Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bob Lao-Tse who wrote (51197)	6/2/1999 11:29:00 AM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

<<..arrogance and intolerance..>> tsss sissle. yeeow Bob. I'm curious as to how you explain the things that go beyond physical science. Here is an easy example. When humans communicate with one another we know that physical sound is carried back and forth between them, their brains are stimulated with electro-chemical responses, synapses do all kinds of things between and among the nerves of the brain. This is largely as a result of the perceived meaning of the message being carried on the physical sound waves. Do agnostics have an explanation for the meaningfulness of messages. Or, is it enough to say that this is a mystery that doesn't have to be explained at the moment?

To: Bob Lao-Tse who wrote (51197)	6/3/1999 10:31:00 PM
From: Johannes Pilch	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

>I neither believe that God exists…< And that, my friend, makes you an atheist – simple as that. >…, nor do I believe that he does not.< Big friggin deal. For you, God simply does not compute. In other words, He is “irrational” (and what the heck is “rational?”) and effectively does not exist. You can call this agnosticism until you rot, but it is nothing but atheism. I do not insist on this because it threatens my faith (for you to do this you would first have to know what faith is, and for you to know it, you would have to have it. And were you to have it, you would be a theist. You therefore have no idea what faith is). I say you are an atheist because ultimately that is what you are. I simply have discarded all that waste matter about your “not knowing.” The mere fact you claim one cannot know if God exists moves you toward even hard atheism because for you even the possibility of knowing God does not exist. Effectively there is no God as far as your person is concerned, and there is no possibility of your ever knowing Him. Call yourself what you will. I will call you an atheist because of the evidence. God could literally exist, and as is the case for all atheists, it is absolutely impossible that you can know Him. Where He is concerned, you are hopelessly cut off. >I simply recognize and accept that I truly do not know. But I've tried to explain this to you before, and obviously it's falling on deaf ears.< Atheism is not merely an offensive stance against the notion of God. It is lack of belief in God. You lack belief in Him and therefore you are without God – “atheist.” Now you may call yourself “agnostic,” and if you really want to be known as agnostic that badly, well dang, I guess I can call you one. But I must be honest with you. As long as you claim “agnosticism,” I will always consider you an atheist. I simply cannot for the world understand why this bothers you. It is like my getting upset because of someone's denying Christ or the existence of Christianity. If some guy thinks Christianity does not exist, I just do not care. Heck, maybe I'm wrong but I think I just read a post of yours where you called Christian creationism a “myth.” Do I really care? Not in the least. You claimed one cannot know God when I sit here knowing Him so well I fear no death. Do I care? I sincerely do not. This is something you believe, and it has nothing at all to do with either me or the truth. Do you hear me calling you intolerant because of this? Nope. But were I to apply the same standard you have applied to me, I could only conclude you to be one dang intolerant, close-minded, dogmatic and arrogant son-of-a-ditch. >I guess I really should be thanking you for your continuing disparagement of my view and therefore of me.< I can hardly see how my rejection of the existence of agnosticism has anything to do with you personally. I think you are an atheist because you are without God, no matter how you attempt to label it. You are not a theist, Bob; and there is no essential fence of ignorance between theism and non-theism (atheism) available upon which you might perch. Sorry, but dems de breaks. >You prove the existence of Christian arrogance and intolerance far more convincingly than I ever could.< And you prove just as convincingly as any “agnostic” how easily one can fabricate a term with no basis in reality merely to satisfy oneself. Perhaps my arrogance and intolerance are not Christian arrogance and intolerance. Perhaps they are simply arrogance and intolerance. Whatever they are, they are certainly no worse than what godless Jesus folk have been doing to Christians since they started reading the Bible “two times plus more” (grin). Believe as you will about me. My conscience is pure here. I have done nothing wrong against you that I can see, and in the end it really doesn't matter anyway as far as you are concerned. I have taken nothing you have said here personally, and am sincerely not hurt or angry with you in the least. I simply reject your Jesus ramblings, your so-called “tolerance” and your so-called “opened mind”. I also reject the existence of your religious philosophy. If this causes you harm and anger, then I really am sorry (I mean this. I wish it did not upset you as it does). Nevertheless I can do none else. Believe as you will about God. In the end you will have to go alone into the Unknown. You have taken your position and now, like we all, await to see how the thing will shake out. If you are comfortable with your position, then it really does not matter what I or anyone else thinks about it. You are responsible for your investment, and if mindlessly holding to a “philosophy” that ultimately does not exist passes for “DD” in your opinion, then its your friggin portfolio. (LOL)