XPost: alt.atheism, alt.flame.jesus.christ, alt.talk.creationism   
   XPost: sci.skeptic   
      
   On Thu, 12 Mar 2015 14:41:18 -0700, Jeanne Douglas    
   wrote:   
   .   
   >In article <1604gad84mqvhkbnqcmqb7e3u1cd71jepb@4ax.com>, mur <> wrote:   
   >   
   >> On Thu, 05 Mar 2015 23:12:30 -0800, Jeanne Douglas    
   >> wrote:   
   >> .   
   >> >On Thu, 05 Mar 2015 21:31:05 -0500, mur wrote:   
   >> >   
   >> >>On Fri, 27 Feb 2015 00:28:21 -0800, Jeanne Douglas   
   >> >>   
   >> >>wrote:   
   >> >>.   
   >> >>>In article <7cqveapp3lph792ulfahruehgramnvjagp@4ax.com>, mur wrote:   
   >> >>>   
   >> >>>> On Fri, 20 Feb 2015 14:58:20 -0800, Jeanne Douglas   
   >> >>>>    
   >> >>>> wrote:   
   >> >>>> .   
   >> >>>> >On Fri, 20 Feb 2015 16:42:07 -0500, mur wrote:   
   >> >>>> >   
   >> >>>> >>On Sat, 14 Feb 2015 21:36:11 -0800, Jeanne Douglas   
   >> >>>> >>   
   >> >>>> >>wrote:   
   >> >>>> >>.   
   >> >>>> >>>In article , mur wrote:   
   >> >>>> >>>   
   >> >>>> >>>> On Thu, 12 Feb 2015 10:22:40 -0800, Jeanne Douglas   
   >> >>>> >>>>    
   >> >>>> >>>> wrote:   
   >> >>>> >>>> .   
   >> >>>> >>>> >In article <2o4ldah5qo072pcljugc8kseima7qoplib@4ax.com>, mur   
   >> >>>> >>>> >wrote:   
   >> >>>> >>>> >   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> On Thu, 05 Feb 2015 16:46:56 -0800, Jeanne Douglas   
   >> >>>> >>>> >>    
   >> >>>> >>>> >> wrote:   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> .   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >In article , mur   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >wrote:   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> On Mon, 02 Feb 2015 03:43:54 -0800, Jeanne Douglas   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >>    
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> wrote:   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> .   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >In article <0qrqcalc1ofgv7gemh395qn40u3tofeiro@4ax.com>,   
   mur   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >wrote:   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> On Sat, 24 Jan 2015 22:25:02 -0800, Jeanne Douglas   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >>    
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> wrote:   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> .   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >On Sat, 24 Jan 2015 13:45:42 -0500, mur wrote:   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>On Tue, 20 Jan 2015 23:28:47 -0700, Wisely Non-Theist   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>wrote:   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>.   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>>In article ,   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>> felix_unger  wrote:   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>>   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> it takes faith to believe that God does not   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> exist   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>>   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>>Perhaps it does may faith to disbelieve in what a   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>>person has   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>>once   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>>believed in,   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>    To disbelieve can mean to have no belief at all,   
   but   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>    it   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>    can   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>    also   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>    mean   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>    to   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>believe something is incorrect. That is very   
   unfortunate   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>imo,   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>and   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>possibly   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>the   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>cause of some honest confustion...POSSIBLY.   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>>but it takes no such faith not to believe in something   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>>one   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>>never has believed in.   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>    To honestly have no belief requires considering the   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>    possibility   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>    that   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>something is correct as well as that it's not correct.   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>You   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>make it   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>clearly   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>obvious you can consider the possibility that God does   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>not   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>exist   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>as   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>being   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>correct. Try to present some evidence that you can also   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>consider   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>the   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>possibility   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>that God does exist as being correct, if you really   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>would   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>like to   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>try   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>pretending   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >>you honestly have no belief about it.   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> >Why?   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >>   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >>     Because unless you do it will remain clear that the   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >>     only   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >>     belief   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >>     you're   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> capable of considering is the one but not any others. If   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> you   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> want to   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> try   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> pretending you "have" no belief then you need to show   
   that   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> you   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> can   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> consider   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> more   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >> than just the ONE we know you DO consider.   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> >Care to translate that gibberish into English?   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >>   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >>     You can't do what I challenged you to do as I suspected,   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >>     so   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >>     you   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >>     proved   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >>     me   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> correct. You've apparently served your purpose as well and   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> clearly   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> as   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> you   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> are   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >> able to.   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >Now you have 2 pieces of word salad to translate into English.   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >When   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >can   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> >I expect your translation?   
   >> >>>> >>>> >>   
   >> >>>> >>>> >>     If you can't figure out what I meant then you just can't   
   >> >>>> >>>> >>     comprehend   
   >> >>>> >>>> >>     because   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> you're not mentally capable, and the concept will always remain   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> beyond   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> your   
   >> >>>> >>>> >> mental ability regardless of how it's presented to you.   
   >> >>>> >>>> >   
   >> >>>> >>>> >And once again you deflect. Is there a reason you never answer a   
   >> >>>> >>>> >question you're asked or respond to requests?   
   >> >>>> >>>>   
   >> >>>> >>>>     Oh okay, now you've made it clear that you want people to   
   >> >>>> >>>>     believe   
   >> >>>> >>>>     you're   
   >> >>>> >>>> even MORE clueless than I pointed out for you above. Everything I   
   >> >>>> >>>> wrote   
   >> >>>> >>>> is in   
   >> >>>> >>>> English. Would you care to explain why you dishonestly want people   
   >> >>>> >>>> to   
   >> >>>> >>>> think   
   >> >>>> >>>> you're so stupid that you think it needed to be translated into   
   the   
   >> >>>> >>>> language   
   >> >>>> >>>> it   
   >> >>>> >>>> was written in to begin with? Or are you going to continue to   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)