Originally posted by @secondsonYou are mistaken, on both counts.
You keep introducing discussions that are off topic. It started with your first post.
11 Feb 18
Originally posted by @secondsonI "got caught flat-footed"? Where? Which post.
Is it because you got caught flat-footed and now feel the need to accuse and ridicule for the sake of your arrogant pride?
Originally posted by @fmfStill can't get on topic can you?
I don't perceive any problem with how I have described my beliefs or, indeed, with my demeanour. It takes all sorts. I note that you, and not me, have now introduced the words "accuse" and "ridicule" and "arrogant pride" into the conversation. What was the "lie" you were on about?
You exhibit symptoms of denial. Face it. Holding to the belief system of agnostic atheism based on the lack of evidence as evidence is irrational.
Agnostic atheism is the belief in nothing, by nothing, for the sake of the denial of something.
11 Feb 18
Originally posted by @secondsonIn case you missed it earlier:
Still can't get on topic can you?
You exhibit symptoms of denial. Face it. Holding to the belief system of agnostic atheism based on the lack of evidence as evidence is irrational.
Agnostic atheism is the belief in nothing, by nothing, for the sake of the denial of something.
Objectively speaking again, one bases belief on truth. That is rational thinking. To hold a position of belief based on the lack of what one knows is true is essentially akin to believing a lie.
While I understand what you're trying to do, this line of thought is nonsensical. You don't seem to have thought this through.
Let's take someone who doesn't believe that space aliens are currently living on Earth. This belief is due to a lack of evidence that space aliens are living on Earth.This belief is based on the truth that there is a lack of evidence. Do you conclude that this belief "is essentially akin to believing a lie"?
Originally posted by @secondsonI've dealt with all this vocabulary you are using.
Still can't get on topic can you?
You exhibit symptoms of denial. Face it. Holding to the belief system of agnostic atheism based on the lack of evidence as evidence is irrational.
Agnostic atheism is the belief in nothing, by nothing, for the sake of the denial of something.
The lack of evidence to substantiate the things Christians claim about Christ is why I am not a Christian. This seems to upset you and'or make you rather brusque.
I might get into similar scrapes, then, with Hindus and Muslims for being unconvinced by what their religions/cultures have to offer.
A god or gods may well exist. If you have any reasons sufficient to make you believe that your god figure is the true one, then good for you. You can declare yourself "objective" and "rational" to your heart's content.
Originally posted by @fmfFrom the first to the last. You're like a ship without a rudder.
I "got caught flat-footed"? Where? Which post.
Just look at your first post. You immediately jump in by projecting a preconceived bias into the discussion without regard to context. You appear to think you need to defend an agenda by making the discussion about what I believe, which has nothing to do with the topic about agnostic atheism.
"Well, it's only natural for you to believe that someone joining your religion has been "successful" and that someone joining a different religion or not being persuaded by any religion has "failed" in your eyes. There's a great deal of partisan sentiment and black-and-white groupist certainty in pretty much all the major retail religions."
I don't give a crap about what you think about what I believe. Do you think you can get focused on the topic and confine your comments to it rather than projecting your emotional insecurities and opinions about what I believe?
Originally posted by @secondsonWell, I am an agnostic atheist. There's no getting away from how pertinent my outlook and beliefs are to this thread's topic. You quoted a 19th century Christian as having said that "agnostic atheists" had "failed" to do something and you attached a bunch of your beliefs to that. So I addressed it. It's normal in a conversation.
Just look at your first post. You immediately jump in by projecting a preconceived bias into the discussion without regard to context. You appear to think you need to defend an agenda by making the discussion about what I believe, which has nothing to do with the topic about agnostic atheism.
Originally posted by @fmfWell, you can keep talking about yourself or you can address the topic of this thread.
I've dealt with all this vocabulary you are using.
The lack of evidence to substantiate the things Christians claim about Christ is why I am not a Christian. This seems to upset you and'or make you rather brusque.
I might get into similar scrapes, then, with Hindus and Muslims for being unconvinced by what their religions/cultures have to offer.
A god ...[text shortened]... then good for you. You can declare yourself "objective" and "rational" to your heart's content.
Get on topic or get out of the thread.
11 Feb 18
Originally posted by @secondsonI am moderately interested in what you think about what I believe, for the time being anyway because what I and people like me believe is the topic of the thread and what you have to offer the analysis is good for the thread.
I don't give a crap about what you think about what I believe.
11 Feb 18
Originally posted by @secondsonI am. I have been. I will continue to do so.
Well, you can keep talking about yourself or you can address the topic of this thread.
Originally posted by @fmfSpeak to the topic, and then maybe we can have a "normal" conversation.
Well, I am an agnostic atheist. There's no getting away from how pertinent my outlook and beliefs are to this thread's topic. You quoted a 19th century Christian as having said that "agnostic atheists" had "failed" to do something and you attached a bunch of your beliefs to that. So I addressed it. It's normal in a conversation.
Originally posted by @secondsonThe topic is what people like me believe. With your very first post you asserted that you believe people like me have "failed" to do or be something or other. I engaged you on that.
Do you think you can get focused on the topic and confine your comments to it rather than projecting your emotional insecurities and opinions about what I believe?
I note that, in addition to the earlier words you have introduced to the conversation, there are now "emotional insecurities" and "projecting" and "get out of the thread". Ha ha.
Originally posted by @secondsonThe topic is agnostic atheism. You happen to believe that agnostic atheists have "failed" to do something or other. That's interesting.
Speak to the topic, and then maybe we can have a "normal" conversation.
11 Feb 18
Originally posted by @secondsonIt's all about "Agnostic atheism". Just look at the thread title. What I personally bring to this thread is the fact that I am an agnostic atheist. What you bring to the thread is your theist perspective and a heap of loaded vocabulary to bolster your subjective opinions in your own mind. All is as it should be and/or as it so often is.
My mistake. It's all about you, you and you.
How could I have been so obtuse?