XPost: alt.agnosticism, alt.atheism, alt.religion.christian
XPost: aus.religion.christian
From: Tommadura@optonline.net
On 1/27/2012 8:44 PM, felix_unger wrote:
> On 28-January-2012 12:29 PM, DanielSan wrote:
>
>> On 1/27/2012 5:27 PM, felix_unger wrote:
>>> On 28-January-2012 12:12 PM, DanielSan wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 1/27/2012 5:09 PM, felix_unger wrote:
>>>>> On 28-January-2012 11:46 AM, DanielSan wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 1/27/2012 4:45 PM, felix_unger wrote:
>>>>>>> On 28-January-2012 9:45 AM, DanielSan wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 1/27/2012 2:44 PM, felix_unger wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 28-January-2012 3:46 AM, John Baker wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 21:11:36 +1100, felix_unger
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> convince others in this manner, especially in a newsgroup
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> alt.atheism where skepticism reigns supreme?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are the one who chose to engage people here, and you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> definitely
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> got perspective by doing so.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh yes, I certainly did
>>>>>>>>>>> cras amet qui nunquam amavit; quique amavit, cras amet
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I shall bid you goodday. I have no interest in continuing with
>>>>>>>>>>> this.
>>>>>>>>>>> it's purposeless and time consuming.
>>>>>>>>>> In other words, you've just been owned.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out, Spanky. We
>>>>>>>>>> wouldn't
>>>>>>>>>> want you to suffer brain damage.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ah yes.. another hateful atheist who cannot tolerate honesty and
>>>>>>>>> truth.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sorry, but where was the honesty and truth?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> can't you read??.. "I shall bid you goodday. I have no interest in
>>>>>>> continuing with this. it's purposeless and time consuming".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Looked like a bunch of lies and distortions to me. Hypocrite.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> why am I not surprised.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Because you're not willing to speak with someone that disagrees
>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>> you in a mature manner and have to rely on insults?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> nonsense. John Wanker has proven that he offers nothing but personal
>>>>>>> attacks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Which you have do, too.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I offer opinion, facts, and arguments,
>>>>
>>>> No, you really haven't. Facts and arguments, that is.
>>>>
>>>>> and I have copped a lot of ad-hom
>>>>> for my trouble from atheists, including you.
>>>>
>>>> Actually, you have copped a lot of ad-hom, too.
>>>>
>>>>> I give what I get.
>>>>
>>>> Where did I do it to you first?
>>>>
>>>>> If you
>>>>> don't like what I have to say, don't talk to me.
>>>>
>>>> Feeling's mutual.
>>>
>>> ok. starting now. you misrepresent and distort things. and to say I have
>>> offered no facts or arguments in ALL that I have posted on these matters
>>> here, is, to use one of your favourite words, lying!. and when I even
>>> proved you wrong *by pure logic*, regarding your 'belief' you still
>>> denied it. you say you're open minded but in all my exchanges with you,
>>> you have shown otherwise- entirely unwilling to see any interpretations
>>> but your own.
>>
>> See what I mean? What am I supposed to call someone that tells
>> falsehoods with the intent to deceive?
>
> Daniel San
>
Sorry = but it is felix unger who has posted in favor of the existence
of gods - that he has NEVER supported with proof that would establish
the clainm to be factual
THOSE that have posted against the claimed gods- are speaking from
knowledge - as I have pointed out. IT is impossible for a single being
to fulfill the claims religions have made for their gods - so the gods
of religion have to be fairy tales
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
