Originally posted by googlefudge Again, in context this part of the post can easily be read, and I think more naturally so, as
an aside to 'all us atheists' rather than specifically talking to you.
it would be like responding to someone's post and talking about it and then having a shout out to all you Lakers fans out there... it's not necessarily intended to include the person you are originally responding/talking to.
You can try to justify his clumsy/careless form of expression all you want. I am simply curious as to why he referred to me as an atheist.
Originally posted by FMF If he responds to me and addresses me like he did, and he uses the word 'you', then he is referring to me, clearly. I am just curious as to why he has chosen to suggest I am an atheist when he has been on this web site for several years and surely knows it isn't so.
I've been on this site for ten years and had no idea whether you were an atheist or not.
Originally posted by FMF You can try to justify his clumsy/careless form of expression all you want. I am simply curious as to why he referred to me as an atheist.
I am not trying to justify it, just saying I don't think, (and didn't read it as), he was referring to you as an
atheist, and don't think it's a justified assumption based on what he said.
He might have been including you, but it is not a given based on what he wrote.
This might be me being biased by me knowing you are not an atheist, but then it didn't pop out to me as
odd for him to be referring to you as an atheist because I didn't think he did.
Originally posted by googlefudge I am not trying to justify it, just saying I don't think, (and didn't read it as), he was referring to you as an
atheist, and don't think it's a justified assumption based on what he said.
He might have been including you, but it is not a given based on what he wrote.
This might be me being biased by me knowing you are not an atheist, but then it ...[text shortened]... to me as
odd for him to be referring to you as an atheist because I didn't think he did.
For the record I don't know what FMF believes. The fact of the matter is that most on this sight seem to be agnostic/atheist. My guess was that FMF was an agnostic or something close to one. If I'm wrong then I retract my statement. I still await FMF to clear up the matter, that is, if he so desires.
Originally posted by googlefudge Yeah, well it helps if you actually read what other people say, rather than simply ignoring
them and repeating your own arguments over and over again.
If certain other people actually said something worth reading then I might just do that.
Originally posted by whodey For the record I don't know what FMF believes. The fact of the matter is that most on this sight seem to be agnostic/atheist. My guess was that FMF was an agnostic or something close to one. If I'm wrong then I retract my statement. I still await FMF to clear up the matter, that is, if he so desires.
Really? my perception is that theists outnumber atheists as regular posters.
Their are plenty enough of both to make assuming someone is one or the other more of a gamble than is sensible.
Also, you are either a theist, or an atheist, there is no middle ground.
Originally posted by FMF Why do you refer to me as an atheist?
I put it down to binary mentality on the part of fundamentalist Christians. From their perspective the only god that could possibly exist is the one that is associated with their own idiosyncratic interpretation of one (out of many) versions of the Bible. As such if you fail to believe in a 6000 year old earth, and fail to praise Bible-"God" in at least one out of every two posts you cannot be a theist (since theist = Christian in their eyes, any other "religion" is just serving the Devil). On these grounds, given that you yourself don't champion the fundie cause, you are seen as an atheist.
Originally posted by googlefudge Really? my perception is that theists outnumber atheists as regular posters.
Their are plenty enough of both to make assuming someone is one or the other more of a gamble than is sensible.
Also, you are either a theist, or an atheist, there is no middle ground.
not quite true, there is the agnostic, who, not wanting to limit his search for truth to
purely unintelligent agencies has an open mind, but seeing no compelling evidence for
the existence of a divine entity, reserves his decision.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie not quite true, there is the agnostic, who, not wanting to limit his search for truth to
purely unintelligent agencies has an open mind, but seeing no compelling evidence for
the existence of a divine entity, reserves his decision.
Nope, read my bio and my last post in the "tone of meaning" thread.
Religious Folks Have a Sunnier Outlook
12 Nov '11 15:38
Back to Top