- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
30 Jan 14
The post that was quoted here has been removedI don't disagree.
However I said religious, not Islamic.
Are you going to tell me that those Africans who are not Muslims are atheists?
The 'cultural' practices are frequently 'religious' practices. Even if they are not
Abrahamic religious practices.
The post that was quoted here has been removedOriginally posted by Duchess64
GrampyBobby likes 'to preach to the converted', to people who already
loathe atheism and regard it as (insert very bad adjectives of choice).
I doubt that anything posted by GrampyBobby has changed the beliefs
of anyone who originally was at least sincerely undecided about atheism.
Originally posted by twhitehead
Sorry, but the little bit I read was so stupid, I didn't want to bother reading more. I am frankly amazed that you bothered posting such nonsense. What did you expect?
I do want an answer as to whether or not you yourself have read it, or are you too exercising judgmental restraint by not reading what you post?
Do you dispute my objection? If so, explain why. If not, explain why you posted something containing such obvious flaws.
Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
As I've frequently mentioned to Great King Rat, googlefudge, Penguin, SwissGambit and others since last Thanksgiving I'm ignorant of atheism and am intensely motivated to shore up the deficiency. What better place than this forum? So please bear with my intellectual clumsiness and selected topics that may seem awkward to you. This one I care about immensely!
Originally posted by PatNovak
Clearly, you have already decided that atheism is a psychological disorder, and you are just trying to establish the causes (atheists are angry, had bad parents, are immoral, etc.). This is not the behavior of someone who is genuinely interested in understanding atheism, but instead is someone who is attempting to make an ad hominem argument against atheism, but is doing so under the false pretense of being interested in learning. You should be honest with the rest of the forum and drop the pretense.
Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
"This one I care about immensely!": because of its possibility of parallel with a dear friend's experience; honesty matters.
Duchess64, please try to grasp the fact that I take have interest in preaching any message to any man or woman online or face to face no matter what they feel or think, reason or believe. I am here as a relaxed retired widower to enjoy worthwhile conversation on any spectrum of topics or issues which relate to the statement of purpose Russ has given for this forum. If and whenever there's interest in questions which I'm qualified to answer in part or whole or to provided accurate references or information as opportunity allows, I'm pleased to so. With respect to this particular thread, as often stated, "I'm ignorant of atheism and am intensely motivated to shore up the deficiency." This topic has captured my interest for the somewhat selfish personal reason given above. I happen to care about each of you despite misunderstandings and hostilities. -Bob
30 Jan 14
Originally posted by googlefudgeOften with "a really long multi post OP" that's already "all together" there's a viable alternative to "post it all at once". Don't you appreciate a little conversational foreplay and excerpt interruptus with everyone contributing to the denouement?
If you have a really long multi post OP then get it all together and then post it all at once.
Don't write a bit and then expect everyone to just ignore it till your done.
lol
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
30 Jan 14
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyNope
Often with "a really long multi post OP" that's already "all together" there's a viable alternative to "post it all at once". Don't you appreciate a little conversational foreplay and excerpt interruptus with everyone contributing to the denouement? [hidden]lol[/hidden]
30 Jan 14
Originally posted by googlefudgeI don't want to answer for GB, but I like your question... so sue me.
Actions speak louder than words.
You do not ACT like one who honestly wants to learn more about atheism.
I know I've asked you repeatedly this question: Why are you here?
And your one answer is: Because I want to be.
But I think my confrontational style may have imparted the wrong message.
I actually want you here, probably more than you want me here!
I think you are smart.
The level of intellect on a scale of 1-10, if I had to peg it, solid six to possibly eight.
Don't take that as insult or compliment: eights or nines are all you're going to find on here--- nines are probably barely nines--- and they're counted on fingers, not hands.
In some respects, you're smarter than me.
In other respects, I consider myself above you.
Call us even, with collateral damage squaring out the differences.
I love having the eights and nines here, those who I openly concede as sharper, smarter, better equipped at parsing out the particulars and mowing down the high grass so plebes like me can attain a better vista.
Why.
I've been told my entire 49 year life how wickedly smart I am, how intimidating my intellect and presence is.
That gets so tiring after awhile, as you all know.
Here, however, I find a salting field, a leveling.
With few exceptions, everyone here is at least just as wickedly smart as I am.
A handful or so are actually -gasp- smarter.
And here's your part: if people just as smart as me--- if people smarter than me--- could choose to reject God, what did I miss?
I come here everyday, hoping/dreading to find that one thing I overlooked, that unnamed lynch pin hiding in my subconscious which will unravel all of my beliefs and leave me with a clearer view of reality.
We all just really want clarity, right?
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
30 Jan 14
The post that was quoted here has been removedI am not sure it always can be.
I would caution your 'friend' that it's entirely possible that his sons could in
future successfully sue him, or even prosecute him, for assaulting them.
An action I would wholeheartedly support and encourage.
30 Jan 14
Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
C'mon GB. You've taken the sentence out of context. I don't have a that much of a problem with you delivering the excerpts piecemeal. Placed in context, it's clear that the point of my post was about something else.
Classic. Rather than post all of his excerpts at once, GB, for whatever reason, has been only posting them intermittently amongst o ...[text shortened]... ehow at fault?
Why do you so often resort to these types of underhanded tactics?[/b]"Placed in context, it's clear that the point of my post was about something else." -ThinkOfOne
Your point?
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Originally posted by divegeester
... but I think the book is probably written to make money from Christians looking for a more intellectual argument against atheism.
That's a bit harsh I think. I think either of two opposite extremes are to be avoided - one of pure financial greediness and the other of unbridled suspicion.
The Corinthians were suspicious that the Apostle Paul was just out for financial gain, bless their hearts.
In spite of the fact that he made tents to support himself and his co-workers, some among the Corinthians were sure that he was just after money however he conducted himself.
His reply includes this -
"My defense to those who examine me is this. Do we not have a right to eat and to drink? ... What soldier ever serves by his own wages? Who plants a vineyard and does not partake of its fruit? Or who shepherds a flock and does not partake of the milk of the flock?
And am I speaking these things according to man? Or does the law not also say these things? For in the law of Moses it is written: 'You shall not muzzle the ox while it is trading out the grain.' Is it for oxen that God cares ?
Or does He say it altogether for our sake ? Yes, for our sake it was written because the plowman should plow in hope, and he who threshes, in hope of partaking.
If we have sown to you the spiritual things, is it a great thing if we shall reap from you the fleshy things? If others partake of this right over you, should not rather we?
Yet we did not use this right, but we bear all things that we may not cause any hindrance to the gospel of Christ. Do you not know that those how labor on the sacred things eat the things of the sacred temple, that those who attend to the altar have their portion with the altar ?"
(See First Corinthians 9)
The intent here is not to suggest every Christian author of a book is up to the caliber of the integrity of the Apostle Paul. But preachers and writers cannot preach down here and eat in heaven.
And if the time and labor extended by this author is compensated for when he could have been off doing another day job, there's nothing wrong with that.
The proceeds of the book may have gone to feed needy children - his own. Some believers reaped the spiritual benefit from it.
30 Jan 14
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyAre you seriously trying to claim that you don't understand the point of the following?
"Placed in context, it's clear that the point of my post was about something else." -ThinkOfOne
Your point?
Classic. Rather than post all of his excerpts at once, GB, for whatever reason, has been only posting them intermittently amongst other posts he has been making. Then he takes others to task for not "muster[ing] the patience to hold [their] fire until all four installments of the excerpts have been posted". That "it's the same courtesy [they] would expect from [him]".
Seriously, who else plays those type of games and then has the effrontery to pretend that it's the others that are somehow at fault?
30 Jan 14
Originally posted by ThinkOfOne[/b]Not a game and nobody's interested in fault; fourth excerpt later this evening or in the morning.
Are you seriously trying to claim that you don't understand the point of the following?
Classic. Rather than post all of his excerpts at once, GB, for whatever reason, has been only posting them intermittently amongst other posts he has been making. [b]Then he takes others to task for not "muster[ing] the patience to hold [their] fire until all ...[text shortened]... then has the effrontery to pretend that it's the others that are somehow at fault?
30 Jan 14
1 edit
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyClassic. GB keeps up the "game" by claiming that it's "not a game". His actions prove otherwise. Rather than own up to the fact that he was out of line when he took a couple of poster to task, he plays the "nobody's interested in fault" card.
Not a game and nobody's interested in fault; fourth excerpt later this evening or in the morning.
As I said earlier:
With the way GB has chosen to dole the excerpts out, it's as if he's inviting people to air their disagreements. Which would be fine except for the fact that he takes people to task for doing so (especially when he has no answer [to the content of the disagreement]). Seems like he's forever playing these types of games.