🚀 go-pugleaf

On Jul 20, 9:36 am, "pba...@worldonline.nl" <pba...@worldonline.nl>
wrote:
> On 19 jul, 20:56, rbwinn <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jul 19, 8:43 am, DanielSan <daniel...@speakeasy.net> wrote:
>
> > > rbwinn wrote:
> > > > On Jul 19, 8:13 am, "pba...@worldonline.nl" <pba...@worldonline.nl>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >> On 17 jul, 05:29, rbwinn <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote:
>
> > > >>> On Jul 16, 1:31 pm, "pba...@worldonline.nl" <pba...@worldonline.nl>
> > > >>> wrote:
> > > >>>> On 16 jul, 16:23, rbwinn <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote:
> > > >>>>> On Jul 15, 9:20 am, "pba...@worldonline.nl" <pba...@worldonline.nl>
> > > >>>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>>> On 14 jul, 05:42, hhyaps...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > >>>>>>> On Jul 14, 1:12 am, "pba...@worldonline.nl" <pba...@worldonline.nl>
> > > >>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>> On 13 jul, 16:22, rbwinn <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>>> On Jul 13, 12:10 am, The Natural Philosopher <a...@b.c> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 12, 7:29�am, Stan-O <bndsna...@aol.com> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 21:21:44 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...@juno.com>
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You atheists seem to have a lot of trouble with the meanings of
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> words. ?There was another atheist who seemed to believe that adult and
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> adulterer meant the same thing.
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ...which is an old joke that you obviously didn't get.
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> It is a very foolish mistake. �Although the two words look and sound
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> similar, they mean very different things.
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> I'd explain the meaning of "a play on words", but it would be like
> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> pouring water on a rock and expecting it to sink in...
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> With atheists, it is not a play on words.  They really believe that
> > > >>>>>>>>>>> adulterers are the most mature adults.
> > > >>>>>>>>>> Atheists don't believe anything.
> > > >>>>>>>>>> More lies from the Prince of Lies.
> > > >>>>>>>>>> Its amazing how much ore of an atheist I want to be, listening to you.
> > > >>>>>>>>> Well, there you have it.  Atheists don't believe anything, they don't
> > > >>>>>>>>> do anything, and they don't think anything.  It does not sound very
> > > >>>>>>>>> exciting to me, but maybe it does to an atheist.
> > > >>>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn- Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht niet weergeven -
> > > >>>>>>>>> - Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht weergeven -
> > > >>>>>>>> Well. Atheist are not lying their butt off like you do.
> > > >>>>>>>> Most of them believe in natural explanations,
> > > >>>>>>>> most of them have a job,
> > > >>>>>>>> and many of them are intelligent enough not to make as silly a claim
> > > >>>>>>>> as to say someone else doesn't think anything.
> > > >>>>>>>> Your statement would be truth though if it was made about dead people.
> > > >>>>>>>> But if all dead people are atheists, what would that mean for heaven
> > > >>>>>>>> and hell?
> > > >>>>>>>> Think about it!
> > > >>>>>>>> I am sure you have enough brains to understand,
> > > >>>>>>>> I only doubt whether you will use them on this issue or perfer to keep
> > > >>>>>>>> making silly statements
> > > >>>>>>>> Peter van Velzen
> > > >>>>>>>> July 2008
> > > >>>>>>>> Amstelveen
> > > >>>>>>>> The Netherlands
> > > >>>>>>> That's where you are wrong, Peter.
> > > >>>>>>> You think rbwinn got brain? OK, has a brain but without cells...
> > > >>>>>>> But you do not know he has mental problem, which the scientists have
> > > >>>>>>> not come up with any cure yet?- Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht niet weergeven -
> > > >>>>>>> - Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht weergeven -
> > > >>>>>> I always assume that a person with whom I can have some kind of
> > > >>>>>> conversation, is more or less intelligent in the same way I am.
> > > >>>>>> Though rbwinn sometimes posts like a moron, that does not nescesarily
> > > >>>>>> mean he is one. He sort of acknowledged he was actually mocking
> > > >>>>>> atheism, by pursuing the line "an atheist has no believe". And if that
> > > >>>>>> would indeed be true, than logic requires that the atheist does not
> > > >>>>>> think. For what is there to think about unless you believe something?
> > > >>>>>> Anyway I always treat posters as if they can understand what I am
> > > >>>>>> saying,
> > > >>>>>> and I will keep doing do, however hard those posters are trying not
> > > >>>>>> to.
> > > >>>>>> Love,
> > > >>>>>> Peter van Velzen
> > > >>>>>> July 2008
> > > >>>>>> Amstelveen
> > > >>>>>> The Netherlands
> > > >>>>>> PS In order to make this post I had to believe:
> > > >>>>>> I exist
> > > >>>>>> You exist
> > > >>>>>> rbwinn exists
> > > >>>>>> My computer exists
> > > >>>>>> Google exists
> > > >>>>>> (my provider doesn't provide Newsgroup access)
> > > >>>>>> sci.physics,cam.mist,alt.sci.physics or alt.atheism exists
> > > >>>>>> English exists
> > > >>>>>> The english words mean what I think they mean
> > > >>>>>> Others can understand the English I produce.
> > > >>>>>> Someone who doesn't believe all of this (except maybe for Google and
> > > >>>>>> rbwinn)
> > > >>>>>> cannot sensibly reply to your post.- Hide quoted text -
> > > >>>>>> - Show quoted text -
> > > >>>>> Europeans are very existential.
> > > >>>>> Robert B. Winn- Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht niet weergeven -
> > > >>>>> - Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht weergeven -
> > > >>>> Somehow Robert, I do not think my philosophy is existentialism. I
> > > >>>> think it rather borders on pragmatism. Discussions become rather
> > > >>>> meaningsless, unless one accepts there is a ground for it. So in order
> > > >>>> to exchange thought with you, I have to suppose that to be possible.
> > > >>>> My main premise is that you are an intelligent human being, able to
> > > >>>> understand what I am saying and able to make me understand what you
> > > >>>> are thinking.
> > > >>>> Besides discussions becoming worthless if this were not the case, I
> > > >>>> think it's a mater of courtesy also.
> > > >>>> Some peopleon usenet are very quick to dismiss others as inferior. I
> > > >>>> admit some people have superior knowledge and/or superior
> > > >>>> understanding. But communication works best if we try and find a way
> > > >>>> to exchange ideas without making arrogant assumptions.
> > > >>>> Even if someone says something that seems utterly stupid, one should
> > > >>>> try an find out their reason for saying it. Many times we find out
> > > >>>> that there is less stupidity in the person than in his/her words.
> > > >>>> Love,
> > > >>> Well, I have never met an atheist who wanted to communicate.  What is
> > > >>> it that you want to communicate?
> > > >>> Robert B. Winn- Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht niet weergeven -
> > > >>> - Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht weergeven -
> > > >> To my amazement, my previous reply dissappeared.
> > > >> So I will try to repost what I said then
>
> > > >> Generally I want to communicate to people, that I care about them.
> > > >> To you in particular I want to say that eveyone who calls himself an
> > > >> atheist, does at least want to communnicate that he is one.
>
> > > >> If you get the impression that atheists do not want to communicate,
> > > >> that might be because of the negative way you are approaching them. A
> > > >> liittle more open-mindedness might be sufficient for getting more
> > > >> friendly replies.
> > > >> As far as I can see, you are shouting out misconceptions about
> > > >> atheists, that lead many of them to claim you are stupid.
>
> > > >> I do not think you are stupid, but I do think you knowledge about
> > > >> atheism is very poor.
> > > >> That is what I want to say to you
> > > >> (apart from the general fact that I care)
>
> > > >> Peter van Velzen
>
> > > > Well, there may be an atheist somewhere who is actually trying to be a
> > > > good person just as there may be an honest lawyer somewhere, but these
> > > > people in this newsgroup are not examples of that.   These are people
> > > > who regard themselves as being more intelligent than others because
> > > > they have rejected religion.
>
> > > Nope, no one thinks that.  They're just more intelligent than you.
>
> > Well, the correct definition of intelligence is the capacity to obey
> > God.  That would seem to mean that you folks are a little bit lacking.
> > Robert B. Winn- Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht niet weergeven -
>
> > - Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht weergeven -
>
> Sorry Robert, but I have to tell you that this - what you have just
> said here - is exactly the reason why most atheists assume you are
> stupid. If you would try and imagine their point of view, you would
> understand.
>
> Imagine somebody would tell you that being intelligent would mean
> obeying the tooth-fairy. Wouldn't you laugh in their face?
>
> Of course saying that I should do the same thing, and imagine your
> point of view.
> What if an allmighty god would exist? Would it be wise to obey him?
> Of course that would mean knowing Gods wishes in sofar as my conduct
> is concerned.
> And that would pose a problem as such.
> Many faiths, churches and sects claim to know God's wishes, but I
> wouldn't know which one to believe. Would you.
>
> I would imagine the best try is to follow the advice of Jesus.
> He said that loving god with all your resources is equal to loving
> your fellow men as much as you love yourself.
> Now even if he was wrong, and even if there is no God, that would
> still be beneficial to our fellow men wouldn't it?
>
> That's why I would advice you and any Christian who converses with
> atheists, to restrain themselves to loving those atheists like you
> love yourselve, and show it!
>
> They might love you back, and might stop assuming you are stupid.
>
Atheists do not appear to me to have love for anything except money.
I am fairly certain they would not love me even if I tried to conform
to their demands.
Robert B. Winn