Is There A God?

[ding]

lol, no, that's what people do when they are having conversations with someone. They identify things they can agree on to identify the things they don't. I made a simple statement. One that I believe is self evident that is something that everyone should know. Do you believe that things you create can be used to learn things about you? Does this question make you uncomfortable?

I can't read your mind; don't understand your 1st Q. Please elaborate.
Re: 2nd Q ... Your 1st Q does not make me uncomfortable, but it does make me shake my head, slowly.

I am not asking you to read my mind. If you can't answer it, I'll understand.

Answer what?
Why are you beating around the bush?
I repeat: please elaborate on your Q, i.e., provide details.

I'm not beating around the bush. You are. Can I use something you created as evidence to learn things about you? Yes or no? It's not a complicated question.

Why do you keep asking that Q?
Why don't you just make your claim?
GO AHEAD!!!!

It is not a claim. It is a fact. Tangible items can be used as evidence.

 

[PK1]

I can't read your mind; don't understand your 1st Q. Please elaborate.
Re: 2nd Q ... Your 1st Q does not make me uncomfortable, but it does make me shake my head, slowly.

I am not asking you to read my mind. If you can't answer it, I'll understand.

Answer what?
Why are you beating around the bush?
I repeat: please elaborate on your Q, i.e., provide details.

I'm not beating around the bush. You are. Can I use something you created as evidence to learn things about you? Yes or no? It's not a complicated question.

Why do you keep asking that Q?
Why don't you just make your claim?
GO AHEAD!!!!

It is not a claim. It is a fact. Tangible items can be used as evidence.

Evidence for what?
What are you claiming to be evidence?
You did not pursue your query:
"Can I use something you created as evidence to learn things about you?"

 

[ding]

I am not asking you to read my mind. If you can't answer it, I'll understand.

Answer what?
Why are you beating around the bush?
I repeat: please elaborate on your Q, i.e., provide details.

I'm not beating around the bush. You are. Can I use something you created as evidence to learn things about you? Yes or no? It's not a complicated question.

Why do you keep asking that Q?
Why don't you just make your claim?
GO AHEAD!!!!

It is not a claim. It is a fact. Tangible items can be used as evidence.

Evidence for what?
What are you claiming to be evidence?
You did not pursue your query:
"Can I use something you created as evidence to learn things about you?"

For anything.

 

[PK1]

Answer what?
Why are you beating around the bush?
I repeat: please elaborate on your Q, i.e., provide details.

I'm not beating around the bush. You are. Can I use something you created as evidence to learn things about you? Yes or no? It's not a complicated question.

Why do you keep asking that Q?
Why don't you just make your claim?
GO AHEAD!!!!

It is not a claim. It is a fact. Tangible items can be used as evidence.

Evidence for what?
What are you claiming to be evidence?
You did not pursue your query:
"Can I use something you created as evidence to learn things about you?"

For anything.

You don't seem to understand what constitutes evidence in an unbiased analysis for explaining something.

 

[ding]

I'm not beating around the bush. You are. Can I use something you created as evidence to learn things about you? Yes or no? It's not a complicated question.

Why do you keep asking that Q?
Why don't you just make your claim?
GO AHEAD!!!!

It is not a claim. It is a fact. Tangible items can be used as evidence.

Evidence for what?
What are you claiming to be evidence?
You did not pursue your query:
"Can I use something you created as evidence to learn things about you?"

For anything.

You don't seem to understand what constitutes evidence in an unbiased analysis for explaining something.

Sure I do. If you created something could I use it to learn something about you even if I did not know you created it?

 

[PK1]

Why do you keep asking that Q?
Why don't you just make your claim?
GO AHEAD!!!!

It is not a claim. It is a fact. Tangible items can be used as evidence.

Evidence for what?
What are you claiming to be evidence?
You did not pursue your query:
"Can I use something you created as evidence to learn things about you?"

For anything.

You don't seem to understand what constitutes evidence in an unbiased analysis for explaining something.

Sure I do. If you created something could I use it to learn something about you even if I did not know you created it?

Yes, you can do a DNA analysis of my excrement. What does that prove?

 

[ding]

It is not a claim. It is a fact. Tangible items can be used as evidence.

Evidence for what?
What are you claiming to be evidence?
You did not pursue your query:
"Can I use something you created as evidence to learn things about you?"

For anything.

You don't seem to understand what constitutes evidence in an unbiased analysis for explaining something.

Sure I do. If you created something could I use it to learn something about you even if I did not know you created it?

Yes, you can do a DNA analysis of my excrement. What does that prove?

That you are a total dip shit dumb ass who didn't understand my question. Are we done? Because I'm not playing this game again with a let's have some fun with a believer bullshit again. I am more than happy to KNOW that you are a moron for not acknowledging what every court in the land understands.

 

[PK1]

Evidence for what?
What are you claiming to be evidence?
You did not pursue your query:
"Can I use something you created as evidence to learn things about you?"

For anything.

You don't seem to understand what constitutes evidence in an unbiased analysis for explaining something.

Sure I do. If you created something could I use it to learn something about you even if I did not know you created it?

Yes, you can do a DNA analysis of my excrement. What does that prove?

That you are a total dip shit dumb ass who didn't understand my question. Are we done? Because I'm not playing this game again with a let's have some fun with a believer bullshit again. I am more than happy to KNOW that you are a moron for not acknowledging what every court in the land understands.

Your immature emotions are finally being expressed vividly; a reflection of your frustration in not being able to communicate logically.

You do not understand objective evidence in jurisprudence as well as science.
However, you do understand childish faith, like one who believes Santa will reward them if they are "good".
LOL.

 

[ding]

For anything.

You don't seem to understand what constitutes evidence in an unbiased analysis for explaining something.

Sure I do. If you created something could I use it to learn something about you even if I did not know you created it?

Yes, you can do a DNA analysis of my excrement. What does that prove?

That you are a total dip shit dumb ass who didn't understand my question. Are we done? Because I'm not playing this game again with a let's have some fun with a believer bullshit again. I am more than happy to KNOW that you are a moron for not acknowledging what every court in the land understands.

Your immature emotions are finally being expressed vividly; a reflection of your frustration in not being able to communicate logically.

You do not understand objective evidence in jurisprudence as well as science.
However, you do understand childish faith, like one who believes Santa will reward them if they are "good".
LOL.

My belief is that militant atheists like yourself are dumbasses because you ignore objective truth. You are a dumbass because you don't weight the good. You are a dumbass because you blame religion or God for acts of men. You are a dumbass for throwing the baby out with the bathwater. You are a dumbass because you have a vague rosy notion of goodness of life without out religion or belief in a Supreme Being. You are a dumbass for ignoring the historical evidence of what a society without God looks like. .

You are a dumbass for not being able to imagine what a world without God or religion would look like. Which is... their religion would be socialism. They would worship big government and social policy. It would be based on atheism and the deification of man. It would proceed in almost all of its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of the individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They would have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine would be abolition of private property, abolition of family and communality or equality. They would practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. They would be identified by an external locus of control. They would worship science but would be the first to argue against it when it did not suit their cause. They would force everyone to believe the same things and think the same way. There would be no diversity of thought, only homogenization of thought.

 

[ding]

For anything.

You don't seem to understand what constitutes evidence in an unbiased analysis for explaining something.

Sure I do. If you created something could I use it to learn something about you even if I did not know you created it?

Yes, you can do a DNA analysis of my excrement. What does that prove?

That you are a total dip shit dumb ass who didn't understand my question. Are we done? Because I'm not playing this game again with a let's have some fun with a believer bullshit again. I am more than happy to KNOW that you are a moron for not acknowledging what every court in the land understands.

Your immature emotions are finally being expressed vividly; a reflection of your frustration in not being able to communicate logically.

You do not understand objective evidence in jurisprudence as well as science.
However, you do understand childish faith, like one who believes Santa will reward them if they are "good".
LOL.

The Khmer Rouge abolished all religion and dispersed minority groups, forbidding them to speak their languages or to practice their customs. These policies had been implemented in less severe forms for many years prior to the Khmer Rouge's taking power.

Communism is naturalized humanism. Karl Marx

The propaganda of atheism is necessary for our programs. Vladimir Lenin

Alexander Solzhenitsyn

“More than half a century ago, while I was still a child, I recall hearing a number of older people offer the following explanation for the great disasters that had befallen Russia: ‘Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened.’” “Since then I have spent well-nigh fifty years working on the history of our Revolution; in the process I have read hundreds of books, collected hundreds of personal testimonies, and have already contributed eight volumes of my own toward the effort of clearing away the rubble left by that upheaval...But if I were asked today to formulate as concisely as possible the main cause of the ruinous Revolution that swallowed up some sixty million of our people, I could not put it more accurately than to repeat: "Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened.’”

“Templeton Lecture, May 10, 1983,” in The Solzhenitsyn Reader: New and Essential Writings, 1947-2005, eds. Edward E. Ericson, Jr. and Daniel J. Mahoney (Wilmington, DE: Intercollegiate Studies Institute, 2006), 577

George Washington
Farewell Address, Sept 17, 1796

“Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports...In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens...”

The Will of the People: Readings in American Democracy (Chicago: Great Books Foundation, 2001), 38.

George Washington
Farewell Address, Sept 17, 1796

“…And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion...reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.”

The Will of the People: Readings in American Democracy (Chicago: Great Books Foundation, 2001), 38.

Throughout our nation's history, churches have done what no government can ever do, namely teach morality and civility. Moral and civil individuals are largely governed by their own sense of right and wrong, and hence have little need for external government. This is the real reason the collectivist Left hates religion: Churches as institutions compete with the state for the people's allegiance, and many devout people put their faith in God before putting their faith in the state. Knowing this, the secularists wage an ongoing war against religion, chipping away bit by bit at our nation's Christian heritage.
Dr. Ron Paul

 

[PK1]

You don't seem to understand what constitutes evidence in an unbiased analysis for explaining something.

Sure I do. If you created something could I use it to learn something about you even if I did not know you created it?

Yes, you can do a DNA analysis of my excrement. What does that prove?

That you are a total dip shit dumb ass who didn't understand my question. Are we done? Because I'm not playing this game again with a let's have some fun with a believer bullshit again. I am more than happy to KNOW that you are a moron for not acknowledging what every court in the land understands.

Your immature emotions are finally being expressed vividly; a reflection of your frustration in not being able to communicate logically.

You do not understand objective evidence in jurisprudence as well as science.
However, you do understand childish faith, like one who believes Santa will reward them if they are "good".
LOL.

My belief is that militant atheists like yourself are dumbasses because you ignore objective truth. You are a dumbass because you don't weight the good. You are a dumbass because you blame religion or God for acts of men. You are a dumbass for throwing the baby out with the bathwater. You are a dumbass because you have a vague rosy notion of goodness of life without out religion or belief in a Supreme Being. You are a dumbass for ignoring the historical evidence of what a society without God looks like. .

You are a dumbass for not being able to imagine what a world without God or religion would look like. Which is... their religion would be socialism. They would worship big government and social policy. It would be based on atheism and the deification of man. It would proceed in almost all of its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of the individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They would have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine would be abolition of private property, abolition of family and communality or equality. They would practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. They would be identified by an external locus of control. They would worship science but would be the first to argue against it when it did not suit their cause. They would force everyone to believe the same things and think the same way. There would be no diversity of thought, only homogenization of thought.

In your words, you are a "dumbass" for not comprehending that i am not an atheist, which confirms your lack of understanding of what evidence is
You are also naive in equating ethics with religion.

 

[ding]

Sure I do. If you created something could I use it to learn something about you even if I did not know you created it?

Yes, you can do a DNA analysis of my excrement. What does that prove?

That you are a total dip shit dumb ass who didn't understand my question. Are we done? Because I'm not playing this game again with a let's have some fun with a believer bullshit again. I am more than happy to KNOW that you are a moron for not acknowledging what every court in the land understands.

Your immature emotions are finally being expressed vividly; a reflection of your frustration in not being able to communicate logically.

You do not understand objective evidence in jurisprudence as well as science.
However, you do understand childish faith, like one who believes Santa will reward them if they are "good".
LOL.

My belief is that militant atheists like yourself are dumbasses because you ignore objective truth. You are a dumbass because you don't weight the good. You are a dumbass because you blame religion or God for acts of men. You are a dumbass for throwing the baby out with the bathwater. You are a dumbass because you have a vague rosy notion of goodness of life without out religion or belief in a Supreme Being. You are a dumbass for ignoring the historical evidence of what a society without God looks like. .

You are a dumbass for not being able to imagine what a world without God or religion would look like. Which is... their religion would be socialism. They would worship big government and social policy. It would be based on atheism and the deification of man. It would proceed in almost all of its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of the individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They would have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine would be abolition of private property, abolition of family and communality or equality. They would practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. They would be identified by an external locus of control. They would worship science but would be the first to argue against it when it did not suit their cause. They would force everyone to believe the same things and think the same way. There would be no diversity of thought, only homogenization of thought.

In your words, you are a "dumbass" for not comprehending that i am not an atheist, which confirms your lack of understanding of what evidence is
You are also naive in equating ethics with religion.

You have yet to demonstrate that to me, so until you do, I will continue to treat you as you behave.

 

[Mudda]

Yes, you can do a DNA analysis of my excrement. What does that prove?

That you are a total dip shit dumb ass who didn't understand my question. Are we done? Because I'm not playing this game again with a let's have some fun with a believer bullshit again. I am more than happy to KNOW that you are a moron for not acknowledging what every court in the land understands.

Your immature emotions are finally being expressed vividly; a reflection of your frustration in not being able to communicate logically.

You do not understand objective evidence in jurisprudence as well as science.
However, you do understand childish faith, like one who believes Santa will reward them if they are "good".
LOL.

My belief is that militant atheists like yourself are dumbasses because you ignore objective truth. You are a dumbass because you don't weight the good. You are a dumbass because you blame religion or God for acts of men. You are a dumbass for throwing the baby out with the bathwater. You are a dumbass because you have a vague rosy notion of goodness of life without out religion or belief in a Supreme Being. You are a dumbass for ignoring the historical evidence of what a society without God looks like. .

You are a dumbass for not being able to imagine what a world without God or religion would look like. Which is... their religion would be socialism. They would worship big government and social policy. It would be based on atheism and the deification of man. It would proceed in almost all of its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of the individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They would have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine would be abolition of private property, abolition of family and communality or equality. They would practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. They would be identified by an external locus of control. They would worship science but would be the first to argue against it when it did not suit their cause. They would force everyone to believe the same things and think the same way. There would be no diversity of thought, only homogenization of thought.

In your words, you are a "dumbass" for not comprehending that i am not an atheist, which confirms your lack of understanding of what evidence is
You are also naive in equating ethics with religion.

You have yet to demonstrate that to me, so until you do, I will continue to treat you as you behave.

How Christian of you.

Just remember, when you get to hell, don't pass Adolf the salt.

 

[PK1]

Yes, you can do a DNA analysis of my excrement. What does that prove?

That you are a total dip shit dumb ass who didn't understand my question. Are we done? Because I'm not playing this game again with a let's have some fun with a believer bullshit again. I am more than happy to KNOW that you are a moron for not acknowledging what every court in the land understands.

Your immature emotions are finally being expressed vividly; a reflection of your frustration in not being able to communicate logically.

You do not understand objective evidence in jurisprudence as well as science.
However, you do understand childish faith, like one who believes Santa will reward them if they are "good".
LOL.

My belief is that militant atheists like yourself are dumbasses because you ignore objective truth. You are a dumbass because you don't weight the good. You are a dumbass because you blame religion or God for acts of men. You are a dumbass for throwing the baby out with the bathwater. You are a dumbass because you have a vague rosy notion of goodness of life without out religion or belief in a Supreme Being. You are a dumbass for ignoring the historical evidence of what a society without God looks like. .

You are a dumbass for not being able to imagine what a world without God or religion would look like. Which is... their religion would be socialism. They would worship big government and social policy. It would be based on atheism and the deification of man. It would proceed in almost all of its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of the individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They would have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine would be abolition of private property, abolition of family and communality or equality. They would practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. They would be identified by an external locus of control. They would worship science but would be the first to argue against it when it did not suit their cause. They would force everyone to believe the same things and think the same way. There would be no diversity of thought, only homogenization of thought.

In your words, you are a "dumbass" for not comprehending that i am not an atheist, which confirms your lack of understanding of what evidence is
You are also naive in equating ethics with religion.

You have yet to demonstrate that to me, so until you do, I will continue to treat you as you behave.

Given your hardened subjective position, i have little confidence that you will understand what it means to be objective in the rational realm.
My comments & attempted queries about your academic positions are finalized, i believe.
I wish you the best in your pursuit of happiness.
Sometimes, ignorance is bliss.

 

[ding]

That you are a total dip shit dumb ass who didn't understand my question. Are we done? Because I'm not playing this game again with a let's have some fun with a believer bullshit again. I am more than happy to KNOW that you are a moron for not acknowledging what every court in the land understands.

Your immature emotions are finally being expressed vividly; a reflection of your frustration in not being able to communicate logically.

You do not understand objective evidence in jurisprudence as well as science.
However, you do understand childish faith, like one who believes Santa will reward them if they are "good".
LOL.

My belief is that militant atheists like yourself are dumbasses because you ignore objective truth. You are a dumbass because you don't weight the good. You are a dumbass because you blame religion or God for acts of men. You are a dumbass for throwing the baby out with the bathwater. You are a dumbass because you have a vague rosy notion of goodness of life without out religion or belief in a Supreme Being. You are a dumbass for ignoring the historical evidence of what a society without God looks like. .

You are a dumbass for not being able to imagine what a world without God or religion would look like. Which is... their religion would be socialism. They would worship big government and social policy. It would be based on atheism and the deification of man. It would proceed in almost all of its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of the individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They would have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine would be abolition of private property, abolition of family and communality or equality. They would practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. They would be identified by an external locus of control. They would worship science but would be the first to argue against it when it did not suit their cause. They would force everyone to believe the same things and think the same way. There would be no diversity of thought, only homogenization of thought.

In your words, you are a "dumbass" for not comprehending that i am not an atheist, which confirms your lack of understanding of what evidence is
You are also naive in equating ethics with religion.

You have yet to demonstrate that to me, so until you do, I will continue to treat you as you behave.

Given your hardened subjective position, i have little confidence that you will understand what it means to be objective in the rational realm.
My comments & attempted queries about your academic positions are finalized, i believe.
I wish you the best in your pursuit of happiness.
Sometimes, ignorance is bliss.

You should test your ignostic objectivity by comparing the number of times you have disagreed or challenged an atheist versus the number of times you have done so with a theist. You just might be surprised to find out that your objectivity is really subjectivity on this subject.

 

[PK1]

You don't seem to understand what constitutes evidence in an unbiased analysis for explaining something.

Sure I do. If you created something could I use it to learn something about you even if I did not know you created it?

Yes, you can do a DNA analysis of my excrement. What does that prove?

That you are a total dip shit dumb ass who didn't understand my question. Are we done? Because I'm not playing this game again with a let's have some fun with a believer bullshit again. I am more than happy to KNOW that you are a moron for not acknowledging what every court in the land understands.

Your immature emotions are finally being expressed vividly; a reflection of your frustration in not being able to communicate logically.
You do not understand objective evidence in jurisprudence as well as science.
However, you do understand childish faith, like one who believes Santa will reward them if they are "good".
LOL.

My belief is that militant atheists like yourself are dumbasses because you ignore objective truth. You are a dumbass because you don't weight the good. You are a dumbass because you blame religion or God for acts of men. You are a dumbass for throwing the baby out with the bathwater. You are a dumbass because you have a vague rosy notion of goodness of life without out religion or belief in a Supreme Being. You are a dumbass for ignoring the historical evidence of what a society without God looks like. .

You are a dumbass for not being able to imagine what a world without God or religion would look like. Which is... their religion would be socialism. They would worship big government and social policy. It would be based on atheism and the deification of man. It would proceed in almost all of its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of the individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They would have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine would be abolition of private property, abolition of family and communality or equality. They would practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. They would be identified by an external locus of control. They would worship science but would be the first to argue against it when it did not suit their cause. They would force everyone to believe the same things and think the same way. There would be no diversity of thought, only homogenization of thought.

In your words, you are a "dumbass" for not comprehending that i am not an atheist, which confirms your lack of understanding of what evidence is
You are also naive in equating ethics with religion.

You have yet to demonstrate that to me, so until you do, I will continue to treat you as you behave.

Given your hardened subjective position, i have little confidence that you will understand what it means to be objective in the rational realm.
My comments & attempted queries about your academic positions are finalized, i believe.
I wish you the best in your pursuit of happiness.
Sometimes, ignorance is bliss.

You should test your ignostic objectivity by comparing the number of times you have disagreed or challenged an atheist versus the number of times you have done so with a theist. You just might be surprised to find out that your objectivity is really subjectivity on this subject.

You could use a basic lesson on Atheism.
Theism is broadly defined as the belief in the existence of a deity or deities.
In its purist form, an atheist is a person without a belief in a god/goddess/deity (a-theist).
This is now considered to be the position of a "weak atheist". A "strong atheist" is one who rejects the existence of any deity.

Although you are a theist & i am not, both you & i are weak atheists.
I hold no belief in any current religion/dogma or god claim, while you probably have no belief in Islam, Hindu, or Greek gods.

Unlike you, i do not believe there is sufficient evidence to conclude that a particular "god" or "gods" exist.
However, i am open to a consideration of a deity's existence (agnosticism) if its rational concept can be defined (ignosticism).

 

[ding]

My belief is that militant atheists like yourself are dumbasses because you ignore objective truth. You are a dumbass because you don't weight the good. You are a dumbass because you blame religion or God for acts of men. You are a dumbass for throwing the baby out with the bathwater. You are a dumbass because you have a vague rosy notion of goodness of life without out religion or belief in a Supreme Being. You are a dumbass for ignoring the historical evidence of what a society without God looks like. .

You are a dumbass for not being able to imagine what a world without God or religion would look like. Which is... their religion would be socialism. They would worship big government and social policy. It would be based on atheism and the deification of man. It would proceed in almost all of its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of the individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts. They would have no distinction between good and evil, no morality or any other kind of value, save pleasure. Their doctrine would be abolition of private property, abolition of family and communality or equality. They would practice moral relativity, indiscriminate indiscriminateness, multiculturalism, cultural marxism and normalization of deviance. They would be identified by an external locus of control. They would worship science but would be the first to argue against it when it did not suit their cause. They would force everyone to believe the same things and think the same way. There would be no diversity of thought, only homogenization of thought.

In your words, you are a "dumbass" for not comprehending that i am not an atheist, which confirms your lack of understanding of what evidence is
You are also naive in equating ethics with religion.

You have yet to demonstrate that to me, so until you do, I will continue to treat you as you behave.

Given your hardened subjective position, i have little confidence that you will understand what it means to be objective in the rational realm.
My comments & attempted queries about your academic positions are finalized, i believe.
I wish you the best in your pursuit of happiness.
Sometimes, ignorance is bliss.

You should test your ignostic objectivity by comparing the number of times you have disagreed or challenged an atheist versus the number of times you have done so with a theist. You just might be surprised to find out that your objectivity is really subjectivity on this subject.

You could use a basic lesson on Atheism.
Theism is broadly defined as the belief in the existence of a deity or deities.
In its purist form, an atheist is a person without a belief in a god/goddess/deity (a-theist).
This is now considered to be the position of a "weak atheist". A "strong atheist" is one who rejects the existence of any deity.

Although you are a theist & i am not, both you & i are weak atheists.
I hold no belief in any current religion/dogma or god claim, while you probably have no belief in Islam, Hindu, or Greek gods.

Unlike you, i do not believe there is sufficient evidence to conclude that a particular "god" or "gods" exist.
However, i am open to a consideration of a deity's existence (agnosticism) if its rational concept can be defined (ignosticism).

See post #387, #467 and #475. I have nothing else to add.

 

[Campbell]

To think that there is not a more powerful figure out there than Humans is ignorant!

Out Where? Does He have an address? I've been around this place through the depression and subsequent wars and I've never seen hide nor hair of one. Every bad thing that's happened in this world as long as I've been alive had mankind's signature on the completion line. If there is a god......screw the useless son-of-a-*****!

 

[PK1]

See post #387, #467 and #475. I have nothing else to add.

See my post #476 and its cited previous posts.
It demonstrates:
1) your inability to provide a reasonable teleological argument for a god (itself a naive explanation);
2) that you are a "weak atheist" relative to ALL religions other than your own; and
3) you cannot even adequately conceptualize your religious perception of "God" to explain anything rational beyond a child's simplistic view à la "he did it".

A philosopher you are not.

 

[PK1]

To think that there is not a more powerful figure out there than Humans is ignorant!

Out Where? Does He have an address? I've been around this place through the depression and subsequent wars and I've never seen hide nor hair of one. Every bad thing that's happened in this world as long as I've been alive had mankind's signature on the completion line. If there is a god......screw the useless son-of-a-*****!

Remember, God "works" in mysterious ways. One is not to question "his" methods or motives, although we are made from His image.