Why Theists call atheism a Rejection of God

wynn

If that was what you got out of "No, it is like saying I refuse to learn Chinese from a book written by someone who had really never heard Chinese or visited China." no wonder you so rarely make sense. As I have said many times, I know nothing about any god(though I know quite a bit about what others say they know). But extraordinary claims about the supernatural gods require extraordinary evidence and you can present none, nor can anyone else. When you can do that YOU can claim you know something about god, 'til then i call BS on such claims, no matter how many books they write based on their ignorance.

Grumpy

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Grumpy,

Could you please respond to this post?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I don't know either way. There was just some words posted on the screen.
You also didn't make the claim that what you wrote was Chinese.

You haven't made that claim, yet, though.

What makes you suspect, though, is your proclivity for negativism and harsh charges against me and other posters.

English has similarities with French, Latin, Dutch and German!!
Ah, they must be all false!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Take up meditation to become aware of your actual intentions.

:shrug:

 

You're such a weasel, and a grumpy one at that.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Oh come on. Of course I did. I asked you "Is this Chinese or is this gibberish."

Harsh charges? You mean pointing out your lack of integrity? If you don't like being told about yourself, perhaps you should try to improve those things about yourself that others find so unattractive.

As I said, the analogy is not perfect (it was your analogy, after all). Leave it to you to pick out the one point I made about religion that does not translate to the language analogy. What's also telling is that it isn't even an analogy to you anymore; now you're actually trying to have a conversation about Chinese!

If I see another post from you in which you intentionally duck the issue and nitpick trivialities, you're going on my ignore list.

 

JDawg

To what purpose? You have your opinion of what Jesus taught, I don't agree. I have no interest in convincing you, and you won't be convincing me. On this point we will just have to agree to disagree.

wynn

Yet another person on this site who, when they can't deal with the discussion, resorts to name calling. At least you didn't descend into vulgarity.

You made an analogy and I pointed out just how ludicrous that analogy was. Neither you nor any of the theologions and apologists who wrote the books you are putting forward can show any reason to believe you know the first thing about the subject you say you are writting about(heck, you can't even give any reason to think your subject even exists). The Jews have a long history of writting commentaries, but at least their religion sees these as opinion, not claiming they have knowledge they do not have.

Grumpy

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I wasn't sharing my opinion of Jesus' teachings, I was explaining to you that he did not teach love as a central tenant. I explained that he taught subservience above all else, and that no matter what else you did, if you did not do it in his name as his follower you were going to hell. These aren't opinions, they are facts.

"I disagree" isn't good enough. Please support your position, or admit you were wrong about his teachings. It's like I'm going to gloat if you admit you're wrong. I would respect you for admitting you had changed your mind. Otherwise you're no better than wynn, and your opinion carries about as much weight as hers.

 

Fascinating.

And there I thought you might have a point.

:bugeye:

 

I'm never surprised when something goes over your head, wynn. I don't know how tall you are, but intellectually you're a hobbit.

 

Hobbits are very nice people, brave too.

 

@wynn --

I see that your skills for obfuscation and inanity haven't dulled in my time away, now, on to the bullshit.

What the doolally are you gibbering on about? You can't compare religion to language as one is an active worldview which makes truth claims that it can't(or won't, which would be worse) verify and the other is a system for communicating knowledge and ideas that makes no claims at all. You're comparing apples and steaks here.