Why did God create so many idiots?

[SpheresOfBalance]

Whoops!

[SpheresOfBalance]

SOB, just in case you don't know: you are now in my ignore list, so don't bother talking to me because I won't see anything you write (including the last post just above this one). Just a friendly warning.

Funny how you can't see them but know to respond, so you're a liar too, figures! Move along boy move along, as I have no time for liars! Be a man and own up or shut up!

Why do so many ninnies show up here? They can dish it out but can't take it. I'm only civil to those that are civil. You insult me and you get it right back at you. You shouldn't cry because my words are sharper than yours, that's the price you pay for being aggressive. Obviously, I don't care if it's active or passive aggressive. Aggressive is in fact aggressive, and it deserves the same in return. I'll not swallow anyones spit!

[ReliStuPhD]

my logic and logical arguments.

The thoughts are crystal clear in my mind and it is beyond me to imagine how someone can not see the blindingly obvious truth of it.

These two lines are not necessarily synonymous. What seems crystal clear to you may not, in fact, be logical, and what is logical may not be crystal clear to you (e.g. I find atheism to be quite illogical insofar as it makes numerous missteps with respect to science, metaphysics and, well, logic, but I have no doubt that it is "crystal clear" to the atheist). Remember, you yourself are levying the criticism that particular religious beliefs are absurd, and yet (some of) the theists against whom you're speaking certainly see their arguments as logical. In effect, we are wondering the exact thing about you. That is, it is beyond us how you cannot see "the blindingly obvious truth of" theism. As a general rule, I've not found thedoc to predicate his positions on shoddy logic, nor has he struck me incapable of following well-constructed arguments based on logic. So perhaps the fault lies with how you've phrased your position?

Based on what you've written, I see very little logic in your arguments (at least in a formal sense). That is to say, you are assuming your own position is logical without actually demonstrating it as such. (nb I'm not saying it's not logical, simply that most of what I see that you've written would not qualify as arguments based on conclusions that follow from a set of premises. Of course, I may simply have missed it, in which case, mea culpa.) Perhaps a different approach is in order? Try warming up some syllogisms and we can evaluate them for validity and soundness? Maybe refer to some standard arguments brought by atheists on this particular point so we can tie into a particular intellectual tradition?

One final thought, it is certainly within your purview to ignore who(m?) you will, but it speaks more to your (in?)ability to engage in sustained arguments than to your interlocutors'. There are certainly some people with rough edges here, but in all but two cases I've seen no reason to ignore them. And, to be fair, you yourself have provided some responses are hardly in the grand tradition of fair and reasoned debate. You dismiss position with which you do not agree, rather than rebut them. You certainly don't strike me as being here to debate in good faith, which surprises me given the tone of your first post in these forums. If your approach is simply that you've made up your mind and are seeking confirmation for your particular set of a prioris, then this might not be the forum for you, and would hardly do justice to the scientific tradition you represent. Perhaps it is you who should be ignored?

[Ned]

Of course, I may simply have missed it, in which case, mea culpa.)

You did.

Mea culpa is accepted.

[ReliStuPhD]

Of course, I may simply have missed it, in which case, mea culpa.)

You did.

Mea culpa is accepted.

Hahaha. Fair enough.

EDIT: I haven't been following this thread closely. Could you point out which post(s) it was so I can give it a read?

[Ned]

Of course, I may simply have missed it, in which case, mea culpa.)

You did.

Mea culpa is accepted.

Hahaha. Fair enough.

EDIT: I haven't been following this thread closely. Could you point out which post(s) it was so I can give it a read?

No.

You and I have had extensive exchanges already in the "Where was god before..." thread.

Doc and I just finished another extensive debate on religion.

I don't want to start another at the moment.

There are other interesting subjects I wish to discuss.

If you wish to put me in your ignore list, please be my guest.

[thedoc]

You are the one that called ALL inhabitants of planet Earth bastards...HYPOCRITE. in addition IDIOT. - please do ignore ive no time for such twods.

SOB, just in case you don't know: you are now in my ignore list, so don't bother talking to me because I won't see anything you write (including the last post just above this one). Just a friendly warning.

Hahahahaha, welcome into the club guys
So, who's still out?

Well, one good thing for Ned, is that there will be a lot less to read on this forum, he won't be spending nearly as much time here. Be thankful for small favors.

[Pluto]

"if there were a god, I would really hate the bastard!"

What would you hate him for?

[Ned]

"if there were a god, I would really hate the bastard!"

What would you hate him for?

The basic 'design' idea of predation. Immeasurable amount of fear, pain and suffering as a result. Being omniscient (as the christians claim) 'he' had no excuse not knowing what would happen.

So, either 'he' didn't care, or 'he' is a sadistic bastard.

But, of course 'he' doesn't exist, being only a figment of the imagination -- an invisible friend.

[David Handeye]

he won't be spending nearly as much time here.

I thought you had the sole right, doc. How will you bear the unfillable loss?

[thedoc]

he won't be spending nearly as much time here.

I thought you had the sole right, doc. How will you bear the unfillable loss?

It'll be tough, but I'll manage, somehow.

[thedoc]

"if there were a god, I would really hate the bastard!"

What would you hate him for?

The basic 'design' idea of predation. Immeasurable amount of fear, pain and suffering as a result. Being omniscient (as the christians claim) 'he' had no excuse not knowing what would happen.

So, either 'he' didn't care, or 'he' is a sadistic bastard.

But, of course 'he' doesn't exist, being only a figment of the imagination -- an invisible friend.

What I don't understand is, if God is an invisible friend, a figment of Christians imagination, why do you feel anything at all. You make accusations toward an entity that you claim doesn't exist, why not just ignore the idea completely, and let others to their delusions? Do others having a delusion bother you so much, why don't you just let it go, what are you so obsessed about?

[thedoc]

Why did God create so many idiots? Well, Christians also need someone to talk about, isn't that what atheists are for.

[thedoc]

Whats why Christians feel so much pity for atheists at an atheists funeral, "All dressed up, and no place to go".

[David Handeye]

Whats why Christians feel so much pity for atheists at an atheists funeral, "All dressed up, and no place to go".

Hahaha this is a good one