Fed up of non believers

[SnailyBoy]

I have no interest in this debate moving forward. This is not a debate, it is an exercise in certain posters making fools of themselves, much to my amusement, by trying to claim that words do not actually mean what their creator meant them to mean, and maintaining that they know more than I do as to my personal beliefs/non beliefs.

 

Irony alert

[mjw47]

:DCyclone.

 

Your last comment was that you don't care, how I wish that were true. For if it were true you would discontinue your remorseless pursuit of making yourself look daft on this thread.

 

You really are irrational.

 

Why would anyone need to extend their view on one particular subject such as theology to every other facet of their lives?

 

Were you the poster who used the term agnostic atheist? Can't be bothered to check, but if it was you ,that is a clear contradiction in terms and shows that you don't understand the meaning of the word agnostic.

 

Whilst I have offered the occasional opinion on here I have only made claim to three things which I know to be true.

 

Firstly, the words theist, agnostic and atheist are descriptions of three separate beliefs regarding the existence or otherwise of God(s).

 

Secondly, the definition of agnostic as described by William L Rowe as ' Someone who neither believes nor disbelieves in the existence of a deity or deities ', is an accurate description of the meaning of the word.

 

Additionally, the explanation by Thomas Henry Huxley the man who coined the word, that you should ' follow your reason as far as it will take you without regard to any other consideration - and - do not pretend that conclusions are certain which are not demonstrated or demonstrable.

 

Both definitions are compatible, and agree that agnostics hold the view that human reason is incapable of rationally justifying the belief that deities do, or do not, exist.

 

Finally, I have stated that being in agreement with the wording of the definitions I am an agnostic.

 

How anyone can choose to find an argument with any of the above is hilarious.

 

To disagree with the first point you have to take issue with every English Dictionary in the world.

 

To disagree with the second point you have to have the unmitigated arrogance to think that you actually know better than the man who invented the word as to it's meaning.

 

Additionally, you would need to come up with a new definition of the word to replace that contained in the dictionaries, and persuade them to include it in their next addition.

 

To disagree with the third point, you would require the ability to read the mind of a man who you wouldn't recognise if you passed him in the street.

 

Despite which, here we are, with some posters apparently wishing to argue about how many angels can sit on the head of a pin.

 

I do find it all very amusing, in particular the delusion apparent with regard to several posters conviction that despite everything they, and only they, have the level of intelligence required to know the true meaning of everything.

 

It's funny, which is why I'm still here.

 

---------- Post added 10-03-2014 at 15:37 ----------

 

Irony alert

 

Idiot alert!

[SnailyBoy]

 

Idiot alert!

 

Ahhh the ubiquitous smilie, just in case we couldn't read into your rantings how much fun you are having.

[mjw47]

Ahhh the ubiquitous smilie, just in case we couldn't read into your rantings how much fun you are having.

 

Yes my friend and how desperate are you lot getting to keep hanging on in there?

 

Why don't you try to address the points raised in my previous post as to how anyone can argue against the only claims that have been made?

 

Instead of posting smartarse one liners.

 

The smiley incidentally, was not to show how much fun I'm having but to show that whilst it's true that I think you a bit of a clown based on your posting history, I don't hold it against you. There's another one for you.

[salsafan]

You could be quite right, I'm not familiar enough with his writings, to contradict you.

All I was saying, is that I've been impressed with some of the views I've heard him express, which shouldn't imply that I'm expecting to agree with every single opinion he has.

 

I came across this recently and I wondered if you may find this interesting also. It is new materials added to my knowledgebase too.

 

 

In some of the Q&A, the Dalai Lama managed to demonstrate in context what it really means, and in a day to day basis, we just have to use our compassion, and our intellect to judge the situation as it unfolds. I thought that it was an interesting lecture. Hope you will enjoy this too.

 

What he touches on Ethics is actually quite true of all if not most religion.

[janie48]

I came across this recently and I wondered if you may find this interesting also. It is new materials added to my knowledgebase too.

 

 

In some of the Q&A, the Dalai Lama managed to demonstrate in context what it really means, and in a day to day basis, we just have to use our compassion, and our intellect to judge the situation as it unfolds. I thought that it was an interesting lecture. Hope you will enjoy this too.

 

What he touches on Ethics is actually quite true of all if not most religion.

I remember seeing him being interviewed on TV a few years ago, and being impressed with much of what he said.

So thanks for that Salfasan, I will be watching it later.

[SnailyBoy]

Yes my friend and how desperate are you lot getting to keep hanging on in there?

 

Why don't you try to address the points raised in my previous post as to how anyone can argue against the only claims that have been made?

 

Instead of posting smartarse one liners.

 

The smiley incidentally, was not to show how much fun I'm having but to show that whilst it's true that I think you a bit of a clown based on your posting history, I don't hold it against you. There's another one for you.

 

Because you go on..... and on..... and on. Recycle and repeat.

[mjw47]

Because you go on..... and on..... and on. Recycle and repeat.

 

I shall stop when the illogical and frankly deluded weirdos on here stop trying to tell me what they think my personal beliefs are, and what description I should use to describe those beliefs, understood?

 

And if you don't like it, there is always the option available to you to stop clicking onto this particular thread isn't there?

 

Or had that not occurred to you?

[SnailyBoy]

I shall stop when the illogical and frankly deluded weirdos on here stop trying to tell me what they think my personal beliefs are, and what description I should use to describe those beliefs, understood?

 

And if you don't like it, there is always the option available to you to stop clicking onto this particular thread isn't there?

 

Or had that not occurred to you?

 

Heard it before.... Try something new.

[ivanava]

I shall stop when the illogical and frankly deluded weirdos on here stop trying to tell me what they think my personal beliefs are, and what description I should use to describe those beliefs, understood?

 

And if you don't like it, there is always the option available to you to stop clicking onto this particular thread isn't there?

 

Or had that not occurred to you?

 

I see the problem, you think everything is telling you how to describe your beliefs, when in fact they are simply expressing their right to describe your beliefs according to the definition of the words. You of cause can describe yourself anyway you see fit.