An Atheist By Any Other Name . . .

You asked.Seriously, you asked, we answered, now you are apparently in a sulk because you don't like the answers. How pathetically childish.I can only suggest that, if you are going to get upset when you don't like the answers, you cease asking questions. You might want to try using your brain. Well no. You have said yourself that no evidence or argument could possibly sway you. In the face of such dogmatism, what end could there be? All I can suggest is that you stop asking difficult questions if you're going to act offended when you receive answers.Mutate and Survive

roflmfaoyour tactics are like 12 years old on the playgroundPercy: whatever you say is bullshit! neener neener neener.sounds like you have been talking to these creationists too long you are beginning to sound like them.you dodged the question. LOLEdited by Artemis Entreri, : No reason given.

on here there are not many Atheists. these people are ANTI-Theists. there is a huge difference.shit disturber is very accurate when it comes to the "anti" crowd.Edited by Artemis Entreri, : No reason given.

It will come closer to an end when . . . :1. people are not stripped of freedoms because of the theistic beliefs of others.2. government policy is based on reason and evidence.3. education policy is not based on theistic beliefs.IOW, when these supposedly private beliefs stay private.

I am just sick and tired of being called delusional because I believe in God.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think both sides of this discussion has been called one thing or another.How do you view people who believe in a god that you don't believe in? What word would you use to describe them?

I ask you to give me a truthful answer. Do you believe there is any evidence or argument that could possibly sway you to that God exists?And, why do nonbelievers on this board and people like Sagan call believers "delusional"?

If a 1,000 foot Zeus came down from the clouds and threw lightning at my feet I would be rather impressed, especially if this was witnessed by thousands of other people. To restate what was said before, I require the same evidence to believe in your god that you require for all of those thousands of other gods that you don't believe in.

I don't call them delusional. I respect their right to believe what they want to believe.I may tell them I think they are wrong. But I don't call them delusional.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What the hell is the difference? Telling them they are wrong means that you think their beliefs are delusional. Are you just hung up on the word delusional?Ok you are not delusional. You are just totally, utterly, 100% WRONG.Is that better?Have you ever looked up the definition for delusional?

quote:

---

having false or unrealistic beliefs or opinions

---

SourceHow is that different from "wrong"?Why are so many christians ok calling other people wrong, but get insulted if anyone even hints they might be just a little not correct in everything they believe.Christian persecution complex strikes again.Edited by Theodoric, : subtitle

Here is the other definition in your link.Psychiatry . maintaining fixed false beliefs even when confronted with facts, usually as a result of mental illness: He was so delusional and paranoid that he thought everybody was conspiring against him. When I tell someone I believe his or her beliefs are wrong I am telling them that I don't agree with their beliefs.If I tell them there beliefs are delusional I am telling them they are in false and against all of the facts.To me there is a big difference between wrong and delusional.

So when you tell them you think they are wrong you don't believe their beliefs are false or against all facts??So what do you think about these beliefs you think are wrong? That they are correct and comport to facts? Then why would you think they are wrong. What you think has no bearing on reality does it.Edited by Theodoric, : remove extraneous ? mark

And you got dozens of them. You're still not satisfied. In fact, you're starting to get snotty. But wait; I thought you weren't interested in our opinions? Remember? How does that gel with your alleged desire for honesty? Were you lying then or are you lying now? Of course. he could appear before in all his blazing glory. Throw some lightning around, wrestle a unicorn, you know... all his showy stuff. That might not instantly convince me - I would have to bear in mind the strong possibility that I had gone stark staring mad - but it would certainly give me cause to serious rethink Christianity.As I have explained over and over, I am not a dogmatist or a zealot. I am not like you. I can admit to myself that I might be wrong. this is the difference between us and the reason why atheist thinking is so baffling to you. not everyone thinks like you; some of us have humility. Because (a) we think you are delusional and (b) because you asked! You asked for honest answers! Well you got them! I can't tell you that I think you're right when I really think that you're wrong. I owe you that much respect at least.As Theo said above, if you believe in God and I believe gods to be fictional, then it necessarily follows that I think you are deluded. It also follows that you think that I am deluded. You claim that there is clear evidence of God, although you seem unsure as to what it might actually be. Lourdes or something? You don't know... Well I am in denial of that evidence. Clearly, I am deluded.Just for the record, when in Message 88 I said "To my mind, the term "agnostic" implies considerably more doubt than this, otherwise what's the value in these terms? All but the most deluded zealots would be agnostic, leaving us with no useful terminology to describe more reasonable positions." I was talking about a hypothetical zealot, someone who claimed absolute knowledge of God's existence. I was not talking about you. At time I had assumed that I was speaking to a reasonable person. Having read your comments in Message 100 though, I can now see why you chose to take offence at my criticism of deluded zealots.Anyhow, I am at a loss to explain your continued presence in this thread. You don't want to change our minds. You have made it clear that you are enough of a zealot that nothing could even conceivably change your mind. You're not interested in what anyone else thinks. You're not even really telling us much about what you think. What's the point? What are you trying to accomplish? Or are you really just whining because Carl Sagan called you deluded?Mutate and Survive

Could that be because you're delusional?

shadow71, this basically means that every single person who believes in a global Flood myth or does not believe that evolution is the driving force behind biodiversity is, in fact, delusional. Creationism is a set of fixed false beliefs typically held even after exposure to facts which falsify them.