XPost: alt.politics.radical-left, alt.abortion, alt.society.liberalism   
   XPost: alt.atheism   
   From: randolf@canadianatheists.ca   
      
   On Fri, 8 Mar 2024 21:22:16 +1100   
   Michael Christ  wrote:   
   > On 8/03/2024 5:44 pm, Randolf Richardson 張文道 wrote:   
   > > On Fri, 8 Mar 2024 15:15:57 +1100   
   > > Michael Christ  wrote:   
   > >> On 8/03/2024 9:24 am, Randolf Richardson 張文道 wrote:   
   > >>> On Tue, 5 Mar 2024 09:59:45 +1100   
   > >>> Michael Christ  wrote:   
   > >>>> On 5/03/2024 6:24 am, Randolf Richardson 張文道 wrote:   
   > >>>>> On Sun, 3 Mar 2024 08:08:30 -0600   
   > >>>>> Gregory Greenman  wrote:   
   > >>>>>> On 3/3/2024 12:37 AM, Michael Christ wrote:   
   > >>>>>>> On 3/03/2024 5:20 pm, Gregory Greenman wrote:   
   > >>>>>>>> On 3/2/2024 6:05 PM, Michael Christ wrote:   
   > >>>>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>>>> Think about it. He has to believe that the ===>>> testimony <<<===   
   of   
   > >>>>>>>>> the talking donkey is true in the bible in order to refute it. Get   
   it?   
   > >>>>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>>> No, not at all. We know that donkeys don't talk, so that story is   
   > >>>>>>>> obviously untrue. That's the point.   
   > >>>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>> Read what I wrote again without snipping it to what you would like.   
   > >>>>>>   
   > >>>>>> Okay, I've done that. What you said is still wrong. Just like the   
   bible.   
   > >>>>>   
   > >>>>> ...and just like how we know that talking donkeys   
   > >>>>> aren't real, we also know talking snakes aren't   
   > >>>>> real.  In fact, it's even more preposterous to   
   > >>>>> claim that snakes can talk since they don't even   
   > >>>>> have vocal folds or a voice box.   
   > >>>>>   
   > >>>>> (I like the point you made about the donkeys not   
   > >>>>> being able to talk.)   
   > >>>>   
   > >>>> Try this Blondie: I said "donkey" or "snake," singular. If you can't   
   > >>>> even get that right what hope is there for you?   
   > >>>   
   > >>> Even I, a natural blonde, knows that the plural   
   > >>> forms of the words "snake" and "donkey" refers to   
   > >>> all snakes and donkeys in the sense of them being   
   > >>> species in a general way.   
   > >>   
   > >> We are talking bible, aint we?   
   > >>   
   > >> One snake, one donkey, and you are both.   
   > >>   
   > >> The point is, genius, you atheists always, always, exaggerate to give   
   > >> the impression you are right. You have to do that.   
   > >   
   > > No.  That's your ill-informed impression of atheists,   
   > > but the reality is that you lot exaggerate to give   
   > > the impression that your god is always right, and you   
   > > probably feel that you have to do that.   
   >   
   > As opposed to what?   
      
   Your false claims.   
      
   > You always being right? :-).   
      
   I'm not always right.  Why do you keep assuming that?   
      
   > >> I said a talking donkey, singular, not your wankfest multiple donkey and   
   > >> you know it.   
   > >   
   > > Do you know of any snakes or donkeys that can talk?   
   > > There's no evidence even for one of either of these   
   > > non-human animals.   
   >   
   > God the Creator can do anything, He holds the universe together.   
      
   Why does the universe need to be held together?  Are   
   the laws of physics not working properly?  If so, how   
   are the laws of physics failing?   
      
   > A greater miracle is the creation of a human life.   
      
   That's not a miracle -- the fields of human biology,   
   which necessarily includes embryology, explain how   
   even the stupidest of people can create human life.   
      
   And even if you wanted to argue that it's a miracle   
   that the stupedist of people can create human life   
   while living long and fulfilling lives, even that   
   would be a stretch-and-a-half because modern health   
   sciences, modern psychology, human rights, modern   
   technology, modern education systems, and so much   
   more are actively facilitating all of this ... and   
   none of this relies on any miracles at all.   
      
   > > You seem to be getting all worked up over a general   
   > > statement about snakes and donkeys not being able   
   > > to talk.   
   >   
   > I just wish you morons didn't twist things but you can't help yourselves   
   > because you have got nothing else.   
      
   No, you're just resorting to name-calling because   
   you're stuck on one book from a very bad time in huamn   
   history -- you really should read other books, there   
   are entire worlds - real and imagined - to explore and   
   gain meaningful perspectives from.  (And most of it is   
   well-written, unlike the Holy Bible which serves as an   
   example of poorly-written fantasy-fiction.)   
      
   > >> Why do you do that? It was explained. You have to do that because you   
   > >> are idiot straw morons busy in your straw.   
   > >   
   > > What does straw have to do with any of this?  And I   
   > > don't know very many atheists who handle straw on a   
   > > daily basis.   
   >   
   > Hahahahahaha, Mr Everything did it itselfer!   
   >   
   > Go and look up straw man arguments.   
      
   Oh, is that what you meant?  Sorry, I was having a   
   blonde moment there ... atheists aren't creating any   
   straw man arguments becuase we don't need to when it   
   comes to arguing against religion; the reason is that   
   religion is self-defeating, so it's easier to just be   
   lazy and quote from its badly-written texts.   
      
   > >> Back to the point,   
   > >   
   > > Finally!   
   > >   
   > >> you have to believe the ===>>> testimony <<<=== of   
   > >> the bible in order to refute it (e.g., talking donkey). Get it?   
   > >   
   > > I don't have to believe anything, and a belief in   
   > > something is not a prerequisite for refuting it.   
   >   
   > It is over your head.   
      
   No, actually, you're the one who's failing to   
   understand the basic concept here (and I'm the   
   blonde one in this converstion!).   
      
   > >> No, you don't, because you are friggin' idiots.   
   > >   
   > > I know you don't believe most people here are   
   > > idiots; otherwise, what is the point of conversing   
   > > with people who you think are idiots?  Do you not   
   > > have self-respect for your own time management, or   
   > > are you some lazy out-of-work loser sitting on the   
   > > couch at home every day while watching soap operas   
   > > and eating bon-bons because beer is too expensive?   
   >   
   > Straw man!   
   >   
   > There you go, genius! :-).   
      
   I didn't build a strawman -- I was merely pointing   
   out your failures, which I mostly put into the form   
   of questions so that you could respond, but you   
   haven't even bothered to attempt to deny any of it,   
   and have chosen instead to dodge and divert.   
      
   --   
   Randolf Richardson 張文道 - randolf@canadianatheists.ca   
   Canadian atheists - True, Northern, Strong, and Free   
   Beautiful British Columbia, Canada   
   https://www.canadianatheists.ca/   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)