• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

[W:658]The Atheist-In-Name-Only

Re: The Atheist-In-Name-Only

Angel said:
You use [sic] incorrectly and you don't know a damn thing about my "faith" and the only thing I ever posted about a "woman's body" I posted a year ago in an abortion thread and what I said there was that it is a woman's right to do with her body whatever she chooses to do. So you don't seem to know what you're talking about and are just posting talking points from your Playbook. Bother some other member, please.
Click to expand...

Gladly...Have A Nice Day:)
 
Re: The Atheist-In-Name-Only

Logicman said:
I'm not going to spend a lot of time on somebody like you who kicks 100% of evidences presented to the curb. You're not a fair arbiter of the truth.
Click to expand...

Of course you are going to say that, since you have no evidence that is valid to present. We both know we won't convince each other. However, the reason you avoid the issue is that you know that the people who follow the thread will see how poor the claimed evidence is, and how much stronger the evidence is of the opposing viewpoint. I am not doing anything to convince someone whose mind is made up. I am just willing to put forth evidence for my viewpoint, and let those who look make up their own mind. You seem unwilling to do the same for your viewpoint. I am willing to let others come to their own conclusions about why that is the case.
 
Re: The Atheist-In-Name-Only

RAMOSS said:
Matt Slick is hardly a good source to go to.
Click to expand...

This is a crazy "yes but no" right here:

Conclusion
Is the Christian forgiven for suicide? Yes. But suicide is not an option. We do not have the right to take our own lives. That belongs to God.
Click to expand...
 
Re: The Atheist-In-Name-Only

Angel said:
I understand some so-called "atheists" better than they understand themselves because they don't understand themselves and because they're really not atheists.
Click to expand...

Ah yes the Angel is smarterer than everyone else and knows what they actually think argument
As pathetic as all your other "arguments"

Go take some courses on logic and spamming this forum with your BS
 
Re: The Atheist-In-Name-Only

Angel said:
You use [sic] incorrectly and you don't know a damn thing about my "faith" and the only thing I ever posted about a "woman's body" I posted a year ago in an abortion thread and what I said there was that it is a woman's right to do with her body whatever she chooses to do. So you don't seem to know what you're talking about and are just posting talking points from your Playbook. Bother some other member, please.
Click to expand...

I know everything about your "faith" I know you better than you know you. You dont really understand yourself Angel because you are not really a theist
 
Re: The Atheist-In-Name-Only

There's also the disappointed PINO, but that's for another thread. Stay tuned. ;)
 
Re: The Atheist-In-Name-Only

Quag said:
I know everything about your "faith" I know you better than you know you. You dont really understand yourself Angel because you are not really a theist
Click to expand...

He's an agnostic based on the content of his posts.
 
Re: The Atheist-In-Name-Only

Logician Man said:
He's an agnostic based on the content of his posts.
Click to expand...
Based on the content of your posts, you're am emoji performance artist -- and that is the mother of all euphemisms.
 
Re: The Atheist-In-Name-Only

Angel said:
Based on the content of your posts, you're am emoji performance artist -- and that is the mother of all euphemisms.
Click to expand...

What is the mother of all euphemisms ?
 
Re: The Atheist-In-Name-Only

Elvira said:
If you question it, then you do not understand it, so you cannot make the claim that you do...
Click to expand...

What utter nonesense.

It is by questioning that understanding happens. By question why wind turbines are the way they are I get to work out how to build a better one.

By questioning Newton's ideas of motion I get to find out if they are true. They are. Well, there is that new space drive thing....

If you cannot question something then you know that you don't really believe it at all. Not really.
 
Re: The Atheist-In-Name-Only

Logician Man said:
He's an agnostic based on the content of his posts.
Click to expand...

No he's a TINA
Theist in name alone

tinas.webp

TINAs are people who dont actually have faith in a God or Gods so they try to "prove" that they exist and invariably fail.
 
Angel said:
Baboons "don't have a belief in gods" -- so it follows, by your reasoning, that all baboons are atheists, and only some atheists baboons.
I'm starting to appreciate "I Lack Belief" Atheism.
Click to expand...

Are baboons known to be capable of belief?
 
Re: The Atheist-In-Name-Only

Tim the plumber said:

What utter nonesense.

It is by questioning that understanding happens. By question why wind turbines are the way they are I get to work out how to build a better one.

By questioning Newton's ideas of motion I get to find out if they are true. They are. Well, there is that new space drive thing....

If you cannot question something then you know that you don't really believe it at all. Not really.
Click to expand...

Utter nonsense is the fact that you claim you already understand...that is the difference...and you don't believe anyway so your point is moot...so keep questioning if you must, but don't make the claim that you already understand...you can't have it both ways...
 
Last edited:
Re: The Atheist-In-Name-Only

Elvira said:
Utter nonsense is the fact that you claim you already understand...that is the difference...and you don't believe anyway so your point is moot...so keep questioning if you must, but don't make the claim that you already understand...you can't have it both ways...
Click to expand...

It is perfectly reasonable to understand and not believe or to understand, use and beleive.

I understand basic physics. The stuff used to work out how to build bridges, ships and jet engines (to a point, entropy and the square root of minus one beat me). I also question it. The space engine that generates a net force without reaction mass says that it is wrong. I don't know how that works.

Doubt is the automatic and inevitable result of looking at the universe with an open and skeptical mind. When you are utterly sure of knowing something the world has a habit if showing it to be wrong. Unlucky.

Just because I undersatand your view does not mean it should not be challenged.
 
Re: The Atheist-In-Name-Only

Tim the plumber said:
It is perfectly reasonable to understand and not believe or to understand, use and beleive.

I understand basic physics. The stuff used to work out how to build bridges, ships and jet engines (to a point, entropy and the square root of minus one beat me). I also question it. The space engine that generates a net force without reaction mass says that it is wrong. I don't know how that works.

Doubt is the automatic and inevitable result of looking at the universe with an open and skeptical mind. When you are utterly sure of knowing something the world has a habit if showing it to be wrong. Unlucky.

Just because I undersatand your view does not mean it should not be challenged.
Click to expand...

lol...but you don't and no matter how much I explain it you, you never will...I cannot comprehend it for you...
 
Re: The Atheist-In-Name-Only

Elvira said:
lol...but you don't and no matter how much I explain it you, you never will...I cannot comprehend it for you...
Click to expand...

Which bit do you think I don't know? How would you test that?
 
Re: The Atheist-In-Name-Only

Tim the plumber said:
Which bit do you think I don't know? How would you test that?
Click to expand...

I've been here long enough for you to know, yet you don't...your remarks testify to that fact...
 
Re: The Atheist-In-Name-Only

Elvira said:
I've been here long enough for you to know, yet you don't...your remarks testify to that fact...
Click to expand...

You see I fully understand why you are unable to test my understanding;

It would show that I fully understood thus you would be forced to have a rethink of your ideas. Far too upsetting for you to cope with.
 
Re: The Atheist-In-Name-Only

Tim the plumber said:
You see I fully understand why you are unable to test my understanding;

It would show that I fully understood thus you would be forced to have a rethink of your ideas. Far too upsetting for you to cope with.
Click to expand...

Your questions prove otherwise...
 
Re: The Atheist-In-Name-Only

Tim the plumber said:
Which is something you are far too scared to test.
Click to expand...

Wrong...I put it to the test 43 years ago and have continued to do so ever since...it always rings true...
 
Re: The Atheist-In-Name-Only

Elvira said:
Wrong...I put it to the test 43 years ago and have continued to do so ever since...it always rings true...
Click to expand...

You see why you keep getting accused of being a liar?

The subject we are discussing is my understanding not yours. Thus when you have changed the subject due to not wanting to face the fact of my understanding it is obvious that you know you have lost.
 
Re: The Atheist-In-Name-Only

Tim the plumber said:

You see why you keep getting accused of being a liar?

The subject we are discussing is my understanding not yours. Thus when you have changed the subject due to not wanting to face the fact of my understanding it is obvious that you know you have lost.
Click to expand...

Further proof that you don't understand...lol...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom