| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Cardinal Vertigo" |
| Date: |
31 Jul 2004 01:32:58 AM |
| Object: |
Theism |
If you believe there are valid and important questions whose answers may
never be found in a lab, you're a theist.
--
"As for that," said Waldenshare, "sensible men are all of the same
religion."
"Pray, what is that?" inquired the Prince.
"Sensible men never tell."
- Benjamin Disraeli, "Endymion"
.
|
|
| User: "Anachron" |
|
| Title: Re: Theism |
31 Jul 2004 10:09:53 AM |
|
|
"Cardinal Vertigo" <vertigo@alexandria.cc> wrote in message
news:u2HOc.22294$q96.2546@newssvr23.news.prodigy.com...
If you believe there are valid and important questions whose answers may
never be found in a lab, you're a theist.
I can't figure this out, I know GOD did it!
If you believe there are valid and important questions whose answers may
never be found in a lab, and this lack of understanding leads you posit
that the subject of study was created by a god, then you're a theist.
There that's better.
--
Rev. Anachron
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: Theism |
31 Jul 2004 01:31:17 AM |
|
|
"Cardinal Vertigo" <vertigo@alexandria.cc> wrote in message
news:u2HOc.22294$q96.2546@newssvr23.news.prodigy.com...
If you believe there are valid and important questions whose answers may
never be found in a lab, you're a theist.
Nope, sorry, wrong answer. I believe there are valid and important questions
that may never be answered simply because I believe human intelligence is
not unlimited.
--
"As for that," said Waldenshare, "sensible men are all of the same
religion."
"Pray, what is that?" inquired the Prince.
"Sensible men never tell."
- Benjamin Disraeli, "Endymion"
.
|
|
|
| User: "nenslo" |
|
| Title: Re: Theism |
31 Jul 2004 03:11:24 AM |
|
|
John Baker wrote:
"Cardinal Vertigo" <vertigo@alexandria.cc> wrote in message
news:u2HOc.22294$q96.2546@newssvr23.news.prodigy.com...
If you believe there are valid and important questions whose answers may
never be found in a lab, you're a theist.
Nope, sorry, wrong answer. I believe there are valid and important questions
that may never be answered simply because I believe human intelligence is
not unlimited.
Theist.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dixit" |
|
| Title: Re: Theism |
02 Aug 2004 09:44:51 AM |
|
|
nenslo wrote:
John Baker wrote:
"Cardinal Vertigo" <vertigo@alexandria.cc> wrote in message
news:u2HOc.22294$q96.2546@newssvr23.news.prodigy.com...
If you believe there are valid and important questions whose answers may
never be found in a lab, you're a theist.
Nope, sorry, wrong answer. I believe there are valid and important questions
that may never be answered simply because I believe human intelligence is
not unlimited.
Theist.
theist : one who holds the irrational belief that there might be a
magically invisible space pixie anyway, even though there is no such
thing in evidence.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Melchizedek" |
|
| Title: Re: Theism |
02 Aug 2004 09:53:14 AM |
|
|
"Dixit" <dix@nospam.com> wrote in message news:DrsPc.234274$Oq2.233854@attbi_s52...
nenslo wrote:
John Baker wrote:
"Cardinal Vertigo" <vertigo@alexandria.cc> wrote in message
news:u2HOc.22294$q96.2546@newssvr23.news.prodigy.com...
If you believe there are valid and important questions whose answers may
never be found in a lab, you're a theist.
Nope, sorry, wrong answer. I believe there are valid and important questions
that may never be answered simply because I believe human intelligence is
not unlimited.
Theist.
theist : one who holds the irrational belief that there might be a
magically invisible space pixie anyway, even though there is no such
thing in evidence.
Understanding The Times
(Audio MP3 Series [32 k bits/sec])
ftp://\in:out@65.127.169.45/=DRIVE=bibleweb-drive/=CD-R=understanding-the-times-audio-series/index.html
A landmark guide to understanding the ideas and forces that are shaping our times.
From Biblical Christianity to Secular Humanism to Marxism-Leninism to the
New Age movement, Understanding the Times provides Christians with a readable,
comprehensive treatment of the most significant religious worldviews operating
in Western Civilization.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Bankruptcy OF MORAL RELATIVISM
ftp://\guest:guest@65.127.169.45/bibleweb/stand-to-reason/stand-to-reason.sht
By
Gregory Koukl
At a Glance:
I. Introduction
II. The Myth of Moral Neutrality
III. What is Moral Relativism?
IV. Our Moral Illiteracy
V. Three Kinds of Ethical Relativism
VI. Relativism's Seven Fatal Flaws
VII. Tactics in Refuting Relativism
VII. The Bankruptcy of Relativism
Monkey Morality
IS EVOLUTION THE BEST
EXPLANATION FOR ETHICS?
By
Gregory Koukl
At a Glance:
I. Introduction
II. How Do Morals Evolve?
III. Morality vs. "Morality"
IV. Why Be Moral Tomorrow?
V. Social Darwinism
VI. Monkey Morality: Relativism with a Twist
VII. Morality above "Morality"
VIII. Monkey Morality Completely Fails
IX. Four Observations about Morality
X. Why Morality?
XI. The Final Verdict
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Strategic Trends 2004 Update
With the wealth of information at our fingertips, it is sometimes hard to see the forest for the trees.
In this Strategic Briefing we will give you a current perspective on the 10 trends that shape our
world and their relevance to Biblical Prophecy. Now, more than ever, we need to stay informed
about what is really going on. As we look eastward, the prophetic skyline is taking on the tones
of the fiery end-times scenario predicted in God's Inspired Word.
Contains briefings on the following subjects:
- Weapons Proliferation
- The Rise of Islam
- The Struggle For Jerusalem
- The Magog Factor
- The American Challenge
- The Rise of the Far East
- Global Pestilence and Biotechnology
- The Rise of the European Superstate
- Global Government
- Global Religion
MediaPlayer
- Strategic Trends 2004 Update (MP3 Audio) 01/02 (1hr 15 min)
- Strategic Trends 2004 Update (MP3 Audio) 01/02 (1hr 04 min)
Adobe PDF Reader
- Slides 01/02 (PDF)
- Slides 02/02 (PDF)
- Notes (PDF)
SAMPLE (1st Hour MP3 [audio only] no slides or notes)
ftp://\in:out@65.127.169.45/=DRIVE=bibleweb-drive/=CD-R=strategic-trends-missler/Strategic_Trends_2004_01.mp3
The full slideshow and notes are part of the Member's Area.
The remainder (2 hours + slides & notes) of this study is
part of the Member's Area, (see below or access http://bibleweb.info/
for more info).
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<><
=== A Christian Bible Study Collection ===
Bibleweb.Info -- 250Gb online - 1.5Tb DVD archive
Comprehensive Old & New Testament Bible studies,
prophecy, commentaries, concordances, apologetics,
Bible lookups, and multiple translations. PowerPoint,
movies in RealAudio, MP3, MediaPlayer, Adobe PDF
formats with free readers. A rich set of web site
links, continually being updated.
http://bibleweb.info/
Some screen shots:
ftp://\guest:guest@65.127.169.45/bibleweb/bibleweb-info-screen-shots.html
Some archive listings are also accessible there.
What's New at Bibleweb.Info
http://bibleweb.info/ftp/whats-new.html
-- Why Read the Bible?
-- How We Got Our Bible
-- Meditations on the Excellencies of the Word of God (Psalm 119)
-- How to Study the Bible
-- Battle for the Church in the Last Days
-- Introduction to Prophecy
-- Signs of the LORD's Return
-- How to Study Bible Prophecy
-- The Rapture
-- Are You Ready for the Rapture?
Small Group Study Materials
Verse-by-Verse, Chapter-by-Chapter, Book-by-Book
Teaching (Audio - MP3) Commentary
Small Group Bible Study Materials
(From: Calvary Chapel with Sr. Pastor Joe Focht) [Over 750 hours]
Small Group Bible Study Materials - Thru-the-Bible
-- Old Testament & New Testament
(From: Searchlight with Pastor Jon Courson) [Over 1200 hours]
*** Additional Materials in the Member's Area ***
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "nenslo" |
|
| Title: Re: Theism |
02 Aug 2004 07:38:31 PM |
|
|
Dixit wrote:
nenslo wrote:
John Baker wrote:
"Cardinal Vertigo" <vertigo@alexandria.cc> wrote in message
news:u2HOc.22294$q96.2546@newssvr23.news.prodigy.com...
If you believe there are valid and important questions whose answers may
never be found in a lab, you're a theist.
Nope, sorry, wrong answer. I believe there are valid and important questions
that may never be answered simply because I believe human intelligence is
not unlimited.
Theist.
theist : one who holds the irrational belief that there might be a
magically invisible space pixie anyway, even though there is no such
thing in evidence.
Oh, I get it. "Magically invisible space pixie" is your tagline. It's
your one schtick. Oh here comes the wacky neighbor with his "magically
invisible space pixie" schtick. Good one man. That horse won't get any
deader on ya.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dixit" |
|
| Title: Re: Theism |
03 Aug 2004 03:22:12 AM |
|
|
nenslo wrote:
Dixit wrote:
nenslo wrote:
John Baker wrote:
"Cardinal Vertigo" <vertigo@alexandria.cc> wrote in message
news:u2HOc.22294$q96.2546@newssvr23.news.prodigy.com...
If you believe there are valid and important questions whose answers may
never be found in a lab, you're a theist.
Nope, sorry, wrong answer. I believe there are valid and important questions
that may never be answered simply because I believe human intelligence is
not unlimited.
Theist.
theist : one who holds the irrational belief that there might be a
magically invisible space pixie anyway, even though there is no such
thing in evidence.
Oh, I get it. "Magically invisible space pixie" is your tagline. It's
your one schtick. Oh here comes the wacky neighbor with his "magically
invisible space pixie" schtick. Good one man. That horse won't get any
deader on ya.
Well then how about enlightening me as to what exactly is being sold by
theologs if not a religious belief that there might be a magically
invisible something ["Theos" (God) they call it] that is hypothetically
the first cause/creator of the universe anyway, even though there is no
such thing in evidence?
.
|
|
|
| User: "nenslo" |
|
| Title: Re: Theism |
04 Aug 2004 09:24:46 PM |
|
|
Dixit wrote:
nenslo wrote:
Dixit wrote:
nenslo wrote:
John Baker wrote:
"Cardinal Vertigo" <vertigo@alexandria.cc> wrote in message
news:u2HOc.22294$q96.2546@newssvr23.news.prodigy.com...
If you believe there are valid and important questions whose answers may
never be found in a lab, you're a theist.
Nope, sorry, wrong answer. I believe there are valid and important questions
that may never be answered simply because I believe human intelligence is
not unlimited.
Theist.
theist : one who holds the irrational belief that there might be a
magically invisible space pixie anyway, even though there is no such
thing in evidence.
Oh, I get it. "Magically invisible space pixie" is your tagline. It's
your one schtick. Oh here comes the wacky neighbor with his "magically
invisible space pixie" schtick. Good one man. That horse won't get any
deader on ya.
Well then how about enlightening me as to what exactly is being sold by
theologs if not a religious belief that there might be a magically
invisible something ["Theos" (God) they call it] that is hypothetically
the first cause/creator of the universe anyway, even though there is no
such thing in evidence?
I really don't know. That is not my belief or opinion.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dixit" |
|
| Title: Re: Theism |
05 Aug 2004 05:31:57 AM |
|
|
nenslo wrote:
Dixit wrote:
nenslo wrote:
Dixit wrote:
nenslo wrote:
John Baker wrote:
"Cardinal Vertigo" <vertigo@alexandria.cc> wrote in message
news:u2HOc.22294$q96.2546@newssvr23.news.prodigy.com...
If you believe there are valid and important questions whose answers may
never be found in a lab, you're a theist.
Nope, sorry, wrong answer. I believe there are valid and important questions
that may never be answered simply because I believe human intelligence is
not unlimited.
Theist.
theist : one who holds the irrational belief that there might be a
magically invisible space pixie anyway, even though there is no such
thing in evidence.
Oh, I get it. "Magically invisible space pixie" is your tagline. It's
your one schtick. Oh here comes the wacky neighbor with his "magically
invisible space pixie" schtick. Good one man. That horse won't get any
deader on ya.
Well then how about enlightening me as to what exactly is being sold by
theologs if not a religious belief that there might be a magically
invisible something ["Theos" (God) they call it] that is hypothetically
the first cause/creator of the universe anyway, even though there is no
such thing in evidence?
I really don't know. That is not my belief or opinion.
It appears that your memory may be failing you, Nenny.
nenslo proposed 8/1/04 1:00 PM:
A thing beyond human understanding ...
http://tinylink.com/?3a4u2uaiEK
.
|
|
|
| User: "nenslo" |
|
| Title: Re: Theism |
05 Aug 2004 08:28:44 PM |
|
|
Dixit wrote:
nenslo wrote:
Dixit wrote:
nenslo wrote:
Dixit wrote:
nenslo wrote:
John Baker wrote:
"Cardinal Vertigo" <vertigo@alexandria.cc> wrote in message
news:u2HOc.22294$q96.2546@newssvr23.news.prodigy.com...
If you believe there are valid and important questions whose answers may
never be found in a lab, you're a theist.
Nope, sorry, wrong answer. I believe there are valid and important questions
that may never be answered simply because I believe human intelligence is
not unlimited.
Theist.
theist : one who holds the irrational belief that there might be a
magically invisible space pixie anyway, even though there is no such
thing in evidence.
Oh, I get it. "Magically invisible space pixie" is your tagline. It's
your one schtick. Oh here comes the wacky neighbor with his "magically
invisible space pixie" schtick. Good one man. That horse won't get any
deader on ya.
Well then how about enlightening me as to what exactly is being sold by
theologs if not a religious belief that there might be a magically
invisible something ["Theos" (God) they call it] that is hypothetically
the first cause/creator of the universe anyway, even though there is no
such thing in evidence?
I really don't know. That is not my belief or opinion.
It appears that your memory may be failing you, Nenny.
nenslo proposed 8/1/04 1:00 PM:
A thing beyond human understanding ...
The entire sentence which you have partially quoted being, " A thing
beyond human understanding is not the same as a magically invisible
space pixie." This is a simple statement of fact, based on the reality
that a phrase composed of a series of words is not the same as a
different phrase composed of a different series of words, in that they
connote an entirely different meaning. This has nothing to do with your
question above about the existence or nonexistence of a deity, about
which I have stated no opinion in this thread. Thank you for providing
once again clear evidence of your tendency to ignore what people
actually write and pretend they wrote something else which you just
invented. If you wish to be thought a rational person you must at some
point actually address the real things people write instead of
pretending they wrote something entirely different which you just made
up, which latter behavior is irrational and fallacious.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Virgil" |
|
| Title: Re: Theism |
03 Aug 2004 04:30:56 PM |
|
|
In article <UWHPc.81769$eM2.41087@attbi_s51>, Dixit <dix@nospam.com>
wrote:
nenslo wrote:
Dixit wrote:
theist : one who holds the irrational belief that there might be a
magically invisible space pixie anyway, even though there is no such
thing in evidence.
Oh, I get it. "Magically invisible space pixie" is your tagline. It's
your one schtick. Oh here comes the wacky neighbor with his "magically
invisible space pixie" schtick. Good one man. That horse won't get any
deader on ya.
Well then how about enlightening me as to what exactly is being sold by
theologs if not a religious belief that there might be a magically
invisible something ["Theos" (God) they call it] that is hypothetically
the first cause/creator of the universe anyway, even though there is no
such thing in evidence?
Try looking "theism" and "theist" up in any dictionary.
Dictionaries are very useful for those able to read.
And none of them say anything about "might exist".
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Virgil" |
|
| Title: Re: Theism |
02 Aug 2004 02:00:41 PM |
|
|
In article <DrsPc.234274$Oq2.233854@attbi_s52>, Dixit <dix@nospam.com>
wrote:
nenslo wrote:
John Baker wrote:
"Cardinal Vertigo" <vertigo@alexandria.cc> wrote in message
news:u2HOc.22294$q96.2546@newssvr23.news.prodigy.com...
If you believe there are valid and important questions whose answers may
never be found in a lab, you're a theist.
Nope, sorry, wrong answer. I believe there are valid and important questions
that may never be answered simply because I believe human intelligence is
not unlimited.
Theist.
theist : one who holds the irrational belief that there might be a
magically invisible space pixie anyway, even though there is no such
thing in evidence.
That makes no more sense than:
theist : one who holds the irrational belief that there cannot be a
magically invisible space pixie anyway, even though there is no such
thing in evidence.
It is only agnostics who consider both the possibilities that
(1) gods might exist
AND
(2) no gods might exist
without being inveigled into believing that we can know that they do or
that they don't.
Septic (of the Magically Invisible Space Pixies) appears to have lost
the battle for sanity in the direction opposite to the actual theists,
who despise "might exist".
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dixit" |
|
| Title: Re: Theism |
02 Aug 2004 03:52:13 PM |
|
|
Virgil wrote:
In article <DrsPc.234274$Oq2.233854@attbi_s52>, Dixit <dix@nospam.com>
wrote:
nenslo wrote:
John Baker wrote:
"Cardinal Vertigo" <vertigo@alexandria.cc> wrote in message
news:u2HOc.22294$q96.2546@newssvr23.news.prodigy.com...
If you believe there are valid and important questions whose answers may
never be found in a lab, you're a theist.
Nope, sorry, wrong answer. I believe there are valid and important questions
that may never be answered simply because I believe human intelligence is
not unlimited.
Theist.
theist : one who holds the irrational belief that there might be a
magically invisible space pixie anyway, even though there is no such
thing in evidence.
That makes no more sense than:
theist : one who holds the irrational belief that there cannot be a
magically invisible space pixie anyway, even though there is no such
thing in evidence.
No, knucklehead, theists are those who hold the irrational belief that
there might be a magically invisible space pixie anyway, even though
there is no such thing in evidence.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Virgil" |
|
| Title: Re: Theism |
02 Aug 2004 04:58:55 PM |
|
|
In article <1QxPc.79720$eM2.12967@attbi_s51>, Dixit <dix@nospam.com>
wrote:
Virgil wrote:
In article <DrsPc.234274$Oq2.233854@attbi_s52>, Dixit <dix@nospam.com>
wrote:
nenslo wrote:
John Baker wrote:
"Cardinal Vertigo" <vertigo@alexandria.cc> wrote in message
news:u2HOc.22294$q96.2546@newssvr23.news.prodigy.com...
If you believe there are valid and important questions whose answers may
never be found in a lab, you're a theist.
Nope, sorry, wrong answer. I believe there are valid and important
questions
that may never be answered simply because I believe human intelligence is
not unlimited.
Theist.
theist : one who holds the irrational belief that there might be a
magically invisible space pixie anyway, even though there is no such
thing in evidence.
That makes no more sense than:
theist : one who holds the irrational belief that there cannot be a
magically invisible space pixie anyway, even though there is no such
thing in evidence.
No, knucklehead, theists are those who hold the irrational belief that
there might be a magically invisible space pixie anyway, even though
there is no such thing in evidence.
That is a delusion held by only Septic (of the Magically Invisible Space
Pixies) and no one else.
Everyone else knows that theists say that there MUST be a god and only
agnostics are satisfied with saying there MIGHT, or MIGHT NOT, be a god.
So it is Septic (of the Magically Invisible Space Pixies) on one side
and everybody else, whether atheist, agnostic of theist, on the other
side.
That makes it are the odds against Septic (of the Magically Invisible
Space Pixies) being right about 6 billion to 1, and that one with a long
record of falsehoods.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dixit" |
|
| Title: Re: Theism |
03 Aug 2004 01:17:19 AM |
|
|
Virgil wrote:
... theists say that there MUST be a god ...
No, theism is characterized by arguing _ad ignorantiam_ as you do, that
there might be one anyway, even though there is no evidence of any such
thing, because there is no proof that hypothesis is false.
You say you believe to be true the proposition that there might be a
magically invisible space pixie anyway, even though there is no evidence
of any such thing.
It is wrong for a man to say stuff like that, knucklehead:
"This principle [the agnostic principle] may be stated in various
ways, but they all amount to this: that it is wrong for a man to say
that he is certain of [believes] the objective truth of any proposition
unless he can produce evidence which logically justifies that certainty.
This is what Agnosticism asserts; and, in my opinion, it is all that is
essential to Agnosticism. That which Agnostics deny and repudiate, as
immoral, is the contrary doctrine, that there are propositions which men
ought to believe, without logically satisfactory evidence." -- Thomas
Huxley in his excoriation of the Christian Belief, "Agnosticism and
Christianity" 1889
.
|
|
|
| User: "Virgil" |
|
| Title: Re: Theism, Septic's false definition of |
03 Aug 2004 03:58:37 PM |
|
|
In article <P5GPc.238436$XM6.18998@attbi_s53>, Dixit <dix@nospam.com>
wrote:
Virgil wrote:
... theists say that there MUST be a god ...
No,
Don't act so surprised, knucklehead, any dictionary or encyclopedia
would have told you the same thing.
But the danger Septic (of the Magically Invisible Space Pixies) actually
doing any research before spouting his nonsense is that he might find
that he has been wrong all this time.
I challenge Septic (of the Magically Invisible Space Pixies) to find any
authority, other than his alter egos, to agree with his false definition
of theism.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Virgil" |
|
| Title: Re: Theism |
03 Aug 2004 03:58:45 PM |
|
|
In article <P5GPc.238436$XM6.18998@attbi_s53>, Dixit <dix@nospam.com>
wrote:
Virgil wrote:
... theists say that there MUST be a god ...
No,
Don't act so surprised, knucklehead, any dictionary or encyclopedia
would have told you the same thing.
But the danger Septic (of the Magically Invisible Space Pixies) actually
doing any research before spouting his nonsense is that he might find
that he has been wrong all this time.
I challenge Septic (of the Magically Invisible Space Pixies) to find any
authority, other than his alter egos, to agree with his false definition
of theism.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Joe Cosby http://joecosby.com/code/mail.pl" |
|
| Title: Re: Theism |
03 Aug 2004 04:13:52 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 14:58:45 -0600, Virgil
<ITSnetNOTcom#virgil@COMCAST.com> wrote:
In article <P5GPc.238436$XM6.18998@attbi_s53>, Dixit <dix@nospam.com>
wrote:
Virgil wrote:
... theists say that there MUST be a god ...
No,
Don't act so surprised, knucklehead, any dictionary or encyclopedia
would have told you the same thing.
But the danger Septic (of the Magically Invisible Space Pixies) actually
doing any research before spouting his nonsense is that he might find
that he has been wrong all this time.
I challenge Septic (of the Magically Invisible Space Pixies) to find any
authority, other than his alter egos, to agree with his false definition
of theism.
Idiots like you and dixit are why these things go on forever, and why
they remain stupid.
If you're obssessed with somebody to the point of only being able to
refer to them by a grade-school level insult name, you have long since
lost the ability to say anything meaningful. Maybe it's really time
to stop and ask yourself what the ***** you ARE doing. The two of you
locked in an idiot's shouting match that will go on forever. You
know, if you even stop to think about the whole thing at all, that
there is no way either of you is going to accept anything the other
one says. You could tell him "grass is green" and if it was in the
context of the argument he would argue it. And vice versa.
But on you two retards will grapple anyway. I guess maybe you hope
that eventually you will say JUST THE RIGHT THING and the other one's
head will explode. It could happen.
There might have been some point in the past where you could have made
a good enough point of debate and left some meaningful impression.
That point is long gone.
Anything that involves that much work which does not end in getting
laid is just WRONG.
--
Joe Cosby
http://joecosby.com/
"Welcome to Mississippi, please set your watch back 25 years"
- Cosmo Electrolux
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cardinal Vertigo" |
|
| Title: Re: Theism |
03 Aug 2004 04:40:00 PM |
|
|
Joe Cosby wrote:
On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 14:58:45 -0600, Virgil
<ITSnetNOTcom#virgil@COMCAST.com> wrote:
In article <P5GPc.238436$XM6.18998@attbi_s53>, Dixit <dix@nospam.com>
wrote:
Virgil wrote:
... theists say that there MUST be a god ...
No,
Don't act so surprised, knucklehead, any dictionary or encyclopedia
would have told you the same thing.
But the danger Septic (of the Magically Invisible Space Pixies) actually
doing any research before spouting his nonsense is that he might find
that he has been wrong all this time.
I challenge Septic (of the Magically Invisible Space Pixies) to find any
authority, other than his alter egos, to agree with his false definition
of theism.
Idiots like you and dixit are why these things go on forever, and why
they remain stupid.
They are sort of amusing, though.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Joe Cosby http://joecosby.com/code/mail.pl" |
|
| Title: Re: Theism |
03 Aug 2004 05:01:21 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 16:40:00 -0500, Cardinal Vertigo
<vertigo@alexandria.cc> wrote:
Joe Cosby wrote:
On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 14:58:45 -0600, Virgil
<ITSnetNOTcom#virgil@COMCAST.com> wrote:
In article <P5GPc.238436$XM6.18998@attbi_s53>, Dixit <dix@nospam.com>
wrote:
Virgil wrote:
... theists say that there MUST be a god ...
No,
Don't act so surprised, knucklehead, any dictionary or encyclopedia
would have told you the same thing.
But the danger Septic (of the Magically Invisible Space Pixies) actually
doing any research before spouting his nonsense is that he might find
that he has been wrong all this time.
I challenge Septic (of the Magically Invisible Space Pixies) to find any
authority, other than his alter egos, to agree with his false definition
of theism.
Idiots like you and dixit are why these things go on forever, and why
they remain stupid.
They are sort of amusing, though.
mud wrestling night at the retard club.
--
Joe Cosby
http://joecosby.com/
The mourning of young widows is as brief as a noonday candle
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Joe Cosby http://joecosby.com/code/mail.pl" |
|
| Title: Re: Theism |
03 Aug 2004 01:24:46 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 06:17:19 GMT, Dixit <dix@nospam.com> wrote:
No, theism is characterized by arguing _ad ignorantiam_ as you do, that
there might be one anyway, even though there is no evidence of any such
thing, because there is no proof that hypothesis is false.
I just wanted to stop and applaud your ability to abuse both the
english AND latin language simultaneously.
--
Joe Cosby
http://joecosby.com/
A kangaroo walks into a bar. The bartender says "Hey. Why don't you do
something nobody in this bar has ever seen before?" The kangaroo says
"I'm waiting for a genie." A monkey gets close to the kangaroo and says
"Give me a hundred bucks and I'll pull down your pants."
So the kangaroo says "Paint my house."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Joe Cosby http://joecosby.com/code/mail.pl" |
|
| Title: Re: Theism |
03 Aug 2004 01:26:13 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 02 Aug 2004 23:24:46 -0700, Joe Cosby
<http://joecosby.com/code/mail.pl> wrote:
On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 06:17:19 GMT, Dixit <dix@nospam.com> wrote:
No, theism is characterized by arguing _ad ignorantiam_ as you do, that
there might be one anyway, even though there is no evidence of any such
thing, because there is no proof that hypothesis is false.
I just wanted to stop and applaud your ability to abuse both the
english AND latin language simultaneously.
ps
is ignorantium heavier than lead?
--
Joe Cosby
http://joecosby.com/
But if we aren't supposed to eat animals, why are they made out
of meat?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dixit" |
|
| Title: Re: Theism |
03 Aug 2004 03:42:56 AM |
|
|
Joe Cosby wrote:
On Mon, 02 Aug 2004 23:24:46 -0700, Joe Cosby
<http://joecosby.com/code/mail.pl> wrote:
On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 06:17:19 GMT, Dixit <dix@nospam.com> wrote:
No, theism is characterized by arguing _ad ignorantiam_ as you do, that
there might be one anyway, even though there is no evidence of any such
thing, because there is no proof that hypothesis is false.
I just wanted to stop and applaud your ability to abuse both the
english AND latin language simultaneously.
ps
is ignorantium heavier than lead?
It is a form of logical fallacy, not an element. Try cracking open
Copi's logic textbook, knucklehead.
<quote>
Famous in the history of science is the argument _ad ignorantiam_ given
in criticism of Galileo, when he showed leading astronomers of his time
the mountains and valleys on the moon that could be seen through his
telescope. Some scholars of that age, absolutely convinced that the moon
was a perfect sphere, as theology and Aristotelian science had long
taught, argued against Galileo that, although we see what appear to be
mountains and valleys, the moon is in fact a perfect sphere, because all
its apparent irregularities are filled in by an invisible crystalline
substance. And this hypothesis, which saves the perfection of the
heavenly bodies, Galileo could not prove false!
</quote>
(Copi and Cohen, _Introduction to Logic_, p. 117)
[In this case the term, 'hypothesis' means a speculative, 'might be'
imagining with no basis in fact.]
.
|
|
|
| User: "Joe Cosby" |
|
| Title: Re: Theism |
03 Aug 2004 10:50:07 AM |
|
|
Dixit <dix@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<keIPc.204437$IQ4.23282@attbi_s02>...
Joe Cosby wrote:
On Mon, 02 Aug 2004 23:24:46 -0700, Joe Cosby
<http://joecosby.com/code/mail.pl> wrote:
On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 06:17:19 GMT, Dixit <dix@nospam.com> wrote:
No, theism is characterized by arguing _ad ignorantiam_ as you do, that
there might be one anyway, even though there is no evidence of any such
thing, because there is no proof that hypothesis is false.
I just wanted to stop and applaud your ability to abuse both the
english AND latin language simultaneously.
ps
is ignorantium heavier than lead?
It is a form of logical fallacy, not an element. Try cracking open
Copi's logic textbook, knucklehead.
<quote>
Famous in the history of science is the argument _ad ignorantiam_ given
in criticism of Galileo, when he showed leading astronomers of his time
the mountains and valleys on the moon that could be seen through his
telescope. Some scholars of that age, absolutely convinced that the moon
was a perfect sphere, as theology and Aristotelian science had long
taught, argued against Galileo that, although we see what appear to be
mountains and valleys, the moon is in fact a perfect sphere, because all
its apparent irregularities are filled in by an invisible crystalline
substance. And this hypothesis, which saves the perfection of the
heavenly bodies, Galileo could not prove false!
</quote>
(Copi and Cohen, _Introduction to Logic_, p. 117)
[In this case the term, 'hypothesis' means a speculative, 'might be'
imagining with no basis in fact.]
Oops ignorantiam is right, you were right. Although I stand on your
use of English being a mess.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dixit" |
|
| Title: Re: Theism |
03 Aug 2004 12:38:08 PM |
|
|
Joe Cosby wrote:
Dixit <dix@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<keIPc.204437$IQ4.23282@attbi_s02>...
Joe Cosby wrote:
On Mon, 02 Aug 2004 23:24:46 -0700, Joe Cosby
<http://joecosby.com/code/mail.pl> wrote:
On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 06:17:19 GMT, Dixit <dix@nospam.com> wrote:
No, theism is characterized by arguing _ad ignorantiam_ as you do, that
there might be one anyway, even though there is no evidence of any such
thing, because there is no proof that hypothesis is false.
I just wanted to stop and applaud your ability to abuse both the
english AND latin language simultaneously.
ps
is ignorantium heavier than lead?
It is a form of logical fallacy, not an element. Try cracking open
Copi's logic textbook, knucklehead.
<quote>
Famous in the history of science is the argument _ad ignorantiam_ given
in criticism of Galileo, when he showed leading astronomers of his time
the mountains and valleys on the moon that could be seen through his
telescope. Some scholars of that age, absolutely convinced that the moon
was a perfect sphere, as theology and Aristotelian science had long
taught, argued against Galileo that, although we see what appear to be
mountains and valleys, the moon is in fact a perfect sphere, because all
its apparent irregularities are filled in by an invisible crystalline
substance. And this hypothesis, which saves the perfection of the
heavenly bodies, Galileo could not prove false!
</quote>
(Copi and Cohen, _Introduction to Logic_, p. 117)
[In this case the term, 'hypothesis' means a speculative, 'might be'
imagining with no basis in fact.]
Oops ignorantiam is right, you were right. Although I stand on your
use of English being a mess.
Well excuse me for living. 8^) Aside from that nitpick about my Engrich,
you do not take exception to what was said?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Virgil" |
|
| Title: Re: Theism |
03 Aug 2004 04:42:49 PM |
|
|
In article <44QPc.201192$a24.84863@attbi_s03>, Dixit <dix@nospam.com>
wrote:
Joe Cosby wrote:
Dixit <dix@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:<keIPc.204437$IQ4.23282@attbi_s02>...
Joe Cosby wrote:
On Mon, 02 Aug 2004 23:24:46 -0700, Joe Cosby
<http://joecosby.com/code/mail.pl> wrote:
On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 06:17:19 GMT, Dixit <dix@nospam.com> wrote:
No, theism is characterized by arguing _ad ignorantiam_ as you do, that
there might be one anyway, even though there is no evidence of any such
thing, because there is no proof that hypothesis is false.
I just wanted to stop and applaud your ability to abuse both the
english AND latin language simultaneously.
ps
is ignorantium heavier than lead?
It is a form of logical fallacy, not an element. Try cracking open
Copi's logic textbook, knucklehead.
[In this case the term, 'hypothesis' means a speculative, 'might be'
imagining with no basis in fact.]
Oops ignorantiam is right, you were right. Although I stand on your
use of English being a mess.
Well excuse me for living.
Never!
8^) Aside from that nitpick about my Engrich,
you do not take exception to what was said?
AS you repeatedly cite references without any attempt at understanding
them at all, it is your stuiptity that offends.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Virgil" |
|
| Title: Re: Theism |
03 Aug 2004 04:38:56 PM |
|
|
In article <keIPc.204437$IQ4.23282@attbi_s02>, Dixit <dix@nospam.com>
wrote:
Joe Cosby wrote:
On Mon, 02 Aug 2004 23:24:46 -0700, Joe Cosby
<http://joecosby.com/code/mail.pl> wrote:
On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 06:17:19 GMT, Dixit <dix@nospam.com> wrote:
No, theism is characterized by arguing _ad ignorantiam_ as you do, that
there might be one anyway, even though there is no evidence of any such
thing, because there is no proof that hypothesis is false.
I just wanted to stop and applaud your ability to abuse both the
english AND latin language simultaneously.
ps
is ignorantium heavier than lead?
It is a form of logical fallacy, not an element. Try cracking open
Copi's logic textbook, knucklehead.
It is a form of logical fallacy that Septic (of the Magically Invisible
Space Pixies) does not seem to understtand, since he commits the fllacy
frequently and faitlsely accuses others of when they are using vallid
logic.
Septic (of the Magically Invisible Space Pixies) may be able to copy the
words from Copi, or elsewhere, but he never hears the music.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Joe Cosby http://joecosby.com/code/mail.pl" |
|
| Title: Re: Theism |
02 Aug 2004 05:06:59 PM |
|
|
this has gotten so fucking boring.
--
Joe Cosby
http://joecosby.com/
Nobody notices a chicken skulking off in the shadows, chuckling
evilly.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cardinal Vertigo" |
|
| Title: Re: Theism |
02 Aug 2004 05:43:17 PM |
|
|
Joe Cosby wrote:
this has gotten so fucking boring.
I think Virgil and Dixit are two twelve-year-olds with IQs maybe a
deviation or two above the mean who just read Ender's Game and are
playing at Demosthenes and Locke, CONVINCED they're going to CHANGE THE
WORLD.
--
"No, but I'm told it works even if you don't believe in it."
- Niels Bohr, when asked whether he really believed the horseshoe
above his door would bring him good luck
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dixit" |
|
| Title: Re: Theism |
03 Aug 2004 03:27:51 AM |
|
|
Cardinal Vertigo wrote:
Joe Cosby wrote:
this has gotten so fucking boring.
I think Virgil and Dixit are two twelve-year-olds ...
I think maybe you are trying to get away with a little argument _ad
hominem_, which is a form of fallacy of diversion, knucklehead.
"The Fallacies of Diversion : The fallacies in this family share the
characteristic that they distract attention away from the issue that is
genuinely under discussion." --
http://www.cuyamaca.net/bruce.thompson/Fallacies/diversion.asp
The issue genuinely under discussion between theists and atheists is
this irrational religious belief theists have that there might be a
magically invisible space pixie anyway, even though there is no evidence
of any such thing theists can point out so that others can check their
observations.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
