Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ironically atheists seem to be the active majority here.

This is true of most internet discussions of religion. The fedora internet atheist crowd never sleeps. It’s basically a bunch of 115 IQ midwits tormenting believers of average or below average intelligence who lack the verbal skills to deal with their (usually quite superficial) arguments against religion. The paradigm case is when some well-meaning but not overly educated believer posts some anodyne and well-intentioned comment along the lines of “thank God 3 people were saved from this horrible accident,” and you get the “Well, acktually, your supposedly omnipotent God could have prevented this accident entirely, the fact he didn’t proves he doesn’t exist. QED.” These atheist posters tend not to be familiar with the extensive intellectual history within Christianity addressing those issues, and certainly the hapless OP isn’t either as they are busy raising kids or whatever. This is no matter, most of these posters are really about trolling religious believers less verbally adept than them. Like the Viet Cong, they fade into the jungle whenever confronted by someone who can hang intellectually, I’ve never seen on respond to tough questions critiquing atheism. They certainly aren’t really interested in the subject matter, or they would be reading Christian apologetics from a 160 IQ guy like C.S. Lewis to encounter challenging arguments.

Who cares if CS Lewis has an IQ of 160? that doesn't mean he's right about everything, or has "challenging arguments" for religion that would sway atheists. It just suggests that you're impressed by him.

No my point was merely that some very intelligent and well-educated people have written sophisticated Christian apologetics that address most of the “can your omnipotent God make a rock so big he can’t lift it? ZOMG pwned” kind of arguments the fedora crowd raises. If they were really interested in the issue, they’d read that kind of thing. But they aren’t, they are really interested in scoring points online against the less verbally adept. But when you raise comments like “most of the bad things that happen in this world are a consequence of misuse of human free will, thus not fairly chargeable to God,” or “the existence of a creator is implied by the existence of the universe if your (reasonable IMO) prior is that something can’t appear from nothing,” or “modern cosmology has ruled out, even in principle, the idea that we will ever understand the origin of the Big Bang; even the question is a divide by zero kind of error—and yet, here we are” they don’t engage in good faith, they say things like “God = Santa Clause”—tired sophomoric arguments.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ironically atheists seem to be the active majority here.

This is true of most internet discussions of religion. The fedora internet atheist crowd never sleeps. It’s basically a bunch of 115 IQ midwits tormenting believers of average or below average intelligence who lack the verbal skills to deal with their (usually quite superficial) arguments against religion. The paradigm case is when some well-meaning but not overly educated believer posts some anodyne and well-intentioned comment along the lines of “thank God 3 people were saved from this horrible accident,” and you get the “Well, acktually, your supposedly omnipotent God could have prevented this accident entirely, the fact he didn’t proves he doesn’t exist. QED.” These atheist posters tend not to be familiar with the extensive intellectual history within Christianity addressing those issues, and certainly the hapless OP isn’t either as they are busy raising kids or whatever. This is no matter, most of these posters are really about trolling religious believers less verbally adept than them. Like the Viet Cong, they fade into the jungle whenever confronted by someone who can hang intellectually, I’ve never seen on respond to tough questions critiquing atheism. They certainly aren’t really interested in the subject matter, or they would be reading Christian apologetics from a 160 IQ guy like C.S. Lewis to encounter challenging arguments.

Who cares if CS Lewis has an IQ of 160? that doesn't mean he's right about everything, or has "challenging arguments" for religion that would sway atheists. It just suggests that you're impressed by him.

No my point was merely that some very intelligent and well-educated people have written sophisticated Christian apologetics that address most of the “can your omnipotent God make a rock so big he can’t lift it? ZOMG pwned” kind of arguments the fedora crowd raises. If they were really interested in the issue, they’d read that kind of thing. But they aren’t, they are really interested in scoring points online against the less verbally adept. But when you raise comments like “most of the bad things that happen in this world are a consequence of misuse of human free will, thus not fairly chargeable to God,” or “the existence of a creator is implied by the existence of the universe if your (reasonable IMO) prior is that something can’t appear from nothing,” or “modern cosmology has ruled out, even in principle, the idea that we will ever understand the origin of the Big Bang; even the question is a divide by zero kind of error—and yet, here we are” they don’t engage in good faith, they say things like “God = Santa Clause”—tired sophomoric arguments.

Still making pseudo-intellectual arguments for God. There are no tough questions critiquing atheism - only dumb questions and pseudo intellectual questions. It doesn't matter how intellectual you are, or like to think you are, and it doesn't matter what fine argument you can make for God - there is no God.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ironically atheists seem to be the active majority here.

This is true of most internet discussions of religion. The fedora internet atheist crowd never sleeps. It’s basically a bunch of 115 IQ midwits tormenting believers of average or below average intelligence who lack the verbal skills to deal with their (usually quite superficial) arguments against religion. The paradigm case is when some well-meaning but not overly educated believer posts some anodyne and well-intentioned comment along the lines of “thank God 3 people were saved from this horrible accident,” and you get the “Well, acktually, your supposedly omnipotent God could have prevented this accident entirely, the fact he didn’t proves he doesn’t exist. QED.” These atheist posters tend not to be familiar with the extensive intellectual history within Christianity addressing those issues, and certainly the hapless OP isn’t either as they are busy raising kids or whatever. This is no matter, most of these posters are really about trolling religious believers less verbally adept than them. Like the Viet Cong, they fade into the jungle whenever confronted by someone who can hang intellectually, I’ve never seen on respond to tough questions critiquing atheism. They certainly aren’t really interested in the subject matter, or they would be reading Christian apologetics from a 160 IQ guy like C.S. Lewis to encounter challenging arguments.

Who cares if CS Lewis has an IQ of 160? that doesn't mean he's right about everything, or has "challenging arguments" for religion that would sway atheists. It just suggests that you're impressed by him.

No my point was merely that some very intelligent and well-educated people have written sophisticated Christian apologetics that address most of the “can your omnipotent God make a rock so big he can’t lift it? ZOMG pwned” kind of arguments the fedora crowd raises. If they were really interested in the issue, they’d read that kind of thing. But they aren’t, they are really interested in scoring points online against the less verbally adept. But when you raise comments like “most of the bad things that happen in this world are a consequence of misuse of human free will, thus not fairly chargeable to God,” or “the existence of a creator is implied by the existence of the universe if your (reasonable IMO) prior is that something can’t appear from nothing,” or “modern cosmology has ruled out, even in principle, the idea that we will ever understand the origin of the Big Bang; even the question is a divide by zero kind of error—and yet, here we are” they don’t engage in good faith, they say things like “God = Santa Clause”—tired sophomoric arguments.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ironically atheists seem to be the active majority here.

This is true of most internet discussions of religion. The fedora internet atheist crowd never sleeps. It’s basically a bunch of 115 IQ midwits tormenting believers of average or below average intelligence who lack the verbal skills to deal with their (usually quite superficial) arguments against religion. The paradigm case is when some well-meaning but not overly educated believer posts some anodyne and well-intentioned comment along the lines of “thank God 3 people were saved from this horrible accident,” and you get the “Well, acktually, your supposedly omnipotent God could have prevented this accident entirely, the fact he didn’t proves he doesn’t exist. QED.” These atheist posters tend not to be familiar with the extensive intellectual history within Christianity addressing those issues, and certainly the hapless OP isn’t either as they are busy raising kids or whatever. This is no matter, most of these posters are really about trolling religious believers less verbally adept than them. Like the Viet Cong, they fade into the jungle whenever confronted by someone who can hang intellectually, I’ve never seen on respond to tough questions critiquing atheism. They certainly aren’t really interested in the subject matter, or they would be reading Christian apologetics from a 160 IQ guy like C.S. Lewis to encounter challenging arguments.

Who cares if CS Lewis has an IQ of 160? that doesn't mean he's right about everything, or has "challenging arguments" for religion that would sway atheists. It just suggests that you're impressed by him.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ironically atheists seem to be the active majority here.

This is true of most internet discussions of religion. The fedora internet atheist crowd never sleeps. It’s basically a bunch of 115 IQ midwits tormenting believers of average or below average intelligence who lack the verbal skills to deal with their (usually quite superficial) arguments against religion. The paradigm case is when some well-meaning but not overly educated believer posts some anodyne and well-intentioned comment along the lines of “thank God 3 people were saved from this horrible accident,” and you get the “Well, acktually, your supposedly omnipotent God could have prevented this accident entirely, the fact he didn’t proves he doesn’t exist. QED.” These atheist posters tend not to be familiar with the extensive intellectual history within Christianity addressing those issues, and certainly the hapless OP isn’t either as they are busy raising kids or whatever. This is no matter, most of these posters are really about trolling religious believers less verbally adept than them. Like the Viet Cong, they fade into the jungle whenever confronted by someone who can hang intellectually, I’ve never seen on respond to tough questions critiquing atheism. They certainly aren’t really interested in the subject matter, or they would be reading Christian apologetics from a 160 IQ guy like C.S. Lewis to encounter challenging arguments.

More ad hominem bullsh*t. All you ever have. Must be hard to be you.

I’d challenge you to respond on the points, but I know this:

YOU CAN’T.

So you keep resorting to insults and the rest of us will stick with facts, logic, reason and evidence.

And we should all be happy with that.

*I’m* not the triggered one. lol

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ironically atheists seem to be the active majority here.

This is true of most internet discussions of religion. The fedora internet atheist crowd never sleeps. It’s basically a bunch of 115 IQ midwits tormenting believers of average or below average intelligence who lack the verbal skills to deal with their (usually quite superficial) arguments against religion. The paradigm case is when some well-meaning but not overly educated believer posts some anodyne and well-intentioned comment along the lines of “thank God 3 people were saved from this horrible accident,” and you get the “Well, acktually, your supposedly omnipotent God could have prevented this accident entirely, the fact he didn’t proves he doesn’t exist. QED.” These atheist posters tend not to be familiar with the extensive intellectual history within Christianity addressing those issues, and certainly the hapless OP isn’t either as they are busy raising kids or whatever. This is no matter, most of these posters are really about trolling religious believers less verbally adept than them. Like the Viet Cong, they fade into the jungle whenever confronted by someone who can hang intellectually, I’ve never seen on respond to tough questions critiquing atheism. They certainly aren’t really interested in the subject matter, or they would be reading Christian apologetics from a 160 IQ guy like C.S. Lewis to encounter challenging arguments.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ironically atheists seem to be the active majority here.

This is true of most internet discussions of religion. The fedora internet atheist crowd never sleeps. It’s basically a bunch of 115 IQ midwits tormenting believers of average or below average intelligence who lack the verbal skills to deal with their (usually quite superficial) arguments against religion. The paradigm case is when some well-meaning but not overly educated believer posts some anodyne and well-intentioned comment along the lines of “thank God 3 people were saved from this horrible accident,” and you get the “Well, acktually, your supposedly omnipotent God could have prevented this accident entirely, the fact he didn’t proves he doesn’t exist. QED.” These atheist posters tend not to be familiar with the extensive intellectual history within Christianity addressing those issues, and certainly the hapless OP isn’t either as they are busy raising kids or whatever. This is no matter, most of these posters are really about trolling religious believers less verbally adept than them. Like the Viet Cong, they fade into the jungle whenever confronted by someone who can hang intellectually, I’ve never seen on respond to tough questions critiquing atheism. They certainly aren’t really interested in the subject matter, or they would be reading Christian apologetics from a 160 IQ guy like C.S. Lewis to encounter challenging arguments.

More ad hominem bullsh*t. All you ever have. Must be hard to be you.

I’d challenge you to respond on the points, but I know this:

YOU CAN’T.

So you keep resorting to insults and the rest of us will stick with facts, logic, reason and evidence.

And we should all be happy with that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ironically atheists seem to be the active majority here.

This is true of most internet discussions of religion. The fedora internet atheist crowd never sleeps. It’s basically a bunch of 115 IQ midwits tormenting believers of average or below average intelligence who lack the verbal skills to deal with their (usually quite superficial) arguments against religion. The paradigm case is when some well-meaning but not overly educated believer posts some anodyne and well-intentioned comment along the lines of “thank God 3 people were saved from this horrible accident,” and you get the “Well, acktually, your supposedly omnipotent God could have prevented this accident entirely, the fact he didn’t proves he doesn’t exist. QED.” These atheist posters tend not to be familiar with the extensive intellectual history within Christianity addressing those issues, and certainly the hapless OP isn’t either as they are busy raising kids or whatever. This is no matter, most of these posters are really about trolling religious believers less verbally adept than them. Like the Viet Cong, they fade into the jungle whenever confronted by someone who can hang intellectually, I’ve never seen on respond to tough questions critiquing atheism. They certainly aren’t really interested in the subject matter, or they would be reading Christian apologetics from a 160 IQ guy like C.S. Lewis to encounter challenging arguments.

Anonymous wrote:Ironically atheists seem to be the active majority here.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m an atheist and I don’t hang out in the religion forum but sometimes I see a post in recent activity and chime in. See ya 👋

Thanks,
That is what should be.
But unfortunately there are some full time dwellers.

+1

-2

I win. By 1.

1+1-2=0 not 1
Good job you will get it next time.

No, I was only competing against you, not the PP, you don't get credit for his original point. Even with your formula it comes out to 0 vs 1, in which zero is one less against the position, hence beating you by one.

The main point was that "+1" and such is the most trite, meaningless, useless, pointless thread bumping type of post. But you totally missed that, I guess.

Don't you hate it when you try and insulting someone and the opposite happens?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m an atheist and I don’t hang out in the religion forum but sometimes I see a post in recent activity and chime in. See ya 👋

Thanks,
That is what should be.
But unfortunately there are some full time dwellers.

+1

-2

I win. By 1.

1+1-2=0 not 1
Good job you will get it next time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m an atheist and I don’t hang out in the religion forum but sometimes I see a post in recent activity and chime in. See ya 👋

Thanks,
That is what should be.
But unfortunately there are some full time dwellers.

+1

-2

I win. By 1.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m an atheist and I don’t hang out in the religion forum but sometimes I see a post in recent activity and chime in. See ya 👋

Thanks,
That is what should be.
But unfortunately there are some full time dwellers.

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m an atheist and I don’t hang out in the religion forum but sometimes I see a post in recent activity and chime in. See ya 👋

Thanks,
That is what should be.
But unfortunately there are some full time dwellers.

Anonymous wrote:They are sad, searching for something in their lives. Deep down they know what they're missing. I pray they lose the blinders and turn to the one who loves them unconditionally before their hearts are forever hardened.