Disproofs of God.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I have until I realised what I had imagined wasn't credible, there being no evidence to support it.

When I imagine stuff I know it’s an activity. What you mean is mistake. I can imagine I saw someone in the town centre but when I get a different ID I know I’m wrong because there is proof otherwise.

You see to write something off as imagination I need to be presented with a truer picture which atheism just doesn’t provide, tells you it doesn’t need to and if you are triply unlucky tells you it already has. See, amongst yourselves you are all lovely people but to the rest of us....lovely people who like to dress inshiny shiny leather and mindgame,

If you did believe you must have asked yourself why you ought to stop believing and given yourself the answer I’m sorry I don’t have to prove anything. That doesn’t seem a very good option to me and certainly not for someone after evidence.

I think the trouble is no one really looked at one of my earlier replies or they might have done and imagined they saw something else

[Roses]

When I imagine stuff I know it’s an activity. What you mean is mistake. I can imagine I saw someone in the town centre but when I get a different ID I know I’m wrong because there is proof otherwise.

You see to write something off as imagination I need to be presented with a truer picture which atheism just doesn’t provide, tells you it doesn’t need to and if you are triply unlucky tells you it already has. See, amongst yourselves you are all lovely people but to the rest of us....lovely people who like to dress inshiny shiny leather and mindgame,

If you did believe you must have asked yourself why you ought to stop believing and given yourself the answer I’m sorry I don’t have to prove anything. That doesn’t seem a very good option to me and certainly not for someone after evidence.

I think the trouble is no one really looked at one of my earlier replies or they might have done and imagined they saw something else

So many of your posts are drivel, most of us tune out!

[Walt Zingmatilder]

So many of your posts are drivel, most of us tune out!

Tune out? You mean Goddodging.

[Roses]

Tune out? You mean Goddodging.

I reckon if any god exists it would be Vlad dodging.

[Gordon]

Moderator:

Three posts consisting primarily of blunt personal remarks about another member, and were devoid of wit or lighthearted humour that characterises 'banter', have been removed.

[Owlswing]

Nope, I chose as a child not to join the Sunday school crocodile as it proceeded around the village.

We had a long Garden and a wood at the bottom, a great place to hide.

If you turned to Christianity as an adult then I would have to say that you are an ad-mans dream come true.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

If you turned to Christianity as an adult then I would have to say that you are an ad-mans dream come true.

When did you turn to paganism? When I was hiding from Christianity in the woods I never came across any tree gods.

I suppose had I been a pagan I couldn’t see the wood for the tree gods.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I reckon if any god exists it would be Vlad dodging.

I had to laugh at that one.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Stop that Pigeon!

I had to laugh at that one.

So anyway, a few posts back (Reply 515) I went to the trouble of setting out your most recent suite of lies, misrepresentations, straw men and logical fallacies. Entirely predictably you’ve ignored that, presumably to leave your way clear to repeat the same lies, misrepresentations, straw men and logical fallacies (and more besides) in future posts.

What do you expect this behaviour to achieve exactly, or is the behaviour its own reward for you because it pleases you in some way?   

[Roses]

When did you turn to paganism? When I was hiding from Christianity in the woods I never came across any tree gods.

I suppose had I been a pagan I couldn’t see the wood for the tree gods.

In reality you have never come across gods of any sort.

[SteveH]

Moderator:

Three posts consisting primarily of blunt personal remarks about another member, and were devoid of wit or lighthearted humour that characterises 'banter', have been removed.

Damn! I missed them! 

[bluehillside Retd.]

Wilks,

Damn! I missed them!

You won’t have missed anything. What do you think about avocados? Nice right? You know how sometimes though you cut one open and it’s all hollowed out and black inside? That’s what it’s like reading one of the Cap’n’s posts – you post a knock down rebuttal to one of his many lies, straw men etc and that’s the reply. Never though will he actually try to engage with the rebuttal itself.

Try it for yourself if you don’t believe me. There are countless lies, fallacies etc to go at but pick any one you like – maybe his signature straw man of “I don’t know the origin of the universe, but it definitely wasn’t god”. No-one I know of says that, nor ever has (what atheists actually say is, “I have no sound reasons to believe there to be god(s)” – a fundamentally different position) but he posts the same straw man over and over again no matter how often the mistake/lie is explained to him.

Try asking him why he does it and see what you get – it’ll be a rotten avocado because that’s all he has.             

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Wilks,

You won’t have missed anything. What do you think about avocados? Nice right? You know how sometimes though you cut one open and it’s all hollowed out and black inside? That’s what it’s like reading one of the Cap’n’s posts – you post a knock down rebuttal to one of his many lies, straw men etc and that’s the reply. Never though will he actually try to engage with the rebuttal itself.

Try it for yourself if you don’t believe me. There are countless lies, fallacies etc to go at but pick any one you like – maybe his signature straw man of “I don’t know the origin of the universe, but it definitely wasn’t god”. No-one I know of says that, nor ever has (what atheists actually say is, “I have no sound reasons to believe there to be god(s)” – a fundamentally different position) but he posts the same straw man over and over again no matter how often the mistake/lie is explained to him.

Try asking him why he does it and see what you get – it’ll be a rotten avocado because that’s all he has.             

I hate to say it but I don’t think Wilkins and Gordon we’re talking about anything I posted and in fact I think I may be the member at whom they were aimed.

I think you were thinking Removed posts.....must be Vlad.

[Owlswing]

When did you turn to paganism? When I was hiding from Christianity in the woods I never came across any tree gods.

I suppose had I been a pagan I couldn’t see the wood for the tree gods.

When, precisely, are you going to read what is posted by others.

I have stated on this Forum more times than I care to count that ALL my beliefs are matters of FAITH and not of FACT!

You and other dyed in the wool Christians, insist on stating that your God is a matter of fact despite the very real fact that you cannot show one iota of proof that he is a FACT!

Thus, as you have no faith in the Pagan beliefs, you would not have seen a Tree God even if he were standing six inches in front of you pissing on your shoes to show his contempt for Christians who deny his existence!

)O(



 

[Walt Zingmatilder]

When, precisely, are you going to read what is posted by others.

I have stated on this Forum more times than I care to count that ALL my beliefs are matters of FAITH and not of FACT!

You and other dyed in the wool Christians, insist on stating that your God is a matter of fact despite the very real fact that you cannot show one iota of proof that he is a FACT!

Thus, as you have no faith in the Pagan beliefs, you would not have seen a Tree God even if he were standing six inches in front of you pissing on your shoes to show his contempt for Christians who deny his existence!

)O(

Great......mention the one God, the atheist right belief police are on it like a shot.
Man beats a drum for the Tree Gods .....nary an atheist in sight......Telling.

[Owlswing]

Great......mention the one God, the atheist right belief police are on it like a shot.

Man beats a drum for the Tree Gods .....nary an atheist in sight......Telling.

Possibly because I am not making a claim that the tree God is a fact?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Possibly because I am not making a claim that the tree God is a fact?

No I have come across atheists for whom Christianity itself is a claim and you just have to be Christian.

Besides I am not debating with you. I want to know from them why they make the distinction between the pagan Gods.....ok and God who seems to be not OK.

As you know since there are those proposing eternal matter and prepared to suspend cause and effect.....I e support magic my contention is that their beef is with the divine.

Since pagan gods seem OK then atheism it could be argued is Goddodging.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Possibly because I am not making a claim that the tree God is a fact?

You are not claiming pagan gods to be a fact. Are you then claiming them to be a fiction? I am now saying that I cannot demonstrate God empirically and from that point of view the default position is agnosticism rather than atheism.
I take it that your position is the same regarding your gods.

[Aruntraveller]

Great......mention the one God, the atheist right belief police are on it like a shot.
Man beats a drum for the Tree Gods .....nary an atheist in sight......Telling.

For myself, andI can't speak for anyone else, it is more of a practical point.

Paganism does not have any privileged position in society. It doesn't get automatic access to our government, nor does it have a route to affect policy as a group of people in a direct fashion in our so-called democracy.

If your "one God" was treated in the same way as "Tree Gods" I doubt you'd get many challenges to your various spurious assertions about Christianity, and for that matter atheists.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

For myself, andI can't speak for anyone else, it is more of a practical point.

Paganism does not have any privileged position in society. It doesn't get automatic access to our government, nor does it have a route to affect policy as a group of people in a direct fashion in our so-called democracy.

If your "one God" was treated in the same way as "Tree Gods" I doubt you'd get many challenges to your various spurious assertions about Christianity, and for that matter atheists.

I dont see privilege as a primarily Cof E issue given the structure and effect of privilege in this country.

Paganism I think we tend to categorise as hobby and past time.
Your privilege argument is therefore skewed. Your antitheistic argument still aggressive and what irritates me with paganism is their limp theism in the face of such vehement antitheism.

Own up. Pagans are ok as long as they are assisting antitheism in its righteous elimination of beliefs.

[Nearly Sane]

I dont see privilege as a primarily Cof E issue given the structure and effect of privilege in this country.

Paganism I think we tend to categorise as hobby and past time.
Your privilege argument is therefore skewed. Your antitheistic argument still aggressive and what irritates me with paganism is their limp theism in the face of such vehement antitheism.

Own up. Pagans are ok as long as they are assisting antitheism in its righteous elimination of beliefs.

Mince

[Aruntraveller]

I dont see privilege as a primarily Cof E issue given the structure and effect of privilege in this country.

Paganism I think we tend to categorise as hobby and past time.
Your privilege argument is therefore skewed. Your antitheistic argument still aggressive and what irritates me with paganism is their limp theism in the face of such vehement antitheism.

Own up. Pagans are ok as long as they are assisting antitheism in its righteous elimination of beliefs.

As I said previously, I can't speak for anyone else, but for me Pagans are ok, Christian are ok, Muslims are ok, Hindus are ok and atheists are ok, other options are available.

My privilege statement is not skewed. Of course, privilege is at work in more than the area of just the Church, did I say otherwise? That'll be a no. I am saying that the Church is in a position to use its privilege in a way that Pagans cannot. As both belief systems are just that, I fail to see why one should be considered more valid than the other and therefore get special treatment.

If you could please point out where my argument is antitheistic and also where it is aggressive I would be very grateful.

Also I have never used Pagans to assist me in the "righteous elimination of beliefs".

In fact I don't think I'm really into all that. So I think in your haste to reply you have me mixed up with someone else entirely.

[SteveH]

I dont see privilege as a primarily Cof E issue given the structure and effect of privilege in this country.

Paganism I think we tend to categorise as hobby and past time.
Your privilege argument is therefore skewed. Your antitheistic argument still aggressive and what irritates me with paganism is their limp theism in the face of such vehement antitheism.

Own up. Pagans are ok as long as they are assisting antitheism in its righteous elimination of beliefs.

Some of your posts read like computer-generated random strings of words.

[Owlswing]

Paganism I think we tend to categorise as a hobby and past time.

Which only goes to show that you know less about Paganism than you do about logical argument.

In fact, every post you make containing the word paganism merely confirms your total and complete ignorance of anything pagan except how to spell the word pagan.

Own up. Pagans are ok as long as they are assisting antitheism in its righteous elimination of beliefs.

You really are very good at talking bollocks when trying to belittle anyone and everyone who disagrees with you.

How can Pagans who believe in all the Greek, Roman, Celtic and Norse gods be antitheistic?

There must be hundreds, if not thousands, of posts on this Forum from persons far wiser than I, NS, Gordon, Trent, Bluehillside etc, for instance, over the years explaining exactly why your posts are complete and total bollocks and still you keep talking great piles of shite! I suppose that is why you use a nom de plume that is an object usually shoved up your arse to shift damn great piles of the stuff!

Enough, I'm back to ignoring your drivel, it has gone way, way, beyond both ignorance (on Paganism anyway) and boring (on everything else!).


Farewell, and May the Goddess watch over you and yours always.

Bright Blessings, Love and Light

Owlswing

)O(

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Which only goes to show that you know less about Paganism than you do about logical argument.

In fact, every post you make containing the word paganism merely confirms your total and complete ignorance of anything pagan except how to spell the word pagan.

You really are very good at talking bollocks when trying to belittle anyone and everyone who disagrees with you.

How can Pagans who believe in all the Greek, Roman, Celtic and Norse gods be antitheistic?

There must be hundreds, if not thousands, of posts on this Forum from persons far wiser than I, NS, Gordon, Trent, Bluehillside etc, for instance, over the years explaining exactly why your posts are complete and total bollocks and still you keep talking great piles of shite! I suppose that is why you use a nom de plume that is an object usually shoved up your arse to shift damn great piles of the stuff!

Enough, I'm back to ignoring your drivel, it has gone way, way, beyond both ignorance (on Paganism anyway) and boring (on everything else!).


Farewell, and May the Goddess watch over you and yours always.

Bright Blessings, Love and Light

Owlswing

)O(

I dont believe I saw the answer to my question. If you are not presenting paganism as a fact are you presenting it as a fiction...or just weird shit as gleaned from your posts to me?