XPost: alt.agnosticism, alt.athiesm, alt.talk.creationism   
   XPost: sci.skeptic   
      
   On Sun, 12 Oct 2014 21:41:05 -0400, "R.Dean" <"R. Dean"@gmail.com> wrote:   
      
   >On 10/12/2014 10:12 AM, Free Lunch wrote:   
   >> On Sat, 11 Oct 2014 21:13:53 -0400, "R.Dean" <"R. Dean"@gmail.com>   
   >> wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> On 10/11/2014 7:08 PM, Free Lunch wrote:   
   >>>> On Sat, 11 Oct 2014 15:44:33 -0400, "R.Dean" <"R. Dean"@gmail.com>   
   >>>> wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> On 10/11/2014 12:23 PM, Free Lunch wrote:   
   >>>>>> On Fri, 10 Oct 2014 23:06:14 -0400, "R.Dean" <"R. Dean"@gmail.com>   
   >>>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> On 10/10/2014 8:48 PM, August Rode wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> On 10/10/2014 6:52 PM, R.Dean wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>> On 10/10/2014 3:33 PM, August Rode wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>> On 10/10/2014 2:39 PM, R.Dean wrote:   
   >>>>>> ...   
   >>>>>>>>>>> I think the continued use the term "non-existent" instead of   
   >>>>>>>>>>> "non-material" is arrogance, since non-existent does not apply   
   where   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Christians are concerned.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> It doesn't? Surely either something exists or it doesn't, right?   
   >>>>>>>>>> Believing that God exists doesn't automatically mean that God   
   exists,   
   >>>>>>>>>> right?   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> Hmm... you don't seem to like answering questions. Is there a   
   particular   
   >>>>>>>> reason for that?   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> We've addressed this before. I've never _claimed_ it does. When you   
   >>>>>>> demand natural explanations for everything how is this resolved?   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> You'll need to show us what other explanations exist and how they work.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>> When you will accept nothing,  but naturalistic explanations, It seems   
   >>>>> you are not open to other explanations. But that's fine, it's your   
   >>>>> right.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> In my view, It's strictly an anti-religious   
   >>>>>>>>>>> proclivity.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> In the same way that continuing to claim that God exists is a   
   religious   
   >>>>>>>>>> proclivity?   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> Who is this in reference to? Who _claims_ that God exist?   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> Unless I miss my guess, *all* Christians do. There's really not much   
   >>>>>>>> reason to be a Christian if God doesn't exist, is there?   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Christians _believe_ God exist. They cannot prove he does. It's a   
   matter   
   >>>>>>> primarily of faith.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> Why do so many of them insist that we believe what they know they cannot   
   >>>>>> back up?   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>> Maybe a few fundamentalist try, but the mainstream denominations don't   
   >>>>> usually bother. They do not send missionaries to the western world.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>> As long as the fundamentalists are not condemned as heretics by the   
   >>>> mainstream, the fundies feel empowered. The religion doesn't matter.   
   >>>> Fundy Christians are no better than the Islamic State.   
   >>>>   
   >>> Islamic State? That would be Isis. I don't see Fundy Christian marching   
   >>> into cities and slaughtering people. I've yet to see a Christian suicide   
   >>> bomber, nor have I heard of a Fundy Christian who beheaded another   
   >>   
   >> Take some history lessons. The fact that fundies these days don't kill   
   >> anyone but abortion providers and poor black men has more to do with the   
   >> fact that they have been marginalized by society than their lack of   
   >> desire to do what fundies in power have always done.   
   > >   
   >I don't know who you are calling fundies, unless you are referring to   
   >very few extremist who murdered abortion doctor and burned clinics,   
   >however the overwhelming majority of Christian do _not_ approve or   
   >support such extremes.   
      
       These people like to feel that Christianity is all about killing people and   
   war, while refusing to appreciate the fact that there are many Christian human   
   aid organizations that do lots of things to help people all over the world.   
   They   
   also like to think there are lots of atheist human aid organizations though   
   I've   
   never been able to find evidence of any. They also like to feel that atheists   
   never killed Christians or tried to force atheism on anyone or began any wars.   
   They like to feel that atheists are always the poor innocent victims and no   
   atheists ever did anything to try to force atheism on any other people. I've   
   found that there are a number of amusing things these people like to believe.   
      
   >Most murdered black people are killed by other   
   >black people.   
   >>   
   >>> person. While Fundy Christians send missionaries into Africa, and other   
   >>> places, they do not demand "convert or die".   
   >>   
   >> More history that you do not know. Europe's Wars among the Christians   
   >> were fought through most of Europe for a couple of hundred years. The   
   >> end result was that Christianity lost almost all political power because   
   >> it proved itself so willing to kill.   
   > >   
   >True, the Protestant Reformation was unwelcome by Catholic Rulers in   
   >countries such as France, Germany and Switzerland so, yes religious   
   >wars were over religious excesses, excesses which brought about the   
   >reformation. However, the rampant notion that most wars were religious   
   >wars is a myth and pales in comparison to non religious wars.   
   >   
   >carm.org/religion-cause-war   
   >>   
   >>> In a Christian land you can   
   >>> criticize Christianity, Jesus Christ, or the Pope   
   >>> with no fear being killed. But you will not criticize the Islamic   
   >>> Prophet in an Islamic State with equal impunity.   
   >>   
   >> Again, you make excuses for your ignorance of history.   
   >>   
   >If you are going to engage in personal insults aimed at me, I refuse to   
   >engage in any further discourse with you.   
      
       My experience with them has been that if you point out their mistakes   
   enough   
   they eventually have nothing left other than personal insults and various types   
   of dishonesty. Then begins the questioning of whether they are actually stupid   
   enough to believe their claims, or if they really aren't but are pretending to   
   be for some reason(s). It seems to me that in the end it usually comes to that   
   point.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)