Comments on: NEO’s debate thread — Bloggers beating on God http://atheists.org/blog/2008/09/09/neo_s_debate_thread_bloggers_beating_on_ A Blog of Atheist Thought Fri, 10 Feb 2012 10:05:55 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: what http://atheists.org/blog/2008/09/09/neo_s_debate_thread_bloggers_beating_on_/comment-page-1#comment-88672 what Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-88672 Well let me start off by saying that I don't know what gawd. So would somebody please give me an operational definition of gawd so that I can determine for myself that which is gawd and that which is not gawd. Well let me start off by saying that I don’t know what gawd. So would somebody please give me an operational definition of gawd so that I can determine for myself that which is gawd and that which is not gawd.

]]> By: what http://atheists.org/blog/2008/09/09/neo_s_debate_thread_bloggers_beating_on_/comment-page-1#comment-88673 what Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-88673 what gawd -> what gawd is what gawd -> what gawd is

]]> By: DVanWechel http://atheists.org/blog/2008/09/09/neo_s_debate_thread_bloggers_beating_on_/comment-page-1#comment-88676 DVanWechel Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-88676 What,<br /> <br /> Don't forget to ask them to also reconcile their operational definition of their God with the definition of "exist".<br /> <br /> That'll make their noodle bake. What,

Don’t forget to ask them to also reconcile their operational definition of their God with the definition of “exist”.

That’ll make their noodle bake.

]]> By: neowolfe http://atheists.org/blog/2008/09/09/neo_s_debate_thread_bloggers_beating_on_/comment-page-1#comment-88682 neowolfe Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-88682 Thanks for opening the thread at my request. My focus was on the Judeo Christian god because that has been the focus of this website, the influence of Christian fundamentalists trying to make inroads into our government and into our lives. I made a challenge to JCC, because he insists on bringing his scriptures into inteligent debates, to come to a seperate thread where we could not bore free thinkers with irrelevent issues and have it out. JCC thinks that his bible is the word of the creator of this universe, handed down to us by imperfect humans, chosen by his god, but delivered in perfect form, so that every word can be trusted, and assumed to be the ultimate authority. My intent, though I do pity him, because at one time in my life I labored under an identical brainwash, is to use his bible to indict his god, stipulating the possibility of his existence for the purpose of smashing such an assumption. And to prove, even if he was real, that he is a hideous, self absorbed mass murderer, that not only does not deserve our worship, but deserves our distain.<br /> <br /> Like I said, this is not free thinker material. It's more like an exorcism.<br /> <br /> NeoWolfe<br /> Thanks for opening the thread at my request. My focus was on the Judeo Christian god because that has been the focus of this website, the influence of Christian fundamentalists trying to make inroads into our government and into our lives. I made a challenge to JCC, because he insists on bringing his scriptures into inteligent debates, to come to a seperate thread where we could not bore free thinkers with irrelevent issues and have it out. JCC thinks that his bible is the word of the creator of this universe, handed down to us by imperfect humans, chosen by his god, but delivered in perfect form, so that every word can be trusted, and assumed to be the ultimate authority. My intent, though I do pity him, because at one time in my life I labored under an identical brainwash, is to use his bible to indict his god, stipulating the possibility of his existence for the purpose of smashing such an assumption. And to prove, even if he was real, that he is a hideous, self absorbed mass murderer, that not only does not deserve our worship, but deserves our distain.

Like I said, this is not free thinker material. It’s more like an exorcism.

NeoWolfe

]]> By: DD Dropout http://atheists.org/blog/2008/09/09/neo_s_debate_thread_bloggers_beating_on_/comment-page-1#comment-88683 DD Dropout Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-88683 JCC has already heard everyone of those arguments at one time or another, I'd hazard. S/he has never had to admit defeat on any single point, because as soon as it starts to go badly, s/he moves the goalposts or moves on to another point.<br /> <br /> By keeping the assumed conclusion clearly in mind, s/he need not consider any contrary evidence you present as being valid, so good luck with that.<br /> <br /> Call me a cynic, if you will. Religious apologists are that one black spot on the sunny meadow of my atheistic life. JCC has already heard everyone of those arguments at one time or another, I’d hazard. S/he has never had to admit defeat on any single point, because as soon as it starts to go badly, s/he moves the goalposts or moves on to another point.

By keeping the assumed conclusion clearly in mind, s/he need not consider any contrary evidence you present as being valid, so good luck with that.

Call me a cynic, if you will. Religious apologists are that one black spot on the sunny meadow of my atheistic life.

]]>