I like your video, in so far as it represents the ideas of a great man.It's the image you added below, that suggests that only atheists did/do science that I find daft, mr. cunt.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt (Old Spike)
With more "modern" sects like yours it is often more the 2nd and 3rd statement (although also your lot like to put the "currently unexplainable" in the "god did it" niche). For other sects all statements are true, unfortunately, especially in the US the trend of "christianity" seems to go more and more in direction of these.
And before you throw your toys out the pram prematurely: this is of course by no means limited to christian beliefs.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Bobbob (Site Administrator)
Modern sects...nice. I've told you before I'm Greek Orthodox. Right there at the schism that saw the church break in two (Orthodox v. Catholic). There since the beginning. This ain't the 'church of dave' or whatever. We're talking Original. We've got apostolic succession, bishops tapped on the shoulder tracing all the way back to the Apostles. Funny note, there's a church on one of the islands where the Bishop won't sit on the bishop's chair cause Paul sat there....yeah, that Paul. But sure, modern sect, whatever. Thanks for sharing your expertise, but lots of us have no problem being scientists and keeping our faith..(yes, faiths, thanks for remembering the others).
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt (Old Spike)
lol, here it is, prize number 3 goes to you, buddy. It actually is you. Adorning yourself with borrowed plumes. You did NOTHING to contribute to this, still you're feeling so proud and superior about a co-incidence you were born into.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Bobbob (Site Administrator)
Born into? That's reductionist at best. Remember the time I pointed out that most atheists (that you or I would know) are the product of failed Christians. As I recall you didn't like that statement, pal.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt (Old Spike)
ok, what have these christians "failed" at?
If I did not like something it is that you think of your belief system as the "default setting", this makes your argumentation flawed and makes it impossible to have a conversation.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Bobbob (Site Administrator)
I didn't say default. We said we're both being nice and allowing for other faiths in this discussion.
I'm trying to draw a parallel here. I'm basically saying atheism may be inherited also. Not the result of some grand awakening (including suggesting a claim to all science which I find amusing). Mom or dad.. or Reverend Arschelecker maybe had a hand in your formation, did they not?
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt (Old Spike)
You don't have to say it is a default, it is blatantly obvious with most believers.
FYI: My parents were both protestant (not catholic, so the priests actually weren't sexually frustrated as a general rule, I got married by a catholic priest, though, who was years later caught and convicted for possessing child porn, lol), but not regular church goers. My mother actually was quite upset when I quit "the church". So here is a "no" on "inherited" atheism, or it being brought upon me by a priest's dick.
In any case you cannot "inherit" the absence of a belief as it is what we are born with, a blank slate that is then filled by upbringing, experience and education.
The similarity between us is we both don't know whether or not god(s) exist(s) the difference between you and me is I admit to this ignorance but don't see any reason at all why there should be one (necessary) and you seem to think you know better but can't reasonably and coherently explain why there is or should be a god.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Bobbob (Site Administrator)
Ok, so what I'm seeing here is only one of us is trying. You say your belief (atheism, which we've established previously is not akin to not collecting stamps, cause folks who don't collect stamps don't run around telling people they're better than those that do), is not the absence of belief, so antitheism we'll call it. Simultaneously you suggest that one can't have an experiential knowledge of God, but people report having this all the time. You on the other hand say that's not possible simply because you don't operate at this level. Boohoo.
Your lord and saviour says it best with his clear unbiased independently arrived at conclusion:
The great Richard Dawkins, everyone. Diddled by a priest, by the way, but this had no bearing on his current opinions. Promise.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt (Old Spike)
"You say your belief.....is not the absence of belief...."
No, like I explained to you a felt 100 times using different arguments: The absence of a belief is not a belief, this would be contradictory, atheism is the "absence of a belief", just because it has a definition it doesn't make it a belief.
I think you confuse two different things, so to make it clear;
It is INcorrect to say atheism is the "belief that there is no god", and I do NOT subscribe to this statement.
It is correct to say atheism is "NOT believing there is a god" (and one may add: due to the lack of evidence provided for the concept), and I DO subscribe to this statement.
In the first category I would put "disgruntled believers", the type you always try to accuse me of being, again, this is not the case, I never had a "bad encounter" with a priest, except for Father Michael, ex dean of Reading, who hilariously fit into the stereotype of catholic clergy, and all our personal interactions with him were very pleasant actually. And this is what I mean by "your default position", every one is a believer until something "bad" happens.
Honest people of the 2nd category, like myself, never say "there is no god" as we have no way of knowing this, we just do not see any reason to believe in one.
Everyone's default position should be "we don't know but certain things make or don't make us a believer", but very few people are allowed to start from there, neither you nor I were.
"Simultaneously you suggest that one can't have an experiential knowledge of God...." Well, this is the really interesting part and I tried to raise this question with you also many a time but your answers were incoherent at best and using a lot of words you literally "said nothing".
What would count as a "experiential knowledge of God" to you, how would you recognise it as such? I personally find it hard to imagine one but if "people have it all the time" you surely must be able to give a few good examples.
The only answer I got from you that would come close to an explanation, I think it was under the circumstance that someone would claim they are the "reborn Jesus" what proof a believer would actually accept for this statement, your answer was, and I quote from memory: "We would just know."
Is this correct? Would everyone "know" or just christians? What if you suddenly would "know" it is Mohammed standing in front of you and thus Allah is the "correct god" and the quran the "correct bible"?
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Bobbob (Site Administrator)
Too long.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
sal9000 (Long Spike)
"Ok, so what I'm seeing here is only one of us is trying"
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt (Old Spike)
lol, somewhat expected. You are so insecure when it comes to your "belief", you tend to resort to gifs, pics, and sarcasm.
I asked serious questions, and I am interested in the answers. Replies like this only makes one feel you do not have any.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Bobbob (Site Administrator)
Sorry, we like to sleep in on Saturdays. Having morning coffee and reading:
'Honest people of the 2nd category, like myself, never say "there is no god" as we have no way of knowing this, we just do not see any reason to believe in one.'
I think I'll revisit your answer throughout the day in snippets. It's too good. Don't want to overdose or anything.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Bobbob (Site Administrator)
Ok I'm back. Seriously though, that part about you saying you're an Honest person of the 2nd category needs to be addressed. We said your stance is hardly passive and I'm sure you've already spooled up your favorite Hitchens video for release on Christmas day. You seem to be making an effort to stress you're going after all religion here, but rather than say it's commendable, I'll just say that you're doing the typical lashing out characteristic of antitheists. Like you know you're missing out on a chunk of the life experience and you don't want anyone else to have that.
As for the personal example you've been asking from me for a while now. It's intensely personal, and not something I'd put up here for your entertainment. Can I suggest you find one of those religious people in your life you mention above and ask them. They'll certainly have one or two examples they want to share with you. Moving on.
Oh look, you've got someone offering above to team up! Kinda like Wilma and Betty. Well, I'll have to side with most dudes and say, 'sure, I'd go with Wilma....but I'd be thinking of Betty.'
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt (Old Spike)
When was I ever dishonest? I never made my stance a secret. What we have to be clear about is that:
atheism is NOT a belief
atheism is NOT necessarily "anti theism" (whether or not you class me as the latter, is not really relevant, however, I would like to stress that I got married in a catholic church by a catholic priest to a catholic woman, how is that for an antitheist?)
"As for the personal example you've been asking from me for a while now. It's intensely personal, and not something I'd put up here for your entertainment"
As you very well know, I did not ask you for YOUR PERSONAL experience but rather for ANY reported experience you would consider "experiential knowledge of God", as, according to you, there are plenty......
So please give just one or two examples you would find acceptable. Unless you can't, of course.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Bobbob (Site Administrator)
Happy to respond to these better-structured and word-efficient statements.
1. Yeah. You're describing agnosticism, which we said you are not. One Spiked national previously cited the example of folks who don't collect stamps not bothering those who do, I mentioned above. Your position is hardly passive.
2. If you were already an atheist at the time, this second bit, where you bowed your head and drank from a cup just makes you a hypocrite, doesn't it? We all have our price. Regards to Mrs. DC. I'm sure she's lovely and was worth it.
Ok. Using the easiest/general example for you of 'there but for the grace of God go I'. Here's how you'd see it:
And yes, that's a much younger George Cromwell playing Archie's work buddy. So Archie from your pov was saved by his preference for more salt. Period. Terrific. But sometimes, taking even the most cynical of us, it's easy to be amazed when the equivalent of this happens to a loved one. It's harder to say 'it just wasn't their time'. Who decides when it's time. Fate, God, the Universe.. it will just depend on the lense you use. In your case your faith being Atheism (there, this is me being nice) Archie needing more salt would be it. Congratulations?
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt (Old Spike)
"You're describing agnosticism," Nope. It just is an honest statement: "atheism is "NOT believing there is a god", agnosticism would include an uncertainty. However I can say from the bottom of my heart that there is no evidence at all pointing to a personal god as suggested by the various holy books.
" If you were already an atheist at the time, this second bit, where you bowed your head and drank from a cup just makes you a hypocrite, doesn't it?"
If accepting the wishes of my to be wife makes me one so be it, in the UK this is just a ceremony, it has no legal power, an official of the registry office did make it legal, the church and shebang was just location.
"I'm sure she's lovely and was worth it." Thank you, indeed she is.
I ignore the rest of your comment as it is the typical arrogant, condescending bull you spout when cornered and left without answers.
So the question remains: Can you give just one or two examples of "experiential knowledge of God" you would find worth mentioning.
Of course you can't, if you could you would have.
So unless you can prove me wrong the conversation ends here.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Bobbob (Site Administrator)
'"I'm sure she's lovely and was worth it." Thank you, indeed she is.
I ignore the rest of your comment as it is the typical arrogant, condescending bull you spout when cornered and left without answers.'
Aww. And we were doing so well, but you're strawmanning and cherrypicking, which we said is typical of you. So that's where I stop reading any further. I don't care much for hypocrisy so that suits me fine.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt (Old Spike)
Oh you did read further and you can't, lol
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Bobbob (Site Administrator)
I didn't. You'll just have to take it on faith.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt (Old Spike)
.....so you can't, and chicken out as always.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Bobbob (Site Administrator)
Tough talk from the guy who's modus operandi is announcing he didn't read his opponent's response while simultaneously declaring victory. For this reason alone you were, you are and you shall ever remain..a putz.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt (Old Spike)
... so you can't.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Bobbob (Site Administrator)
more accurately i did. but you didn't read it (or watch it) cause you're scared.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt (Old Spike)
Learn to pay attention: I read your replies here, I just did not comment on some of it. I asked for just one or two examples of "experiential knowledge of God"
You did not give one (no need for it to be your personal experience, although I can't see how this could be embarrassing in an anonymous forum like this), so you can't.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Bobbob (Site Administrator)
It wouldn't be embarrassing. It would just cheapen it. Don't cast pearls and that kind of thing. Now as for 'pay attention', you first. I gave you the general example above. Of people who attributed their life or the life of someone they loved being saved against all odds to God (or the divine depending on the particular faith). I posted the video of Archie, running a little ahead in our conversation to say this is something you or those such as you would merely dismiss as chance, happenstance, a fluke if you will. 1 event looked at through two lenses. One dismissing it. The other having their faith reaffirmed by it. I don't expect you to understand. This might take effort (as in the slightest bit of). m' k?
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt (Old Spike)
"Of people who attributed their life or the life of someone they loved being saved against all odds to God"
I suspected that this was the case, especially coming from you:
A personal experience "saving" oneself or a loved one from a seemingly hopeless situation, which could easily and more realistically be explained by co-incidence, is attributed to intervention by (a) personal god(s).
For example "I arrived late at the airport due to having misplaced my passport, missed the plane which then crashed with no survivors, this was god's doing." or if it is a loved one, "My wife was in a plane crash, I prayed for her, and god made her the sole survivor," Adding the power of prayer, which, in contrary to uncountable times before, seemingly worked this one time.
All this is pretty sad and selfish, based on oneself feeling more important somehow than anybody else because one was "worth" saving, which is exactly the impression one gets when one has a conversation with you about faith and religion.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Bobbob (Site Administrator)
So that first paragraph could pretty much be summed up by anyone saying, 'hey, isn't that confirmation bias?' But you have to go all reductionist and make it so I'm saying a Christian survived through the power of prayer and a non-Christian didn't. How so very...'you'.
You then go on to express further insecurities touting that yours truly is selfish, has a feeling of importance and self worth, characterizing it as an ...'impression'. Can I speak to you of the impression you give?.. That these insecurities of yours (manifested in these vids you post actually looking for some push back) are at the root of why atheists are inferior to non-stamp collectors,.. in my humble opinion. ;-)
Again, just wanting to reiterate here that I'm sorry this impression irritates you.. between your legs..where your vagina is.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt (Old Spike)
"I'm saying a Christian survived through the power of prayer and a non-Christian didn't"
No, you feel you are more important than others, that is what your faith is based on. This is why you "laugh about catholics" (and others) too, although they are "as christian" as you are.
If Jesus would have existed he would have died for at least one of your sins buddy.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Bobbob (Site Administrator)
Why are you misquoting above? Citing a snippet of a statement that taken out of context makes it look like I stated as fact what I stated with irony. The full quote is: 'But you have to go all reductionist and make it so I'm saying a Christian survived through the power of prayer and a non-Christian didn't.' Why this dirty trick. Is it cause your arguments are weak?
I mean it stands to reason that anyone who ascribes to one denomination over another will think that one is (or works) the best. Assuming you got over this particular brain fart you're having one can conclude the reason you're shaking your little pudgy fist right now is that the person you're talking to has faith...any faith...as opposed to...what you got.
Hubris, bud, is when you go out of your way to claim not collecting stamps somehow makes you smarter. Hypocrisy is when you get mad cause in your estimation the stamp collector probably thinks 'like all other stamp collectors' that he's smarter. So maybe check yourself.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt (Old Spike)
To people like you it doesn't matter whether the one that died is "christian" or not, the important thing to you is that YOU survived, thus being more worthwhile to save than the ones who died.
Being better at something because one has more talent, experience or studied more cannot be compared to this.
And, bud, you suffer "hubris" big time, it's just that people who do of course don't notice,
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Bobbob (Site Administrator)
You brought us full circle only to remind us that more talent, study, experience does not equate with atheism. We don't attribute these traits to you exclusively. What old church or parish was your College built on?
And that last sentence indicates a delightful lack of self awareness. Make sure your zipper's not open.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt (Old Spike)
".... talent, study, experience does not equate with atheism"
Of course it doesn't and I NEVER claimed any such thing, I am a big fan of megadeth btw..
A person being atheist or believes in different deities does also NOT mean one is good, bad, superior or more "worthy" than the others, this is the fact you and many of your likes, regardless of which god(s) they believe in, struggle with.
Let me give you an example:
When asked you what you would accept as proof for a "reborn Jesus" you said you would "just know", which probably to a believer sounds reasonable, however, to a non believer it sounds incredibly arrogant and privileged to put it mildly.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Bobbob (Site Administrator)
That last sentence, again, just perfectly recaps the lack of understanding on your part. Merely accept that those who have faith experience life on a level you don't comprehend (a spiritual fulfillment atheists don't feel since we're apparently just bags of meat). The fact you don't get it should be apparent to you by now. Then maybe stop lashing out like a small child needing attention. Find some confidence, some peace, with your particular... ehm... belief system.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
daftcunt (Old Spike)
The only one lashing out, rather profanely using childish insults, in all our conversations is you, bud. So this is also where the insecurities lie.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Bobbob (Site Administrator)
Perpetrator and victim card played. So predictable of you. Sorry you got irritated. Here.
Comments
(Site Administrator)
I like your video, in so far as it represents the ideas of a great man.It's the image you added below, that suggests that only atheists did/do science that I find daft, mr. cunt.
(Old Spike)
With more "modern" sects like yours it is often more the 2nd and 3rd statement (although also your lot like to put the "currently unexplainable" in the "god did it" niche). For other sects all statements are true, unfortunately, especially in the US the trend of "christianity" seems to go more and more in direction of these.
And before you throw your toys out the pram prematurely: this is of course by no means limited to christian beliefs.
(Site Administrator)
Modern sects...nice. I've told you before I'm Greek Orthodox. Right there at the schism that saw the church break in two (Orthodox v. Catholic). There since the beginning. This ain't the 'church of dave' or whatever. We're talking Original. We've got apostolic succession, bishops tapped on the shoulder tracing all the way back to the Apostles. Funny note, there's a church on one of the islands where the Bishop won't sit on the bishop's chair cause Paul sat there....yeah, that Paul. But sure, modern sect, whatever. Thanks for sharing your expertise, but lots of us have no problem being scientists and keeping our faith..(yes, faiths, thanks for remembering the others).
(Old Spike)
lol, here it is, prize number 3 goes to you, buddy. It actually is you. Adorning yourself with borrowed plumes. You did NOTHING to contribute to this, still you're feeling so proud and superior about a co-incidence you were born into.
(Site Administrator)
Born into? That's reductionist at best. Remember the time I pointed out that most atheists (that you or I would know) are the product of failed Christians. As I recall you didn't like that statement, pal.
(Old Spike)
ok, what have these christians "failed" at?
If I did not like something it is that you think of your belief system as the "default setting", this makes your argumentation flawed and makes it impossible to have a conversation.
(Site Administrator)
I didn't say default. We said we're both being nice and allowing for other faiths in this discussion.
I'm trying to draw a parallel here. I'm basically saying atheism may be inherited also. Not the result of some grand awakening (including suggesting a claim to all science which I find amusing). Mom or dad.. or Reverend Arschelecker maybe had a hand in your formation, did they not?
(Old Spike)
You don't have to say it is a default, it is blatantly obvious with most believers.
FYI: My parents were both protestant (not catholic, so the priests actually weren't sexually frustrated as a general rule, I got married by a catholic priest, though, who was years later caught and convicted for possessing child porn, lol), but not regular church goers. My mother actually was quite upset when I quit "the church". So here is a "no" on "inherited" atheism, or it being brought upon me by a priest's dick.
In any case you cannot "inherit" the absence of a belief as it is what we are born with, a blank slate that is then filled by upbringing, experience and education.
The similarity between us is we both don't know whether or not god(s) exist(s) the difference between you and me is I admit to this ignorance but don't see any reason at all why there should be one (necessary) and you seem to think you know better but can't reasonably and coherently explain why there is or should be a god.
(Site Administrator)
Ok, so what I'm seeing here is only one of us is trying. You say your belief (atheism, which we've established previously is not akin to not collecting stamps, cause folks who don't collect stamps don't run around telling people they're better than those that do), is not the absence of belief, so antitheism we'll call it. Simultaneously you suggest that one can't have an experiential knowledge of God, but people report having this all the time. You on the other hand say that's not possible simply because you don't operate at this level. Boohoo.
Your lord and saviour says it best with his clear unbiased independently arrived at conclusion:
The great Richard Dawkins, everyone. Diddled by a priest, by the way, but this had no bearing on his current opinions. Promise.
(Old Spike)
"You say your belief.....is not the absence of belief...."
No, like I explained to you a felt 100 times using different arguments: The absence of a belief is not a belief, this would be contradictory, atheism is the "absence of a belief", just because it has a definition it doesn't make it a belief.
I think you confuse two different things, so to make it clear;
In the first category I would put "disgruntled believers", the type you always try to accuse me of being, again, this is not the case, I never had a "bad encounter" with a priest, except for Father Michael, ex dean of Reading, who hilariously fit into the stereotype of catholic clergy, and all our personal interactions with him were very pleasant actually. And this is what I mean by "your default position", every one is a believer until something "bad" happens.
Honest people of the 2nd category, like myself, never say "there is no god" as we have no way of knowing this, we just do not see any reason to believe in one.
Everyone's default position should be "we don't know but certain things make or don't make us a believer", but very few people are allowed to start from there, neither you nor I were.
"Simultaneously you suggest that one can't have an experiential knowledge of God...." Well, this is the really interesting part and I tried to raise this question with you also many a time but your answers were incoherent at best and using a lot of words you literally "said nothing".
What would count as a "experiential knowledge of God" to you, how would you recognise it as such? I personally find it hard to imagine one but if "people have it all the time" you surely must be able to give a few good examples.
The only answer I got from you that would come close to an explanation, I think it was under the circumstance that someone would claim they are the "reborn Jesus" what proof a believer would actually accept for this statement, your answer was, and I quote from memory: "We would just know."
Is this correct? Would everyone "know" or just christians? What if you suddenly would "know" it is Mohammed standing in front of you and thus Allah is the "correct god" and the quran the "correct bible"?
(Site Administrator)
Too long.
(Long Spike)
"Ok, so what I'm seeing here is only one of us is trying"
(Old Spike)
lol, somewhat expected. You are so insecure when it comes to your "belief", you tend to resort to gifs, pics, and sarcasm.
I asked serious questions, and I am interested in the answers. Replies like this only makes one feel you do not have any.
(Site Administrator)
Sorry, we like to sleep in on Saturdays. Having morning coffee and reading:
'Honest people of the 2nd category, like myself, never say "there is no god" as we have no way of knowing this, we just do not see any reason to believe in one.'
I think I'll revisit your answer throughout the day in snippets. It's too good. Don't want to overdose or anything.
(Site Administrator)
Ok I'm back. Seriously though, that part about you saying you're an Honest person of the 2nd category needs to be addressed. We said your stance is hardly passive and I'm sure you've already spooled up your favorite Hitchens video for release on Christmas day. You seem to be making an effort to stress you're going after all religion here, but rather than say it's commendable, I'll just say that you're doing the typical lashing out characteristic of antitheists. Like you know you're missing out on a chunk of the life experience and you don't want anyone else to have that.
As for the personal example you've been asking from me for a while now. It's intensely personal, and not something I'd put up here for your entertainment. Can I suggest you find one of those religious people in your life you mention above and ask them. They'll certainly have one or two examples they want to share with you. Moving on.
Oh look, you've got someone offering above to team up! Kinda like Wilma and Betty. Well, I'll have to side with most dudes and say, 'sure, I'd go with Wilma....but I'd be thinking of Betty.'
(Old Spike)
When was I ever dishonest? I never made my stance a secret. What we have to be clear about is that:
"As for the personal example you've been asking from me for a while now. It's intensely personal, and not something I'd put up here for your entertainment"
As you very well know, I did not ask you for YOUR PERSONAL experience but rather for ANY reported experience you would consider "experiential knowledge of God", as, according to you, there are plenty......
So please give just one or two examples you would find acceptable. Unless you can't, of course.
(Site Administrator)
Happy to respond to these better-structured and word-efficient statements.
1. Yeah. You're describing agnosticism, which we said you are not. One Spiked national previously cited the example of folks who don't collect stamps not bothering those who do, I mentioned above. Your position is hardly passive.
2. If you were already an atheist at the time, this second bit, where you bowed your head and drank from a cup just makes you a hypocrite, doesn't it? We all have our price. Regards to Mrs. DC. I'm sure she's lovely and was worth it.
Ok. Using the easiest/general example for you of 'there but for the grace of God go I'. Here's how you'd see it:
And yes, that's a much younger George Cromwell playing Archie's work buddy. So Archie from your pov was saved by his preference for more salt. Period. Terrific. But sometimes, taking even the most cynical of us, it's easy to be amazed when the equivalent of this happens to a loved one. It's harder to say 'it just wasn't their time'. Who decides when it's time. Fate, God, the Universe.. it will just depend on the lense you use. In your case your faith being Atheism (there, this is me being nice) Archie needing more salt would be it. Congratulations?
(Old Spike)
"You're describing agnosticism," Nope. It just is an honest statement: "atheism is "NOT believing there is a god", agnosticism would include an uncertainty. However I can say from the bottom of my heart that there is no evidence at all pointing to a personal god as suggested by the various holy books.
" If you were already an atheist at the time, this second bit, where you bowed your head and drank from a cup just makes you a hypocrite, doesn't it?"
If accepting the wishes of my to be wife makes me one so be it, in the UK this is just a ceremony, it has no legal power, an official of the registry office did make it legal, the church and shebang was just location.
"I'm sure she's lovely and was worth it." Thank you, indeed she is.
I ignore the rest of your comment as it is the typical arrogant, condescending bull you spout when cornered and left without answers.
So the question remains: Can you give just one or two examples of "experiential knowledge of God" you would find worth mentioning.
Of course you can't, if you could you would have.
So unless you can prove me wrong the conversation ends here.
(Site Administrator)
'"I'm sure she's lovely and was worth it." Thank you, indeed she is.
I ignore the rest of your comment as it is the typical arrogant, condescending bull you spout when cornered and left without answers.'
Aww. And we were doing so well, but you're strawmanning and cherrypicking, which we said is typical of you. So that's where I stop reading any further. I don't care much for hypocrisy so that suits me fine.
(Old Spike)
Oh you did read further and you can't, lol
(Site Administrator)
I didn't. You'll just have to take it on faith.
(Old Spike)
.....so you can't, and chicken out as always.
(Site Administrator)
Tough talk from the guy who's modus operandi is announcing he didn't read his opponent's response while simultaneously declaring victory. For this reason alone you were, you are and you shall ever remain..a putz.
(Old Spike)
... so you can't.
(Site Administrator)
more accurately i did. but you didn't read it (or watch it) cause you're scared.
(Old Spike)
Learn to pay attention: I read your replies here, I just did not comment on some of it. I asked for just one or two examples of "experiential knowledge of God"
You did not give one (no need for it to be your personal experience, although I can't see how this could be embarrassing in an anonymous forum like this), so you can't.
(Site Administrator)
It wouldn't be embarrassing. It would just cheapen it. Don't cast pearls and that kind of thing. Now as for 'pay attention', you first. I gave you the general example above. Of people who attributed their life or the life of someone they loved being saved against all odds to God (or the divine depending on the particular faith). I posted the video of Archie, running a little ahead in our conversation to say this is something you or those such as you would merely dismiss as chance, happenstance, a fluke if you will. 1 event looked at through two lenses. One dismissing it. The other having their faith reaffirmed by it. I don't expect you to understand. This might take effort (as in the slightest bit of). m' k?
(Old Spike)
"Of people who attributed their life or the life of someone they loved being saved against all odds to God"
I suspected that this was the case, especially coming from you:
A personal experience "saving" oneself or a loved one from a seemingly hopeless situation, which could easily and more realistically be explained by co-incidence, is attributed to intervention by (a) personal god(s).
For example "I arrived late at the airport due to having misplaced my passport, missed the plane which then crashed with no survivors, this was god's doing." or if it is a loved one, "My wife was in a plane crash, I prayed for her, and god made her the sole survivor," Adding the power of prayer, which, in contrary to uncountable times before, seemingly worked this one time.
All this is pretty sad and selfish, based on oneself feeling more important somehow than anybody else because one was "worth" saving, which is exactly the impression one gets when one has a conversation with you about faith and religion.
(Site Administrator)
So that first paragraph could pretty much be summed up by anyone saying, 'hey, isn't that confirmation bias?' But you have to go all reductionist and make it so I'm saying a Christian survived through the power of prayer and a non-Christian didn't. How so very...'you'.
You then go on to express further insecurities touting that yours truly is selfish, has a feeling of importance and self worth, characterizing it as an ...'impression'. Can I speak to you of the impression you give?.. That these insecurities of yours (manifested in these vids you post actually looking for some push back) are at the root of why atheists are inferior to non-stamp collectors,.. in my humble opinion. ;-)
Again, just wanting to reiterate here that I'm sorry this impression irritates you.. between your legs..where your vagina is.
(Old Spike)
"I'm saying a Christian survived through the power of prayer and a non-Christian didn't"
No, you feel you are more important than others, that is what your faith is based on. This is why you "laugh about catholics" (and others) too, although they are "as christian" as you are.
If Jesus would have existed he would have died for at least one of your sins buddy.
(Site Administrator)
Why are you misquoting above? Citing a snippet of a statement that taken out of context makes it look like I stated as fact what I stated with irony. The full quote is: 'But you have to go all reductionist and make it so I'm saying a Christian survived through the power of prayer and a non-Christian didn't.' Why this dirty trick. Is it cause your arguments are weak?
I mean it stands to reason that anyone who ascribes to one denomination over another will think that one is (or works) the best. Assuming you got over this particular brain fart you're having one can conclude the reason you're shaking your little pudgy fist right now is that the person you're talking to has faith...any faith...as opposed to...what you got.
Hubris, bud, is when you go out of your way to claim not collecting stamps somehow makes you smarter. Hypocrisy is when you get mad cause in your estimation the stamp collector probably thinks 'like all other stamp collectors' that he's smarter. So maybe check yourself.
(Old Spike)
To people like you it doesn't matter whether the one that died is "christian" or not, the important thing to you is that YOU survived, thus being more worthwhile to save than the ones who died.
Being better at something because one has more talent, experience or studied more cannot be compared to this.
And, bud, you suffer "hubris" big time, it's just that people who do of course don't notice,
(Site Administrator)
You brought us full circle only to remind us that more talent, study, experience does not equate with atheism. We don't attribute these traits to you exclusively. What old church or parish was your College built on?
And that last sentence indicates a delightful lack of self awareness. Make sure your zipper's not open.
(Old Spike)
".... talent, study, experience does not equate with atheism"
Of course it doesn't and I NEVER claimed any such thing, I am a big fan of megadeth btw..
A person being atheist or believes in different deities does also NOT mean one is good, bad, superior or more "worthy" than the others, this is the fact you and many of your likes, regardless of which god(s) they believe in, struggle with.
Let me give you an example:
When asked you what you would accept as proof for a "reborn Jesus" you said you would "just know", which probably to a believer sounds reasonable, however, to a non believer it sounds incredibly arrogant and privileged to put it mildly.
(Site Administrator)
That last sentence, again, just perfectly recaps the lack of understanding on your part. Merely accept that those who have faith experience life on a level you don't comprehend (a spiritual fulfillment atheists don't feel since we're apparently just bags of meat). The fact you don't get it should be apparent to you by now. Then maybe stop lashing out like a small child needing attention. Find some confidence, some peace, with your particular... ehm... belief system.
(Old Spike)
The only one lashing out, rather profanely using childish insults, in all our conversations is you, bud. So this is also where the insecurities lie.
(Site Administrator)
Perpetrator and victim card played. So predictable of you. Sorry you got irritated. Here.