Why he is dishonest.

Originally posted by googlefudge
And you still don't get that I am not CLAIMING to have the truth.The position of atheism is that
there is not sufficient (or any) evidence to be able to claim that there is a god or gods.
This isn't a truth claim it's analysing religions truth claims and deciding that they are not yet proved.

And science doesn't claim to make 'truth' claims either. ...[text shortened]... ask that you restate them more fully because I don't know what it is you are asking.

You are somewhat unclear hence all the misunderstanding.

I doubt needing to explain the last two questions as it is clear that we were arguing nothing, thus no answers needed.

Originally posted by Dasa
The atheist is dishonest for failing to recognize the intelligent design, intelligent function, the intelligent complexity, the intelligent purpose and the intelligent form and beauty of all things.

Instead he refuses to see what is clearly recognizable and for this he is dishonest.

He foolishly states that all things are a product of random chance acts o ...[text shortened]... ho are also dishonest.

He has many Phd on his wall at home...............Phds in foolishness.

Are all Hindus' as judgemental as you Dasa?

Originally posted by josephw
Are all Hindus' as judgemental as you Dasa?

knowing several hindus, i would have to say that dasa is the most obnoxious i've had the displeasure of knowing. though i doubt he is really a hindu. i think he is a poor, lost, wretched soul who stumbled onto a veda site or book and decided he wanted to adopt the religion and become the defender of the faith, much to the chagrin of hindus everywhere.

Originally posted by VoidSpirit
knowing several hindus, i would have to say that dasa is the most obnoxious i've had the displeasure of knowing. though i doubt he is really a hindu. i think he is a poor, lost, wretched soul who stumbled onto a veda site or book and decided he wanted to adopt the religion and become the defender of the faith, much to the chagrin of hindus everywhere.

I thought the same. I hate to sound judgemental, but the OP sounds adolescent. It's disconcerting to me to read things like that knowing the poster is incapable of doing anything other than voicing their opinion in a debate forum without providing the slightest bit of evidence to support their assertions.

I have to admit though that I probably have the same effect on others.

Originally posted by VoidSpirit
knowing several hindus, i would have to say that dasa is the most obnoxious i've had the displeasure of knowing. though i doubt he is really a hindu. i think he is a poor, lost, wretched soul who stumbled onto a veda site or book and decided he wanted to adopt the religion and become the defender of the faith, much to the chagrin of hindus everywhere.

I know several "hindus" (hare krsnas) , from where Dasa says he lives - Brisbane.
For the most part , most of them have kept a quiet air.
Although when we (me and my friend, 10 years ago) , went to prashadum and wanted some take on their religion - more than just chanting, or things like - "go chant 'Hare Krsna' ", then we found a couple of them ,(usually the younger ones), came out with some really fundamentalist crap. Not unlike Dasa. And take away the body language and other nuances in the atmosphere, and keep just the words, and you would have something like Dasa, (in a few cases).
I think thats why the older ones kept their mouths shut.

Having said all that, I still reckon that krsna society is better than the so-called christian society, in which it is contained for the moment, (ie. ISKON)

Originally posted by josephw
I thought the same. I hate to sound judgemental, but the OP sounds adolescent. It's disconcerting to me to read things like that knowing the poster is incapable of doing anything other than voicing their opinion in a debate forum without providing the slightest bit of evidence to support their assertions.

I have to admit though that I probably have the same effect on others.

You guys (christians) really do rely on the "oh she/he's immature" argument a lot.
I say that that is just not good enough, and if that's all you have then you are being out and out agist.

Edit: Also, as far as that ,"not having the slightest bit of evidence", is concerned, I find that a bit rich coming from someone who thinks that the bible trumps all other spiritual literature, thereby pretty much putting you in the same type of theist basket as Dasa.

Originally posted by karoly aczel
You guys (christians) really do rely on the "oh she/he's immature" argument a lot.
I say that that is just not good enough, and if that's all you have then you are being out and out agist.

Edit: Also, as far as that ,"not having the slightest bit of evidence", is concerned, I find that a bit rich coming from someone who thinks that the bible trum ...[text shortened]... ual literature, thereby pretty much putting you in the same type of theist basket as Dasa.

"You guys (christians) really do rely on the "oh she/he's immature" argument a lot."

Is that right? Can you provide an example? If you can read you will notice I didn't say Dasa was immature. It is adolescent to say someone said something they didn't say.

Read the words carefully. I didn't say you were immature.

Originally posted by Nicksten
You are somewhat unclear hence all the misunderstanding.

I doubt needing to explain the last two questions as it is clear that we were arguing nothing, thus no answers needed.

I am perfectly clear, you either just pay no attention to what I say, have language comprehension issues,
or simply lie about what my position is because you can't frame an argument against what I actually say or believe.

You on the other hand are very often unclear, which is why I asked clarification on the two questions you asked.
They were too poorly written for me to determine what it was you were getting at and I don't like to guess.

Originally posted by josephw
[b]"You guys (christians) really do rely on the "oh she/he's immature" argument a lot."

Is that right? Can you provide an example? If you can read you will notice I didn't say Dasa was immature. It is adolescent to say someone said something they didn't say.

Read the words carefully. I didn't say you were immature.[/b]

You've said my ideas were immature, and not being thought through properly - despite me having told you almost the opposite. It seems you are not respecting my experiences in life and only come up with a positive comment when you are endorsing one aspect or another of christianity.


The example is right there by you a few posts/pages up.

So you are saying that Dasa is NOT immature? I really dont follow ...


Edit: sorry, you said "Are all hindus that judgemental?" and I said something along the lines of 'you being a bit rich for using that argument to put down hindus' in general. I see christians making value judgments quite often enough to say that they really dont have a good handle on JC's words, and ultimately seek to divide the general (spiritual) population rather than UNITE . Which is an often repeated argument in these parts 🙁

And yes, I do find that similar to calling them "immature".

Originally posted by Dasa
The Bhagavad Gita and the Bible is as................Gold is to lead.

The Bible presents false knowledge.

The Bhagavad Gita does not.

Are you able to quote the bit in the Bhagavad Gita that authorizes genocide and authorizes you to call for genocide?

Originally posted by FMF
Are you able to quote the bit in the Bhagavad Gita that authorizes genocide and authorizes you to call for genocide?

fmf: do you think groups of people who mutilate the genitalia of young girls - and who bomb buses planes and trains - and who kill people who have individual different political views - and who stone to death women who do not wear a head and body covering - and who cut the throats of young girls who don't marry their own kind so as to bring back honour to the family................should be allowed to exist amongst the civilized people of earth.

Originally posted by josephw
Are all Hindus' as judgemental as you Dasa?

In the 18 months I have been in this a forum...........I have not presented or taught or defended Hinduism.

I am not a Hindu.

The Vedas do not teach Hinduism.

I am not interested in Hinduism.

I do not present Hinduism.

The Hinduism of today ...........is a concoction of false teachings and a collection of misunderstood Vedic teachings.

If you want to know anything about Hinduism..................talk to a Hindu.

Originally posted by googlefudge
I am perfectly clear, you either just pay no attention to what I say, have language comprehension issues,
or simply lie about what my position is because you can't frame an argument against what I actually say or believe.

You on the other hand are very often unclear, which is why I asked clarification on the two questions you asked.
They were too poorly written for me to determine what it was you were getting at and I don't like to guess.

To me you were unclear. I can just as well argue my questions was clear according to me. I can not lie what your positions are and if so by making such a statement just shows how "unclear" everything was.

Originally posted by Nicksten
To me you were unclear. I can just as well argue my questions was clear according to me. I can not lie what your positions are and if so by making such a statement just shows how "unclear" everything was.

Well it is now clear that it's a language issue due to English not being your first language.

I will bear that in mind from now on.

I apologise for accusing you of intentional ignoring or misrepresenting my positions, it's
now clear that neither of us was understanding the other.


I will endeavour to make my language simpler and easier to understand for any here trying
to debate in a second language.
I can well understand that it can't be easy.

Originally posted by Dasa
fmf: do you think groups of people who mutilate the genitalia of young girls - and who bomb buses planes and trains - and who kill people who have individual different political views - and who stone to death women who do not wear a head and body covering - and who cut the throats of young girls who don't marry their own kind so as to bring back honour to the family................should be allowed to exist amongst the civilized people of earth.

The question is, Dasa, can you or can you not quote the bit in the Bhagavad Gita that authorizes genocide and that authorizes you to call for genocide against hundreds and hundreds of millions of innocent people because of their religion? Yes or no?