Sorry, Kosta, but I think Betty Boop has hit on something here. You sure quack a lot more like an atheist than the "simply seeking the truth" agnostic you seem to want everyone to think you are. Actions sure speak louder than words and your actions BY your words say you are not a fair nor honest skeptic. I have yet to read anything that sounds like sincerity. If your beliefs were put on a scale the atheist side would by far outweigh the theistic side. How long are you going to pretend to ride the fence?
LOL!
sure speak louder than words and your actions BY your words say you are not a fair nor honest skeptic. I have yet to read anything that sounds like sincerity. If your beliefs were put on a scale the atheist side would by far outweigh the theistic side. How long are you going to pretend to ride the fence?
There is a good reason for that. Atheists simply do not make up fantastic stories, or appeal to "verticals" or "spiritual knowledge" and other intangibles. They certainly do not insist on talking snakes and donkeys, nor do they claim that a true atheist can walk on water or cure disease by chasing "evil spirits" out of someone, or claiming that dead people just get up and walk away after being dead for several days, or live inside a fish's stomach for three days, or that the Sun stood still for a whole day, etc.
If they did, I can assure you that the preponderance of my posts would be directed at asking them just how do they know such things. Very few atheists I have encountered actually claim 100% certainty that God doesn't exist. If atheists who come to debate issues on the FR, so simply epxlain their opinions, were of the Richard Dawkins type, I would certainly say a lot more to them. In fact I have written a scathing letter to Richard Dawkins who is for some reason blaming and crusading against God! What exactly did God do to him?
Now, betty boop got up this morning and decided she is getting tired of me "jerking her around" because I told her in all sincerity (which you deny me!) that proving that God exists would be the greatest discovery ever. How dare I say such a thing, and subject the God of her choice to "tests"?
You ask me why is there a preponderance of my posts that suggest to the exceedingly suspicious if not paranoid hat I am a dishonest cyber-atheist? When someone, like betty boop says that my world is not reality but hers (filled with transcendetals, along with talking donkeys and snakes) is, do you honestly expect me to sit back and simply take such stupidity without saying something?
You and bb must be very spoiled or have acquired well trained "yes men" in your lives who never oppose your hyperbolic conclusions. As for my views on organized religions, theology, the Bible, etc. I think I read much more diversified sources than most people do and form my opinions on the basis of much broader input, or as FOX News would say try to be "fair and balanced".
Maybe I just see things differently that others. You know, when I find out that Matthew 28:19 originally didn't appear to have the trinitarian formula in it, I begin to wonder when was it put in. I don't consider your scriptures to be holy or written by God, but by men. That doesn't make me an atheist.
At any rate, you should address the issues at hand and not read my mind. If you disagree with my observaitopns, that's fine. If I make a factual error, such as I did with the Edict of Milan, and I am corrected, I stand corrected. There is no need to psychoanalyze and get under anyone's skin. Stick to the issues, and stay away from character-assasinations.
How can kosta be a "'simply seeking the truth' agnostic" when he denies Truth in the first place?
Oh, I'm sorry: He'll say he doesn't deny Truth; he just can't prove that it exists — to his own satisfaction.
So it seems to me that he is talking out of both sides of his mouth, trying to have it "both ways." Which is "no way" that actually works, in logic or reason.
For all practical purposes, the very word "agnostic" means "to know nothing."
And yet kosta presents himself as singularly "all-knowing" — in his purported ignorance (i.e., lack of ability to prove anything).
I'm sorry; but such a method makes no sense to me whatsoever.
Thank you so much for your astute observations, dear boatbums!