You did try for the content of the riddle, which is the topic. But you were wrong.Harbal wrote:If that was an attempt at an explanation of something, it failed miserably.Walker wrote: As the atheist follows the hard-wire to must rub out, must rub out, he fails to answer the riddle, i.e., address the content.
Stuck on rubbin out, ain't ya.
Not another f@cking thread on atheism.
Re: Not another f@cking thread on atheism.
-
sthitapragya
- Posts: 1105
- Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2014 2:55 pm
Re: Not another f@cking thread on atheism.
You need to get with the times. That is not what rubbing out means. Here's a hint. It's your favourite pastime from what I can gauge of you.Walker wrote:Oh you must have ignored or missed that. It has been decided that rubbing out is the PC term for destroy.
This is the prime mover for atheists.
To destroy God.
Rub out.
Re: Not another f@cking thread on atheism.
Atheist, you are the destroyer.sthitapragya wrote:You need to get with the times. That is not what rubbing out means. Here's a hint. It's your favourite pastime from what I can gauge of you.Walker wrote:Oh you must have ignored or missed that. It has been decided that rubbing out is the PC term for destroy.
This is the prime mover for atheists.
To destroy God.
Rub out.
You are the one who rubs out God.
Re: Not another f@cking thread on atheism.
Walker! I haven't the faintest idea of what you are ranting about.Walker wrote: You did try for the content of the riddle, which is the topic. But you were wrong.
-
sthitapragya
- Posts: 1105
- Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2014 2:55 pm
Re: Not another f@cking thread on atheism.
Woah! Hey, God! Let's be clear. I didn't say that. This guy did. OK? And I don't swing that way. So direct your wrath at him, not me.Walker wrote:Atheist, you are the destroyer.sthitapragya wrote:You need to get with the times. That is not what rubbing out means. Here's a hint. It's your favourite pastime from what I can gauge of you.Walker wrote:Oh you must have ignored or missed that. It has been decided that rubbing out is the PC term for destroy.
This is the prime mover for atheists.
To destroy God.
Rub out.
You are the one who rubs out God.
Re: Not another f@cking thread on atheism.
Then back up in the thread to where it says riddle, before the atheist began the little display of distraction.Harbal wrote:Walker! I haven't the faintest idea of what you are ranting about.Walker wrote: You did try for the content of the riddle, which is the topic. But you were wrong.
Read the riddle, think about it, answer it.
If you want to, of course.
Re: Not another f@cking thread on atheism.
(sotto voice) like herding cats for a simple response
-
sthitapragya
- Posts: 1105
- Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2014 2:55 pm
Re: Not another f@cking thread on atheism.
He claims that the crazy stuff he wrote is a riddle and wants us to solve it while he rubs one out. I don't know why he wants that. But it's Walker. So...Harbal wrote:Walker! I haven't the faintest idea of what you are ranting about.Walker wrote: You did try for the content of the riddle, which is the topic. But you were wrong.
Last edited by sthitapragya on Sun Jun 12, 2016 10:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Not another f@cking thread on atheism.
This is where I started to get puzzled.Walker wrote:Are you just another pretty face?Harbal wrote:Alas, your recommendations lack sufficient credibility to enable them to be justifiably acted upon.yiostheoy wrote: You should read his book and then use him for your avatar.
Riddle me this: Who in their right mind would deny that the concept of God is ineffable while experiencing conceptual non-existence’s ineffable-ness?
Re: Not another f@cking thread on atheism.
No rush.
As atheism is predicated on "no," anything yes-oriented is likely inappropriate to this situation.
Think about it, we'll see what happens later.
As atheism is predicated on "no," anything yes-oriented is likely inappropriate to this situation.
Think about it, we'll see what happens later.
Re: Not another f@cking thread on atheism.
The post where you started your rant had nothing to do with atheism.Walker wrote:No rush.
As atheism is predicated on "no," anything yes-oriented is likely inappropriate to this situation.
Think about it, we'll see what happens later.
Re: Not another f@cking thread on atheism.
Amazing.Harbal wrote:The post where you started your rant had nothing to do with atheism.Walker wrote:No rush.
As atheism is predicated on "no," anything yes-oriented is likely inappropriate to this situation.
Think about it, we'll see what happens later.
The atheist says no the boat, no to the helicopter, and for sake of analogy, no to the riddle.
Ever hear the joke?
Key word, no.
All life does is add to the litany of no.
It bleeds into everything.
Take your time. I'm not here.
Last edited by Walker on Sun Jun 12, 2016 11:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Not another f@cking thread on atheism.
I really don't know what this is about, Walker, but I've lost interest.
Re: Not another f@cking thread on atheism.
It's about answering the riddle instead saying no, I won't even try to understand.Harbal wrote:I really don't know what this is about, Walker, but I've lost interest.
You know, like an atheist.
Re: Not another f@cking thread on atheism.
Walker wrote:This is the prime mover for atheists.
To destroy God.
Walker, at least, is determined to prove that true.Right at the beginning I wrote:What atheists say;
There is no evidence of god.
What theists hear:
There is evidence of no god.