Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Is There A Conspiracy Of Atheists To Overthrow Christianity?

page: 63
10
<< 60  61  62    64  65  66 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 13 2008 @ 04:14 PM
link   
Picrat,

Most of what you state in your post is true and appropriate. By this I mean the pattern of things on this earth verses those in heaven. Also what you state as mans track record or history is nothing new. This has been going on in one form after another since recorded time.

Men left to their natural goodness natures always do the things you describe. They can do no better ...what you describe is the apex of mans greatness. It will always gel down to the format you describe..no matter what culture, language, custom, etc.

In its Readers Digest version .....this world has always needed help. This world has gotten into this condition by the help of men with great intellectual capacities.Very profound intelligences.

However..I will pass on the Valium thanks. Ive read John Maynard Keynes and his 'Economic Consequences of the Peace" about the consequences of the WW1 peace treaty. Very intresting and telling book if one can get through alot of the verbage and into the substance of the book. THat pattern which Keynes is describing so long ago, is still going on today and about to happen to this economy. THe shame is that our leaders are not telling us at all. It can be seen and was predicted by people in whom I had contact back in the 1970s. All of it is coming to pass.

If I can paraphrase the portion of the book which sticks in my mind and we are seeing happen around us for some time now..

"The best way to destroy the capitalist system is to debauch the currency."

No attacks from ICBMs. NO invasions of hords of enemys swarming ashore here. No mass terrorist attacks etc etc. Just simply debase the currency by allowing the Government to borrow on the public credit...unlimited....no restraints. Hence debauching the value of the currency.
This has the capacity to destroy all contracts and obligations merely because the currency becomes worthless. All capitalism is based on the ability to contract and obligate to specific performance. This is usually done in a standard called dollars and cents. Without this no commerce is possible in this country. With a debauched currency people will simply stop doing what they are doing or they will take a loss if they dont.

What you describe is not new at all. It is simply our turn today.

HOwever this is slightly off the topic thread of the OP but it definitely is a religion being practiced here with definite results. Not the doing of AThiests...I can tell you that ...this is beyond thier capabilitys. But it is man made. Definitely. No doubt it is man made.

Put another way ..it is the very theft of a nation by the bartering and selling of the souls of its people by a government or government system which is unworthy and is in fact a "hijacker" of the public trust.
Anytime you barter and sell the souls of a people/nation...under the guise of such trust ...you are counterfitting. You are deceiving them to get them to do what is necessary to steal from them thier souls and thier substance. This implys and speaks of a religious deception. This too is how I know it cannot be done by AThiests. It must be a counterfit religion ..made to look just like the real thing such that a very ignorant and unperceptive people can go back to the voting booth year after year to vote in more of the same conduct on the part of their leaders and government...more hijacking and more counterfitting......no matter who or whom is running for government office.

If there is any truth to this pattern ...picrat....please give me the name of the god of this religion...the hijacker/counterfitter!!??? By name please!!

Thanks,
Orangetom


[edit on 13-4-2008 by orangetom1999]




posted on Apr, 13 2008 @ 11:02 PM
link   
|---Is There A Conspiracy Of Atheists To Overthrow Christianity?---|

Conspiracy-desire-will-agenda --- what ever you want to call it --- YES. Christianity-Islam-Buddhism-Hinduism-Taosim-Judaism-Deism. Religion-Spirituality-Theism in general. Militant Fundamental Atheists want it ALL gone. They want to bend EVERYONE to their way of thinking and theirs alone all while shoving their beliefs down our throats. MFA's want THEIR world view impossed on the world and use different tactics to further their AGENDA.



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 12:49 AM
link   
buddhism and taoism are philosophies, not religions.

and athiest will try to help educate you, but in the end you have to be willing to seek out the truth, and myth is not truth- its only a semblance of the truth. whether you choose to look past the semblance is either within you or not.

if you want to confine your awareness into a little box of religious dogma, then you make that choice. if i choose to expand my awareness to combine the logic of all religion/philosophy and my experience into a common denominitor to find truth, then that is my choice.



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 01:26 AM
link   
|---BUDDISM-TAOSIM: PHILOSOPHIES---|

Spirituality Also already mentioned above.

We'll use the word Philosophy too. Fundamental Militant Atheists want it ALL gone while they leave only the stain of secular materialism in their wake. Don't want to believe me?? Look at the Eastern countries under atheistic governments to see what is happeneing to buddhists and taoists.

It does not matter if you are a theist or spiritualist. They want us all to assimilate to their world view. It is not limited to Christianity. It is religious-spiritual-theistic.

"Mythical??" Yeah. Atheists have their myths too. Ask me and I'll fire off a few.





[edit on 14-4-2008 by Snoopy64]

[edit on 14-4-2008 by Snoopy64]



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 03:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by shizzle5150

Sorry I don't mean to be hateful but logic is determining weather a number is < or > another.


What the hell does the weather have to do with less than or greater than?

No logic there is there? Nope, None.

Of course I am doing the same thing YOU did playing with idles use of the word heart and your mis-use of the word "weather"



I am sincerely sorry but you see that the problem with logic, it can't be wrong and if you say it is how about something that can be tested??? Sorry the joy you feel in your heart does not count. People feel joy in their hearts writing messages on bombs. Just because you feel it does not make it "logical".


Oh but it does and the logic is tested and made patent in the same way my friend. First lets both find out what "Logic" and how you use it to substantiate an opinion and Ill use same to prove your opinion is subjective . Even the video you use in your link can be reduced to pure logic but then again getting anyone to know what the hell a screen full of one's and zero's is supposed to prove much less anyone warming up to it is pointless now when we reduce everything down to pure logic.

I could give you some Quantum Science that is totally illogical where 4+4 = any number. The lawyer in the court room tries to persuade the jury to feel that his argument is right and fair – not to know his argument is right and fair. If it were true logic proves a damn thing, evolution woudn't be taught in our public schools to make God irrelevant but to explain the origins of life. Sadly, it fails miserably in both those areas.

When Idle spoke of her heart, she used the word heart assuming the reader would have the common sense to know she wasn't talking about the organ that pumps blood. She also probably didn't anticipate someone who portrays themselves as being so intelligent about Logic would be using it as an opportunity to attack them in a veiled ad-hom. I mean it just doesn't seem logical does it.



Sorry I don't mean to be hateful.


Sorry but that just doesn't make sense and isn't logical.
that you mean NOT to be hateful?

No one is making you do it are they?

Didn't think so. Now where is the logic?

What would have been logical is that you don't want to "seem" hateful or come off that way. I have to say, if you thought you are being hateful enough to offer the disclaimer, then conventional wisdom suggests that is EXACTLY what you were being else why the disclaimer.

What proves it, is you would have us excuse your hatefulness by offering a "no valid reason for doing it". Like I said,, unless someone was making you do it. Other than to say "you don't mean to be hateful",, lets be logical shall we?

In the future, if you don't mean to be hateful, then DON'T BE!

That would not only be more believable

It makes more logical sense and

Is why YOUR logic,

is flawed.

- Con









[edit on 14-4-2008 by Conspiriology]



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 03:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by 4theye
buddhism and taoism are philosophies, not religions.






buddhism and taoism are philosophies, not religions.


Google it yourself.



and athiest will try to help educate you, but in the end you have to be willing to seek out the truth, and myth is not truth- its only a semblance of the truth. whether you choose to look past the semblance is either within you or not.


That statement would apply if he were talking about myth but he isn't YOU are.



if you want to confine your awareness into a little box of religious dogma, then you make that choice. if i choose to expand my awareness to combine the logic of all religion/philosophy and my experience into a common denominitor to find truth, then that is my choice.


Your statment suggests the kind of logic that if someone had the truth and lost it, you would suggest they will probably find it in the last place they look. As if after they found it they would keep looking choosing to "expand their awarness and not be confined to the religion box"

Hey guy,, if you have already got the truth,,

you don't need to look anymore,,

Dogma's KoO like that

- Con



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 04:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Conspiriology
 


Son I like your style. When the heart is driving, logic is the backseat driver. The greatest logician to ever live, Solomon, wrote the Proverbs of the Bible. When you debate atheists remember "A fool finds no pleasure in understanding but delights in airing his own opinions." Their arrogance springs eternal "or Fools rush in where angels fear to tread". Sometimes a proverb goes out of style or degenerates into a cliche. The role of proverbs has changed over time, yet they remain popular. Son you might need to look in your Bible to Proverbs 23:9 "Do not speak to a fool, for he will scorn the wisdom of your words."



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 04:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jack Thomas Chick
reply to post by Conspiriology
 


Son I like your style. When the heart is driving, logic is the backseat driver. The greatest logician to ever live, Solomon, wrote the Proverbs of the Bible. When you debate atheists remember "A fool finds no pleasure in understanding but delights in airing his own opinions." Their arrogance springs eternal "or Fools rush in where angels fear to tread". Sometimes a proverb goes out of style or degenerates into a cliche. The role of proverbs has changed over time, yet they remain popular. Son you might need to look in your Bible to Proverbs 23:9 "Do not speak to a fool, for he will scorn the wisdom of your words."


By the way,, I have been alive long enough to call other people son and usually they are not even in their 40's yet. When I do, it is only when I want to be condescending. (hint)




That's the thing about advice, isn't it, the wise don't need it and fools won't heed it. Which one I am can only be known by me unless you think me wise, you wouldn't have offered such good advice.

It was good advice too,, however,, my post wasn't so much to speak to the Atheist but to the Christian who may have had her confidence in her Faith shaken by someone elses use of the logic of legion the language of liars.


I DO appreciate your concern nevertheless



- Con





[edit on 14-4-2008 by Conspiriology]



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 04:36 AM
link   
reply to post by orangetom1999
 


Orangetom where do we begin ,how about the bible itself -how long ago was it supposedly written? it states give unto Ceaser that which belongs to Ceaser aka taxes considering that Ceaser was only born 100 years bc so how did romes monetary and govermental system become ours it seems they still have their hands in everyones pockets,i believe- this is how our governments fund and pay for their terror tactics they call war -so how and when did we lose control of these loose cannons and their minions -how about when they started to control the population through their laws and judicial system!!It seems these 2 go hand in hand doubt it i wouldn`t one is the lackie to the other one wrote the history books for the kings now called governments and they did just what they were told or they were killed-they also pay no taxes pretty strange bed fellows agreed.or how about the 60s when the children of rock and roll raised their voices -their heads and their hearts towards the heavens and screamed bloody blue murder any idea why? it wouldn`t be because they saw the unleashing of the light and hellsfire that would destroy all life in this world would it -care to guess -nuclear,atomic ,germ ,chemical,biological or nuclear energy-nuke and atomic can be seen the other two need microscopes with light behind them -question 2years ago there was a huge blackout i wonder how close those nuke plants came to melting down bet we never get an answer.so what happened at kent state -the government turned on its own citizens because they stood up for their beliefs-saying hell no we wont go all they wanted was change -and they shot them in the great halls of learning i wonder where that comes from.so what happened shortly after this i remember the government -the church -millitary and police stood on the steps of one of the usa. government buildings and called the youth of its country long haired drugged crazed hippie satanist killing freaks -and this is recorded on film the archives of the news now do we understand that power corrupts as only the corrupt call themselves the power . and you the people allowed it to afraid to stand up for your beliefs these kids did and some died for it so where were our churches thats right they had their heads stuck in the sand again. there is a song written and the words are quote -if god was here he`d tell us to our faces that man is some kind of sinner -so true!and so on as to the atheists i wouldn`t worry there arn`t enough to take on all faiths beliefs or religions let alone even try. as for the god and his name who cares we are the ones who need to learn to stand up for ourselves as not people of a nation but as the human race united as one species and this will never happen as everyone is my enemy according to my government and its lackies -horse hockey-there is only one way to fix this mess quite voting for them and the people of the world need to start their own political party world wide fund it and back it and vote for it and the insane old men go the way of the dinosaurs extinct by their own rules and laws then we can begin to fix this mess of theirs and never needing to fire a shot to win this war against them all we need to do is take their false god like power away from them-considering that we are still making the same mistakes made in our past history no wonder it repeats itself -i liked your post -if their is a war let us fight it this way not theirs .



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 05:15 AM
link   
I personally don't think that athiests need to bother attempting to overthrow Christianity or any of it's tenets. Those who call themselves Christians are already doing a fine job of it.

To me it is most evident in their misled involvement in politics as they attempt to legislate morality over unbelievers rather than make converts of them.

One of the biggest movements along this line has been the "Focus on the Family" organization. The head of that organization, James Dobson, did some good things early in his career for families but has gone seriously awry in these last few years with his unquestioning support of certain politicians who say one thing but do another.

I think that Christians are doing a fine job of negating all that they say they believe just fine.

I see a majority of Christianity attempting to force it's morality upon the masses rather than making converts of the individuals and allowing God to do the work. Forced morality didn't work for Judism 3500 years ago and it still doesn't.

If Christianity wants to enforce morality, then the place for that is within the church....not outside upon unbelievers. Even better than that would be to have compassion within the church....especially if it went further than just on Sundays.



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 05:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Snoopy64
We'll use the word Philosophy too. Fundamental Militant Atheists want it ALL gone while they leave only the stain of secular materialism in their wake.


there's so much wrong with this...

1: how the hell is one a fundamental atheist? do i really not believe in god while other atheists just pretend to not believe in god?
there's really only 1 thing to atheism, it's not believing in god, so there are no fundamentals

2: militant? the black panthers were militant, the IRA was (still kind of is) militant, the basque separatists are militant. atheists in the west, not militant.

3:we don't want philosophy gone. philosophy is the understanding of the world and issues through pure logic

4: stain of secular materialism? well, you're obviously betraying your bias that secular materialism is a bad thing, however, i'd like to ask you how you know that all atheists are materialists. i sure as hell disagree with materialism, as i'm not entirely sure if we could prove the existence of something that isn't material.



Don't want to believe me?? Look at the Eastern countries under atheistic governments to see what is happeneing to buddhists and taoists.


and we "fundamentalist militant atheists" in the west condemn it. (free tibet, by the way)

in fact, many of us actually have a soft spot for buddhism as we see it as one of those religions that hasn't really hurt anybody

and they aren't doing it to people because they are buddhists or taoists, they're doing it because they're buddhists and taoists in opposition to the government. the chinese government would have no problem at all with the dalai lama if he was a state puppet.



It does not matter if you are a theist or spiritualist. They want us all to assimilate to their world view. It is not limited to Christianity. It is religious-spiritual-theistic.


we don't want you to assimilate to our world view. there is no singular atheistic world view. each atheist has their own particular world view.



"Mythical??" Yeah. Atheists have their myths too. Ask me and I'll fire off a few.


at the risk of having to put up with further ignorance, i'll just ask: what are the myths atheists have?

do we think that darwin saved the beagle from sinking by evolving a tortoise to a massive size in order to carry it on its back all the way back to england from the gallapagos?



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 08:04 AM
link   
reply to post by picrat
 


I was refering primarily to the money lenders who can be traced from very ancient times unto today. Their tack of getting governments into debt and then insuring that their people get put in government offices. Then another cycle of debt and another of thier people put into variouis offices to gaurantee the direction of the next loan cycle. Eventually the government runs huge deficits. This was happening even in Ancient Rome.
Often this even results in war when needed to cover a bad loan by these lenders...or put another lender in a bad spot.
Today it happens to be both lenders and insurance underwriters. How to cover a bad loan or get a government into debt in order to control it.

The more immediate remedy is to force a government to go back to hard moneys. Hence they cannot borrow in the manner they are doing today. As moneys cannot be created so easily. It will have to be paid in substance.Government can still get into debts but it is not as easily done to the point of selling an entire nation. The lenders would not have the leeway nor the borrowers. A balanced budget amendment would never get passed by the legislatures nor a leaders. Hard moneys are more self regulating when the notes issued by government can be called by the moneys being redeemable in specie.

This concept also needs to be taught to the public through the educational system ...a concept which will never be allowed by a deceitful government who also finances said educational system. It is a closed shop. Governments never teach the public to put light on their doings.

Nonetheless getting governments into debt ..by and by makes the governmnent and hence the peoples the boot lackys for special intrests.
And since they finance public education ..it becomes easy to put a public on a treadmill. The media also shill for this system. That becomes more and more obvious as time goes by.

Hence ..once again..I dont think Athiests are involved in such a system/religion of deception. This requires a system or religion much more sophisticated and subtle than Athiests. Athiests do not make good counterfitters as is required for such a system to operate. They can be used in support of a system like this but I do not give them credit for the religious aspect of such a system.

Davenman,

I too dont think that Christians should be involved in such a system of religion as is politics. A religion of deceit, hijacking, and counterfitting. I say this particulary since both religious institutions and government are involved in the sham of tax subsidys in the nature of 501c tax exemptions.
This does not make good nonsense when one thinks it through.

This corporate status is a tax subsidy on the part of the Government and Churchs both. Many of the Churchs in this country are filed as tax exempt corporations. This is not seperation of church and state on the part of the government and the churchs both. They are both liars and counterfitters here. They are literally in bed together for a benefit.

You know that logic and reason thing some of the posters on here like to promote as greatness. Look at this non logic through the prisim I am describing...tax subsidys and Seperation of Church and State. It seems on the surface to be logical ...but underneath where no one is supposed to be able to see..it does not make good nonsense.
It is contrary to the doctrine of seperation of church and state that both government and churchs like to proclaim. They are both liars and have the public bamboozled here. They are both counterfitters. They are both involved in a religion for deceptive purposes here.

Once again..give me the name of the god of this religion?? The counterfitter?? The liar??

To put this conversely ...this type of government/politics is now a religion. The religion of lies and deceit. So too are the church leaders who know this is going on.

Give me the name of the liar of this religion??

But it is so logical..so reasonable.!! Is this not so??

To take this further...when and where did our government begin lying to us in this and so too the churchs?? When did they begin sleeping together and not tell the public they both claim to serve???

Under the tax exempt corporate status the churchs can be audited if they take stances for which the government does not approve. James Dobson has learned this lesson by being audited and threatened. So has Pat Robertson. The members of these churchs..however...havent a clue.

I know of only a handful of Churchs who will not give out chits to thier members and have not filed for tax exempt corporate status.

In your post you are correct in your premise...you have not taken it far enough. Many believers are totally unawares of this system operating within the Churchs and the Churchs want it that way. IN this preachers are teaching a feel good type of Christianity which is actually a sham. For many churchs have huge debts and cannot get off this tax exempt status. It becomes a drug to them.

The truth is that the governments and churchs both have crossed the line here...they are both phoneys and are parasiting off each other and by this parasitical relationship they both prey on the public they claim to serve.
For by this predatory relationship between the goverenment and the churchs...the churchs cannot now preach the whole council of God and the government does not want it preached ..but desire more of a feel good religion. Sound and fury signifying nothing.

Remember what I am telling you here...by being in bed together..government and Churchs are both practicing a religion here and it is not the one advertised by both of these partys.

This is a description of a counterfit and an counterfitter. But to many it is logical and reasonable.
To those of us who can see it for what it is...it does not make good nonsense.


Thanks,
Orangetom




[edit on 14-4-2008 by orangetom1999]



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 03:08 PM
link   
|---FUNDAMENTAL MILITANT ATHEIST---|

Is a definition for this really necessary?? Fundamental atheists differ from spiritual atheists like Buddhist-Taoist-Nontheistic Religionists. Fundamental atheists lack any form of spirituality and are fundamental materialists.

Militants are the die-hard-in-your-face-shoving-down-your-throat atheists who are actively hell bent on infringing upon other people's right to believe their philosophies-religions-spiritualism. They do not hold to a to-each-their-own standard but to a to-each-my-own standard.

All theists =/= Materialists. Direct me to where I said ALL atheists are materialists. I did not. This is about FMA's.

"We don't want you to assimilate to our world view." We?? Are you a fundamental atheist? If so-if not --- why are you speaking for them??



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 03:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Snoopy64
|---FUNDAMENTAL MILITANT ATHEIST---|

Is a definition for this really necessary?? Fundamental atheists differ from spiritual atheists like Buddhist-Taoist-Nontheistic Religionists. Fundamental atheists lack any form of spirituality and are fundamental materialists.

Militants are the die-hard-in-your-face-shoving-down-your-throat atheists who are actively hell bent on infringing upon other people's right to believe their philosophies-religions-spiritualism. They do not hold to a to-each-their-own standard but to a to-each-my-own standard.

All theists =/= Materialists. Direct me to where I said ALL atheists are materialists. I did not. This is about FMA's.

"We don't want you to assimilate to our world view." We?? Are you a fundamental atheist? If so-if not --- why are you speaking for them??


Firstly, congratulations on your discovery of BB code. We applaud your ongoing practice with this interesting and oftentimes expressive addition to text-based communication.

Now knock it the hell off already.

Ahem.

Are you a militant atheist fundamentalist materialist? 'Cause you seem to be a lot of talking for them, yourself. Whoever the hell they are. Could you perhaps share with us the people behind this Fundatheimateriamilitist erm, movement?



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 03:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Snoopy64
 


there's no such thing as a "fundamental atheist"

let me clarify

fundamental christian: sticks to the fundamentals of christianity
fundamental muslim: sticks to the fundamentals of islam

fundamental atheist: would stick to the fundamentals of atheism

...atheism has only 1 thing, not believing in god
all atheists would be fundamental atheists...


...militant?
write a few best selling books, start organizing on the internet, and start objecting to statements like this:


Davis: I don’t know what you have against God, but some of us don’t have much against him. We look forward to him and his blessings. And it’s really a tragedy — it’s tragic — when a person who is engaged in anything related to God, they want to fight. They want to fight prayer in school.

I don’t see you (Sherman) fighting guns in school. You know?

I’m trying to understand the philosophy that you want to spread in the state of Illinois. This is the Land of Lincoln. This is the Land of Lincoln where people believe in God, where people believe in protecting their children.… What you have to spew and spread is extremely dangerous, it’s dangerous–

Sherman: What’s dangerous, ma’am?

Davis: It’s dangerous to the progression of this state. And it’s dangerous for our children to even know that your philosophy exists! Now you will go to court to fight kids to have the opportunity to be quiet for a minute. But damn if you’ll go to [court] to fight for them to keep guns out of their hands. I am fed up! Get out of that seat!

Sherman: Thank you for sharing your perspective with me, and I’m sure that if this matter does go to court—

Davis: You have no right to be here! We believe in something. You believe in destroying! You believe in destroying what this state was built upon.


source

and suddenly you're "militant"
... i wonder what people would have said if someone said that it's dangerous for people to know that judaism exists...or islam...or christianity...

but nah, it's ok to yell at atheists about how dangerous their philosophy is
no double standards here.



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 04:09 PM
link   
|---BB CODE FORUM POLICE---|

Thank you Forum Fuzz. Are you the forum fuzz?? Do you have anything pertinent to say or is this another display of questionable intelligence by criticising a style and not the argument??

|---WHO ARE THE FMA POSTER CHILDREN??---|

Are you people playing Devil's Advocate here?? What's going on here with all the questions that have obvious answers?? I'm not here to coddle people who play dumb. You are playing --- Right??

|---ATHEISM: A DISBELIEF IN GOD/S---|

That is the general definition of atheism. FMA is another story like fundamental Christianity and Islam are another story from moderate and liberal Christianity and Islam. Every can of trail mix has their nuts. Can atheists acknowledge theirs??




[edit on 4/14/08 by Snoopy64]

[edit on 4/14/08 by Snoopy64]



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 04:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Snoopy64
|---BB CODE FORUM POLICE---|

Thank you Forum Fuzz. Are you the forum fuzz?? Do you have anything pertinent to say or is this another display of questionable intelligence by criticising a style and not the argument??

|---WHO ARE THE FMA POSTER CHILDREN??---|

Are you people playing Devil's Advocate here?? What's going on here with all the questions that have obvious answers?? I'm not here to coddle people who play dumb. You are playing --- Right??

|---ATHEISM: A DISBELIEF IN GOD/S---|

That is the general definition of atheism. FMA is another story like fundamental Christianity and Islam are another story from moderate and liberal Christianity and Islam. Every can of trail mix has their nuts. Can atheists acknowledge theirs??




[edit on 4/14/08 by Snoopy64]

[edit on 4/14/08 by Snoopy64]


I'm afraid your "style" makes your posts look like nonsense to me.

And I suppose Atheists would fess up to them - if you were willing to say exactly who they were. Give it a try, see how it goes



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 05:25 PM
link   
|---FEAR THE BB CODE:: BE AFRAID-BE VERY AFRAID---|

No reason to be afraid of something so innocent like BB code. Revel in your phobia --- it is your fear not mine. This is my style on many-a-forum and blog. It's better to stick to one's own style than to adjust to the coding of every new community. Now get off it or don't read it because your offense will not put me on the defense.

Examples:: I know this unwinnable technique and don't paint in those colours. Ask me to back up accusations that Bush is a reptilian and that will lay the burden of evidence upon myself. Ask me to provide sources Lincoln was assasinated in a theatre only to make yourself look naiive. Examples??:: Dawkins-Hitchens-Harris-MM O'Hair-Stalin-Lenin. Past and Present --- Literal millitants and Descriptive millitants. Caustic-Abrasive-Condescending-Faux Superiority. Consider this a token-gift-freebie. Don't ask me any more stupid questions.

[edit on 4/14/08 by Snoopy64]

[edit on 4/14/08 by Snoopy64]



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 07:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Snoopy64
 


...you just put Dawkins, Hitchens, and Harris in the same category as O'Hair?'

they're not a like
and you left out the 4th horseman, Dennet

...it's obvious that putting them in the same category as Lenin or Stalin, those two were primarily motivated by political ideology.

it would be the same as me comparing the Popes to Hitler, they were Catholics that I disagree with, but it's an idiotically extreme comparison.

seriously, what about Dawkins, Hitchens, and Harris do you have a problem with?



posted on Apr, 14 2008 @ 08:10 PM
link   
|---WASTE OF TIME---|


...you just put Dawkins, Hitchens, and Harris in the same category as O'Hair?'


It looks like I did. Upon double checking --- I most certainly did. Many examples went into that list to give you an assortment of FMA's.


and you left out the 4th horseman, Dennet


Are you admitting the fact you already knew the answer to your own question?? That is why I do not answer questions with obvious and well known answers. You --- Sir or Madam --- justified my previous cynicism and have earned a place on my mental memo as a doer of such pointless and time wasting antics.


it would be the same as me comparing the Popes to Hitler


FMA's come in many forms. Isn't that the typical atheist self defense canard?? Atheists come in all shapes and sizes and cannot be boxed in??


what about Dawkins, Hitchens, and Harris do you have a problem with?


You mean you are aware of the "four horesmen" but would not realize why a spiritual theist such as myself would have a problem with them or realize what problem I would have?? Do not concern yourself any further with my cares. It looks like you will need to place your full effort in solving matters in your own corner. There is no need to discuss matters with people who know the answer before asking.








[edit on 4/14/08 by Snoopy64]









 
10
<< 60  61  62    64  65  66 >>

log in

join