03 May '17 23:24>1 edit
When do you give up hope. At some point we have to give up our losses, but when? And what do you hold onto next?
Do you see I ask not about gods, but about people.
Do you see I ask not about gods, but about people.
Originally posted by apathistGiving up hope is like leaving a job. The best way to quit a job is when you know you have another waiting for you.
When do you give up hope. At some point we have to give up our losses, but when? And what do you hold onto next?
Do you see I ask not about gods, but about people.
Originally posted by sonshipGood enough, except what if another is not known to be waiting for you?
Giving up hope is like leaving a job. The best way to quit a job is when you know you have another waiting for you. ...
Originally posted by apathistInterestingly enough, the lunatic at times thinks that everyone else is insane,
Good enough, except what if another is not known to be waiting for you?
Btw, I specifically said we're not talking about gods here, but you had no self-control at all. Could it be you suffer from a mental disease. Every religion in every culture at all points in time had their share of fanatics. It's a human thing.
Originally posted by apathistThe polarised thinking often expressed in this forum is quite interesting. I would rather have my hope in what turned out to be an imaginary benevolent God, than real narcotics.
When do you give up hope. At some point we have to give up our losses, but when? And what do you hold onto next?
Do you see I ask not about gods, but about people.
Originally posted by apathistGood enough, except what if another is not known to be waiting for you?
Good enough, except what if another is not known to be waiting for you?
Btw, I specifically said we're not talking about gods here, but you had no self-control at all. Could it be you suffer from a mental disease. Every religion in every culture at all points in time had their share of fanatics. It's a human thing.
Originally posted by sonshipDo you derive comfort sir from the blanket generalisation that atheists reject God so they can lead sinful lives, rather than being actually unconvinced of His existence?
Every religion in every culture at all points in time had their share of fanatics. It's a human thing.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some comfort can be derived in blanket generalizations. Let's say that all chess players are as eccentric and paranoid as Bobby Fischer. Better stay away fr ...[text shortened]...
Ah, that feels good ... good rationale to entirely dismiss chess as not being anything worthwhile.
Originally posted by divegeesterThe poppy has a long and interesting history with people!Powerful, useful, dangerous. There are other drugs as well that are known to spark and fan the flames of spirituality.
... I would rather have my hope in what turned out to be an imaginary benevolent God, than real narcotics.
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeIn my observation, most atheists reject the idea of God in part because they reject what God is about--as described in Scripture. Taken further, they reject what God commands, including what God forbids. For example, many atheists reject God because God condemns the homosexual lifestyle. "No loving God would forbid someone loving another." Right? This is where we get the idea--again, at least in part--that many atheists reject God because they feel like people should be able to do things that God calls sinful.
Do you derive comfort sir from the blanket generalisation that atheists reject God so they can lead sinful lives, rather than being actually unconvinced of His existence?
Originally posted by Tom WolseyAtheists merely believe in one less god than you do. Your rationalization doesn't work.
In my observation, most atheists reject the idea of God in part because they reject what God is about--as described in Scripture. Taken further, they reject what God commands, including what God forbids. For example, many atheists reject God because God condemns the homosexual lifestyle. "No loving God would forbid someone loving another." Right? This i ...[text shortened]... atheists reject God because they feel like people should be able to do things that God calls sinful.
Originally posted by apathistI wasn't rationalizing. I was demonstrating where the idea comes from that atheist reject God in favor of sin. The agnostic view is reasonable. If you haven't seen sufficient, compelling evidence for God, then it only makes sense you would reserve judgment. The atheist view is fallacious.
Atheists merely believe in one less god than you do. Your rationalization doesn't work.
Originally posted by Tom WolseyNo Sir. Atheists reject God because they don't believe He exists. That's it. Finito. Why would I care what a God i don't believe in condemns or doesn't condemn?
In my observation, most atheists reject the idea of God in part because they reject what God is about--as described in Scripture. Taken further, they reject what God commands, including what God forbids. For example, many atheists reject God because God condemns the homosexual lifestyle. "No loving God would forbid someone loving another." Right? Thi ...[text shortened]... ists reject God because they feel like people should be able to do things that God calls sinful.