🚀 go-pugleaf

Smiler wrote:
> "rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote in message 
> news:e9047a34-efb7-4c97-bee2-b6347b86f5f4@m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> On Jun 29, 12:26?am, BuddyThunder <nos...@paradise.net.nz> wrote:
>> Smiler wrote:
>>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote in message
>>> news:065060a2-b02e-4232-84f0-e35b7411dcd2@h1g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
>>> On Jun 27, 9:05 am, mizlee <miz...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> On Jun 27, 8:49 am, rbwinn <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Jun 27, 12:31 am, The Natural Philosopher <a...@b.c> wrote:
>>>>>> rbwinn wrote:
>>>>>>> On Jun 26, 1:09?pm, The Natural Philosopher <a...@b.c> wrote:
>>>>>>>> W.A. Sawford wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 26 Jun 2008, rbwinn wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 26, 5:05? am, RobertL <robertml...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 26, 4:48? am, rbwinn <rbwi...@juno.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 25, 7:27?pm, "Smiler" <Smi...@Joe.King.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Well, if no one proved it, then it was not proven. ? All you have
>>>>>>>>>> done
>>>>>>>>>> is to say it was proven without showing any proof or anyone who
>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>> suppsed to have done it. ?Atheists have said they have proven all
>>>>>>>>>> manner of things. ?Almost always it turns out to be something
>>>>>>>>>> some
>>>>>>>>>> individual atheist put together that sounds good to other
>>>>>>>>>> atheists.
>>>>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn
>>>>>>>>> I wasn't going to get involved in all this (unless it's Friday,
>>>>>>>>> which it
>>>>>>>>> isn't) but I can't stand it any longer (sigh).
>>>>>>>>> 'Atheists have said they have proven all manner of things.'
>>>>>>>>> Well, what exactly have they claimed to have proved, and which
>>>>>>>>> atheists
>>>>>>>>> have claimed it? ?Atheists don't actually need to 'prove'
>>>>>>>>> anything,
>>>>>>>>> because there is not a shred of evidence that god exists in the
>>>>>>>>> first
>>>>>>>>> place. The onus is not on atheists to prove the non-existence of
>>>>>>>>> god any
>>>>>>>>> more than the non-existence of the ravening bug-blatter beast of
>>>>>>>>> Traal.
>>>>>>>> Completely wrong. The concept of God is not a scientific hypotheis,
>>>>>>>> nor
>>>>>>>> a fact.
>>>>>>>> So it can't be proven or disproven.
>>>>>>>> Its simply a shorthand for 'all the wide and wonderful stuff we
>>>>>>>> cant get
>>>>>>>> a handle on; and feel scared by' more or less.
>>>>>>>> Atheism isn't so much denying His existence, nor yet keeping and
>>>>>>>> open
>>>>>>>> mind on the subject (agnostic) its merely sidestepping the whole
>>>>>>>> mess as
>>>>>>>> something one can simply do without.
>>>>>>>>> Show me some real evidence and I'll think about belief. Although
>>>>>>>>> actual
>>>>>>>>> evidence would of course remove the need for belief in the first
>>>>>>>>> place...
>>>>>>>> That's the whole point. Belief is a state of mind that has utility.
>>>>>>>> Its
>>>>>>>> a little bit of Wise-ardry. Headology.
>>>>>>>> Wise-ards understand that believing in something is an action, not
>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>> statement about its existence, or lack thereof.
>>>>>>>>> Wendy- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>>> Well, what atheists do not like to discuss is Jesus Christ.
>>>>>> Yu seem to know more about what Atheists do and don't do than Jesus.
>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn- Hide quoted text -
>>>>> I know a lot about atheists, but not as much as Jesus Christ knows.
>>>>> He was the one who created atheists.
>>>>> Robert B. Winn- Hide quoted text -
>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>> So, if Jesus Christ created atheists, and Jesus Christ was perfect, he
>>>> could not create imperfection. Hence, atheists are perfect. Sounds
>>>> OK to me.- Hide quoted text -
>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>> Well, Jesus Christ would be the one to tell your idea. ?He is the one
>>> who is going to judge the earth.
>>> -------------------------------------
>>> You keep saying this and talk about 'end times', but have never told us 
>>> what
>>> date it will happen.
>>> You claim to have a 'direct line' to this JC character, so tell us what 
>>> he
>>> says.
>> He *is* kinda tardy to the party. I bet he brings some kick-ass wine 
>> though!- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
> 
> The day and hour no man knoweth, no, not the angels in heaven.
> -------------------------------------------
> So it could be tomorrow, in a million years time, or never.
> Accuracy was never the bible's strongpoint, was it?
> 
Ofcourse not. Religion scres ero in te future prediction game, as far as 
actual verifiable results go.

That's why it ain't science.

Its a psychologiacal methodology - an approach to life. Not a bad one, 
as long as you understand that is what it is, and dont confuse it with 
science, which is an intellectual and rational approach to life for 
specific narrow purposes, mostly to do with controlling and predicting 
the way things happen.

Science aswers the How of things, but Religion and to an extent moral 
philsophy, attempts to answer the Why of things.


Scince can tell you how to achieve all sorts of results, but never why 
you would want those results in the first place: Science makes no moral 
statements.

Science is about what can be done: religion is maybe about what should 
be done.


In other words it is the intentional side of human nature packaged in a 
nice branded package, and given out for sampling.

Our pagan ancestors understood that, and allowed it to happen that way, 
but didn't fall into the trap of thinking it was more than that.

That was the split between religion and science that started with 
Christianity, and continued with Islam: the emotional side was split 
from the rational side and the final severance occurred really with the 
ideas of Newton and the like, when it became obvious that the Church 
felt that it has lost grip on rational philosophy, and retreated into an 
absurd position of claiming all knowledge, whereas in fact it only 
retained the emotional toolbox.

And the most radical of the Faithful, the intellectual Luddites who 
could not stomach the new ideas, felt that society was now sinful and 
repugnant, and they all set sail for America, along with fugitives from 
the Law, slaves, and get rich quick merchants, which is of course the 
final spiritual mix that comprises the mess of pottage that is what 
little there is of 'American Culture'.  A hugely greedy, criminal and 
exploitative culture, that also claims to be the bastion of Spiritual 
Faith, which is sold with about as much finesse as cornflakes, and where 
the rule of God is backed up by all the weaponry that Science can 
muster. Happiness is a warm gun, and God on your side, and f*** the 
nig***s. Who probably don't even HAVE souls...so that's all right then.

Somewhere in a diary circa 1973, I wrote

"God bless Amerika: because it sure needs it, and no one else will!"








> Smiler,
> The godless one
> a.a.# 2279
> 
> 
>