|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: marques de sademarques de sade Date: Mar 30, 2008 10:39
On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 14:11:51 +0100 (CET), "Sanity's Little Helper"
noshpam.org> wrote:
>Nobody honestly believes in God.
so what do you suggest accounts for islamist-style holy jihad, if
it's not belief. you mean someone straps a bomb on him/herself
because they know it's all a lie? Not to mention following a
pedophile, in the first place? (eg: muhammed was 51 when he had
sex with his wife aysha who was 9 at the time) I mean, if that's
not a clue of what's to come... I don't know what is... And if you
somehow can rationalize the pedophilia, then don't be so shocked
when the chickens come home to roost in the form of holy-jihad.
octinomos
--
`We come now to the idea of the Gaeia Universe, where the whole of the Universe would be a single living entity of which all mankind is barely an organelle. But unlike the organisms of Earth, the elements of the Universe, energy and matter, are not connected by the bloody and battering interaction of consumption that we experience on Earth, but by the same forces of physics and mechanics which govern the aforementioned astronomical principles. The concept of pantheism proposes an additional connection, one of an overarching divine presence. In this divinity, mind and matter are one, and all things in the Universe are evenly connected'' --B.D. Abramson
|
| |
|
| | 189 Comments |
|
|
Author: TomTom Date: Mar 30, 2008 12:45
"marques de sade" netscape.net> wrote in message
news:47efcdbb.180781427@news.sysmatrix.net...> On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 14:11:51 +0100 (CET), "Sanity's Little Helper"
> noshpam.org> wrote:
>>>Nobody honestly believes in God.
>
> so what do you suggest accounts for islamist-style holy jihad, if
> it's not belief. you mean someone straps a bomb on him/herself
> because they know it's all a lie?
Maybe he means that religious belief is an attempt to falsely deny the
reality of death. Hence, one may truly believe something that is in itself
a falsehood.
|
| |
|
| | 84 Comments |
|
|
Date: Mar 30, 2008 22:45
On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 12:45:08 -0700, "Tom" comcast.net> wrote:
>
>"marques de sade" netscape.net> wrote in message
>news:47efcdbb.180781427@news.sysmatrix.net...>> On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 14:11:51 +0100 (CET), "Sanity's Little Helper"
>> noshpam.org> wrote:
>>>>>Nobody honestly believes in God.
>>
>> so what do you suggest accounts for islamist-style holy jihad, if
>> it's not belief. you mean someone straps a bomb on him/herself
>> because they know it's all a lie?
>
>Maybe he means that religious belief is an attempt to falsely deny the
>reality of death.
The marques dude believes in multiple lives, believes
his "god" is in all matter living and nonliving, but denies
the possibility that a creator might exist.
|
| Show full article (0.94Kb) |
| 4 Comments |
|
|
Author: TomTom Date: Mar 31, 2008 12:28
wrote in message news:vhu0v3htv5h91atmah0tef0cbe7q7eep3q@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 12:45:08 -0700, "Tom"
> comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>"marques de sade" netscape.net> wrote in message
>>news:47efcdbb.180781427@news.sysmatrix.net...>>> On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 14:11:51 +0100 (CET), "Sanity's Little Helper"
>>> noshpam.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>Nobody honestly believes in God.
>>>
>>> so what do you suggest accounts for islamist-style holy jihad, if
>>> it's not belief. you mean someone straps a bomb on him/herself
>>> because they know it's all a lie?
>>
>>Maybe he means that religious belief is an attempt to falsely deny the
>>reality of death.
>
> The marques dude believes in multiple lives, believes ...
|
| Show full article (1.95Kb) |
| 28 Comments |
|
|
Author: Erwin HessleErwin Hessle Date: Mar 31, 2008 17:08
On Mar 31, 3:28 pm, "Tom" comcast.net> wrote:> One might easily conclude that the
> claim for the existence of a creator being is implausible, given the lack of
> verifiable evidence in its support.
Not to mention all the verifiable evidence against it, the apparent
necessity for complex things to arise from simple things in order to
avoid stretching the bounds of probability beyond breaking point being
the most obvious.
Erwin Hessle, 8=3
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: The Speaking ClockThe Speaking Clock Date: Apr 1, 2008 15:00
On 1 Apr, 01:08, Erwin Hessle erwinhessle.com> wrote:> On Mar 31, 3:28 pm, "Tom" comcast.net> wrote:
>>> One might easily conclude that the
>> claim for the existence of a creator being is implausible, given the lack of
>> verifiable evidence in its support.
>
> Not to mention all the verifiable evidence against it, the apparent
> necessity for complex things to arise from simple things in order to
> avoid stretching the bounds of probability beyond breaking point being
> the most obvious.
>
> Erwin Hessle, 8=3
I'm not so sure of the ground as you guys seem to be.
|
| Show full article (1.29Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Erwin HessleErwin Hessle Date: Apr 1, 2008 15:39
On Apr 1, 6:00 pm, The Speaking Clock live.co.uk> wrote:> On 1 Apr, 01:08, Erwin Hessle erwinhessle.com> wrote:
>>> On Mar 31, 3:28 pm, "Tom" comcast.net> wrote:>
>>> One might easily conclude that the
>>> claim for the existence of a creator being is implausible, given the lack of
>>> verifiable evidence in its support.
>
>> Not to mention all the verifiable evidence against it, the apparent
>> necessity for complex things to arise from simple things in order to
>> avoid stretching the bounds of probability beyond breaking point being
>> the most obvious.
>
>> Erwin Hessle, 8=3
>
> I'm not so sure of the ground as you guys seem to be.
There's a real good reason for that.
|
| Show full article (3.20Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: The Speaking ClockThe Speaking Clock Date: Apr 1, 2008 16:24
On 1 Apr, 23:39, Erwin Hessle erwinhessle.com> wrote:> On Apr 1, 6:00 pm, The Speaking Clock live.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>>> On 1 Apr, 01:08, Erwin Hessle erwinhessle.com> wrote:>
>>> On Mar 31, 3:28 pm, "Tom" comcast.net> wrote:>
>>>> One might easily conclude that the
>>>> claim for the existence of a creator being is implausible, given the lack of
>>>> verifiable evidence in its support.
>
>>> Not to mention all the verifiable evidence against it, the apparent
>>> necessity for complex things to arise from simple things in order to
>>> avoid stretching the bounds of probability beyond breaking point being
>>> the most obvious.
> ...
|
| Show full article (3.71Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: AbsorbedAbsorbed Date: Apr 1, 2008 17:20
The Speaking Clock wrote:
> Dear Erwin,
>
> Thank you for the amusing and instructive read. I would like to hang
> a christmas tree light on every one of your fantastic ego bait
> trapdoors. Unfortunately, I am otherwised engaged today and I beg
> your forgiveness for my absense. :P
It seems that you're determining the validity of Erwin's arguments with
the same method that you're determining the origins of the universe.
Even proverbially the "judge a book by it's cover" method isn't recommended.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: The Speaking ClockThe Speaking Clock Date: Apr 1, 2008 21:38
On 2 Apr, 01:20, Absorbed hotmail.com> wrote:> The Speaking Clock wrote:
>> Dear Erwin,
>
>> Thank you for the amusing and instructive read. I would like to hang
>> a christmas tree light on every one of your fantastic ego bait
>> trapdoors. Unfortunately, I am otherwised engaged today and I beg
>> your forgiveness for my absense. :P
>
> It seems that you're determining the validity of Erwin's arguments with
> the same method that you're determining the origins of the universe.
> Even proverbially the "judge a book by it's cover" method isn't recommended.
I didn't determine the origins of the universe. I posed this
question: "Do these patterns or currents we can divine on the
surfeit of life available to our senses, suggest nothing but a grand
coincidence?"
|
| Show full article (1.31Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
