🚀 go-pugleaf

On Jul 12, 11:53 pm, The Natural Philosopher <a...@b.c> wrote:
> rbwinn wrote:
> > On Jul 11, 5:18�pm, "Smiler" <Smi...@Joe.King.com> wrote:
> >> "The Natural Philosopher" <a...@b.c> wrote in messagenews:1215765710.4836.0@proxy02.news.clara.net...
>
> >>> rbwinn wrote:
> >>>> On Jul 10, 5:20?am, The Natural Philosopher <a...@b.c> wrote:
> >>>>> Alex W. wrote:
> >>>>>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote in message
> >>>>>>news:08134c4b-46c5-454f-9a5f-47756eddfd59@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> >>>>>> Without religion to oppose, atheists would do nothing at all.
> >>>>> Thats not true. They just would walk away from any discussion on the
> >>>>> subject thankfully, and get on with living, and in some case, trying to
> >>>>> understand the extraordinary universe we seem to find ourselves in.
> >>>>> Really the transition fom a Gaia type animism picture of the universe,
> >>>>> to a personalised supernatural creator and law giver, to an impersonal
> >>>>> set of amoral laws..is not as abrupt as the fanboys would like to think.
> >>>>> What is unusual, historically, is the fanatical faith needed to maintain
> >>>>> the concept of a personal and moral God, in the face of Reason.
> >>>>> Mediaevally speaking, no one questioned that the world and events moved
> >>>>> according to some vast and ineffable and mysterious pattern, and the
> >>>>> concept of a supernatural intelligence and a plan, was pretty
> >>>>> reasonable..until science started uncovering the rules, which turned out
> >>>>> to be mindlessly simple, totally impersonal and implacable, and
> >>>>> impervious to personal appeal. And no evidence of intelligence at all.
> >>>>> Note that none of this necessarily negates the proposition that faith,
> >>>>> belief, prayer, and a live lived AS IF there were an afterlife,is not a
> >>>>> Good Thing for people and civilisations.
> >>>>> But none of these even indicate that what is believed in must of
> >>>>> necessity be true.
> >>>>> Archers were able to hit targets long before Newton identified the Force
> >>>>> of Gravity.
> >>>>> Understanding of the presumed science behind phenonmena is no
> >>>>> pre-requisite for learning to deal with them. Any ad-hoc theory that has
> >>>>> pragmatic use will do.
> >>>>> If you look at religion in that light, it makes a lot of sense.
> >>>>> Mired in dogma however, the fanatical Theist simply persists in the
> >>>>> useless, long past its sell-by date.
> >>>>>> ==========
> >>>>>> ..... other than get on with our lives ....- Hide quoted text -
> >>>>> - Show quoted text -
> >>>> If atheists want to believe that they are not intelligent, I see no
> >>>> problem with that.
> >>>> Robert B. Winn
> >>> And how is that in any way relevant to what I posted?
> >> You expect relevance from this moron?
> >> He can't even manage coherence, logic or truth.
>
> >> Smiler,
> >> The godless one
> >> a.a.# 2279- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > Atheists believe that intelligence is nothing more than electrical
> > impulses.
>
> No, they do not. Another lie from the Prince of Lies.
>
>
Your problem, Natural, is the same problem that all atheists have.
You never say anything.
Robert B. Winn