessing knowledge, especially esoteric knowledge of spiritual matters. 3. (initial capital letter) pertaining to or characteristic of the Gnostics. noun 4. (initial capital letter) a member of any of certain sects among the early Christians who claimed to have superior knowledge of spiritual matters, and explained the world as created by powers or agencies arising as emanations from the Godhead. If you look on a variety of sites, you can find similar definitions. During my first response, I simply and honestly asked for clarification on your terms. I wasn't criticizing or demeaning at all. However, rather than providing additional information to me, you had an unnecessary knee-jerk reaction and resorted to personal attacks, straw man statements and nonsense. Silly me for expecting an adult conversation. First of all "you" was plural. If "you" singular missed out, here you go. The Pope, the Dalai Lama, the various Imams, Franklin Graham and any other religious leader you can imagine all refrain from claiming to be "gnostic" despite being quite familiar with the divine. That's because there is no generally accepted and certainly is no generally understood definition of "gnosis" just as I said. If they don't claim to be "gnostic" how do you get off claiming to know what one is? When there are definitions already established for words, but people don't want to use them...that's not my issue. If someone wants to use different definitions for words or disregard definitions for words, it's hard to carry on any kind of reasonable exchange. I can claim to have an understanding of the word gnostic, because it references "knowledge" by every definition I've seen. With that said, the steps required to gain knowledge on a particular subject is a different conversation all together.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on May 30, 2017 17:52:25 GMT
So if I own a mansion, a jet, a yacht, etc......that's not materialism? Not necessarily.
|
|