'Imagine No Religion' signs to go up around Phoenix

[JoltinJoe]

I don't lie. Prick. If you didn't previously cited to this website before, then I apologize.

Yes you do. Apology accepted. Keep it on the high road Joe and we'll be fine.

You know what? Not only are you under-read and easily duped, but you are a jerkoff too.

You ask me to stay on the high road and then you call me a liar? Seriously, just because you can't keep up is no reason to attack me.

I'm done with you, fool.

[D1B]

Yes you do. Apology accepted. Keep it on the high road Joe and we'll be fine.

You know what? Not only are you under-read and easily duped, but you are a jerkoff too.

You ask me to stay on the high road and then you call me a liar? Seriously, just because you can't keep up is no reason to attack me.

I'm done with you, fool.

I'm duped?

[JoltinJoe]

You know what? Not only are you under-read and easily duped, but you are a jerkoff too.

You ask me to stay on the high road and then you call me a liar? Seriously, just because you can't keep up is no reason to attack me.

I'm done with you, fool.

I'm duped?

And under-read too (which has been apparent to me for a long time, but I've polite enough not to say anything, until now).

See Cleets' discussion above about Kierkegaard and his Christian existentialism? You don't really have a clue what he is talking about, do you? In fact, numerous times over the years with you I have justified faith as a "leap" not based in common rationality, and you have soundly dismissed that as foolish, without once showing any recognition that this concept is at the foundation of one of the most respected philosophical traditions anchored by some of the weightiest thinkers ever.

You've rejected entire schools of philosophy without ever reading from some of their representative thinkers.

For years, I have been suggesting to you to take that leap, and that you can do it without sacrificing your respect for rationality. I've done that under my mistaken impression that you were a decent guy. My first encounter with you involved my suggestion that our five senses limited our ability to perceive reality, and that there were surely more than five ways to experience reality. If we had a sixth sense, I said, the existence of God may be as obvious to you as a tree right before you. So I said you can take that leap, recoginizing it was a leap. You dismissed me in some pretty harsh terms -- as if I was the one who tought of that. Maybe I should have taken the hint then. When it gets to a boilong point, you do nothing but insult me. Why do I continue this conversation?

[Cap'n Cat]

Wow. I thought we were going to all play nice. Or was that just on AGS?

[JoltinJoe]

Wow. I thought we were going to all play nice. Or was that just on AGS?

He started it. If he wants to play nice, he shouldn't go around calling people "liars."

This one, though, was the last straw.

[travelinman67]

And under-read too (which has been apparent to me for a long time, but I've polite enough not to say anything, until now).

See Cleets' discussion above about Kierkegaard and his Christian existentialism? You don't really have a clue what he is talking about, do you? In fact, numerous times over the years with you I have justified faith as a "leap" not based in common rationality, and you have soundly dismissed that as foolish, without once showing any recognition that this concept is at the foundation of one of the most respected philosophical traditions anchored by some of the weightiest thinkers ever.

You've rejected entire schools of philosophy without ever reading from some of their representative thinkers.

For years, I have been suggesting to you to take that leap, and that you can do it without sacrificing your respect for rationality. I've done that under my mistaken impression that you were a decent guy. My first encounter with you involved my suggestion that our five senses limited our ability to perceive reality, and that there were surely more than five ways to experience reality. If we had a sixth sense, I said, the existence of God may be as obvious to you as a tree right before you. So I said you can take that leap, recoginizing it was a leap. You dismissed me in some pretty harsh terms -- as if I was the one who tought of that. Maybe I should have taken the hint then. When it gets to a boilong point, you do nothing but insult me. Why do I continue this conversation?

Maybe if you make it a little more obvious to one of his five senses...

'Course, then again, Joe, that would require admitting that man's knowledge is incomplete and finite...

...WOW!

Too much to handle! Where's my pipe...I gotta get stoned so i can deal with this.

[Cap'n Cat]

Where's my pipe...I gotta get stoned so i can deal with this.

You left it in the confessional.............

[JoltinJoe]

And under-read too (which has been apparent to me for a long time, but I've polite enough not to say anything, until now).

See Cleets' discussion above about Kierkegaard and his Christian existentialism? You don't really have a clue what he is talking about, do you? In fact, numerous times over the years with you I have justified faith as a "leap" not based in common rationality, and you have soundly dismissed that as foolish, without once showing any recognition that this concept is at the foundation of one of the most respected philosophical traditions anchored by some of the weightiest thinkers ever.

You've rejected entire schools of philosophy without ever reading from some of their representative thinkers.

For years, I have been suggesting to you to take that leap, and that you can do it without sacrificing your respect for rationality. I've done that under my mistaken impression that you were a decent guy. My first encounter with you involved my suggestion that our five senses limited our ability to perceive reality, and that there were surely more than five ways to experience reality. If we had a sixth sense, I said, the existence of God may be as obvious to you as a tree right before you. So I said you can take that leap, recoginizing it was a leap. You dismissed me in some pretty harsh terms -- as if I was the one who tought of that. Maybe I should have taken the hint then. When it gets to a boilong point, you do nothing but insult me. Why do I continue this conversation?

Maybe if you make it a little more obvious to one of his five senses...

'Course, then again, Joe, that would require admitting that man's knowledge is incomplete and finite...

...WOW!

Too much to handle! Where's my pipe...I gotta get stoned so i can deal with this.

Of course, plenty of great thinkers, using the famous "watch analogy" (if a watch exists, then a watchmaker must exist) have thought that the existence of a creator is evident to our five senses and our logic.

Even Voltaire (whom D1B quoted in his AGS' signature) found some merit to the watch analogy. I quietly relished the irony, which no doubt was going right over his head.

[travelinman67]

Where's my pipe...I gotta get stoned so i can deal with this.

You left it in the confessional.............

Don't belong to a church, quippin' kitty. See discussion of Kierkegaard.

There's been a lot of thought-provoking wisdom posted by Cleets and Joltin Joe on this thread. If you and "1TP" (OneTrickPony) were as open-minded as you ENVISION yourselves, you'd understand the value of these discussions and knock off the "Chicago-esque" belittling/name calling.

[JoltinJoe]

You left it in the confessional.............

Don't belong to a church, quippin' kitty. See discussion of Kierkegaard.

There's been a lot of thought-provoking wisdom posted by Cleets and Joltin Joe on this thread. If you and "1TP" (OneTrickPony) were as open-minded as you ENVISION yourselves, you'd understand the value of these discussions and knock off the "Chicago-esque" belittling/name calling.

Thanks, T-Man. Cleets & I have some solid areas of agreement ... but, on the other hand, his calling Hegel "pompous" was a subtle shot at me, I understood it as it was intended.

Cleets sees Hegel all over my thought process, at least from a philosophy standpoint ... but I actually think I'm closer to Christian Existentialism.

[travelinman67]

Thanks, T-Man. Cleets & I have some solid areas of agreement ... but, on the other hand, his calling Hegel "pompous" was a subtle shot at me, I understood it as it was intended.

Cleets sees Hegel all over my thought process, at least from a philosophy standpoint ... but I actually think I'm closer to Christian Existentialism.

...calling Hegel "pompous" musta been the two beers and a whisky talking...

Cleets is not one to mock thinkers who push out the boundaries of logic.

(Oops...ESPECIALLY after two beers and a whisky... )

Your observation of limitations to man's abilities (hence the constriction which results in man's gravitation towards absolutes)...makes sense to all but the most "pompous" (and ignorant) pseudo-intellectuals. (Sorry...I couldn't figure out how to incorporate "1TP" in that sentence without disrupting the metre. )

[Appaholic]

In fact, I'll add this. I knew a lawyer by the name of Justin Finger through our alumni affairs. He was Fordham Law guy from the mid-50's or so. He was a pretty well known and highly respected lawyer, and he was active in the Anti-Defamation League. And he told me once that he felt that the Wiesenthal Center's claims about the Catholic Church were highly irresponsible.

Objection!....heresay, your honor.....

[Appaholic]

[Appaholic]

[Appaholic]

[D1B]

I'm duped?

And under-read too (which has been apparent to me for a long time, but I've polite enough not to say anything, until now).

See Cleets' discussion above about Kierkegaard and his Christian existentialism? You don't really have a clue what he is talking about, do you? In fact, numerous times over the years with you I have justified faith as a "leap" not based in common rationality, and you have soundly dismissed that as foolish, without once showing any recognition that this concept is at the foundation of one of the most respected philosophical traditions anchored by some of the weightiest thinkers ever.

You've rejected entire schools of philosophy without ever reading from some of their representative thinkers.

For years, I have been suggesting to you to take that leap, and that you can do it without sacrificing your respect for rationality. I've done that under my mistaken impression that you were a decent guy. My first encounter with you involved my suggestion that our five senses limited our ability to perceive reality, and that there were surely more than five ways to experience reality. If we had a sixth sense, I said, the existence of God may be as obvious to you as a tree right before you. So I said you can take that leap, recoginizing it was a leap. You dismissed me in some pretty harsh terms -- as if I was the one who tought of that. Maybe I should have taken the hint then. When it gets to a boilong point, you do nothing but insult me. Why do I continue this conversation?

You and Assman67 are like children who still believe in the tooth fairy. And I'm the one who is easily duped?

What schools of philosophy have I attacked? Not saying I didn't, other than theology, I cannot recall.

*I called you on a point, you apologized. You've done nothing but attack me this whole thread. You are the one who has lost his composure.

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

D1B and Joltin this has been a great read again. You both believe in your respective positions and make points that are germaine to your own arguments. You're both sharp guys with different POV and it is good to sit back and consider both of your positions from my perspective. Both of you have said the other is lying over points I've read in the past on many of these discussions. Joltin Joe is not lying when he posts as he believes what he is posting to be true. D1, likewise, is not lying as he believes what he is posting. The only lie being perpetrated is when you accuse each other of lying. These things always get heated between you guys but I just don't think you should take it personally when a line is crossed with the name calling because it has happened many times in the past and becomes an unnecessary but somewhat accepted part of all of these conversations.

[Cap'n Cat]

You left it in the confessional.............

Don't belong to a church, quippin' kitty. See discussion of Kierkegaard.

There's been a lot of thought-provoking wisdom posted by Cleets and Joltin Joe on this thread. If you and "1TP" (OneTrickPony) were as open-minded as you ENVISION yourselves, you'd understand the value of these discussions and knock off the "Chicago-esque" belittling/name calling.

Hey, motormouth, Cap'n Cat ain't involved in this one. And, the fact that I am just a hair more open-minded than you is what makes me get up in the morning, son!

And, did someone say something about being "duped"? Any mofo who believes in ghosts and made up tales such as this "God" guy and that "Bible" book..............sheeit.

[Cap'n Cat]

You are the one who has lost his composure.

Who knows who's right in this, um, debate, but I'm here to say that composure was lost by Joe (again)and, as such, he will be listed loser by technical default.

Love ya, though.

[JoltinJoe]

I didn't lose my composure. He called me a liar, so he got what he deserves.

I've never, ever called D1B a liar.

And I'm serious that I'm through with him.

[D1B]

Maybe if you make it a little more obvious to one of his five senses...

'Course, then again, Joe, that would require admitting that man's knowledge is incomplete and finite...

...WOW!

Too much to handle! Where's my pipe...I gotta get stoned so i can deal with this.

Of course, plenty of great thinkers, using the famous "watch analogy" (if a watch exists, then a watchmaker must exist) have thought that the existence of a creator is evident to our five senses and our logic.

Even Voltaire (whom D1B quoted in his AGS' signature) found some merit to the watch analogy. I quietly relished the irony, which no doubt was going right over his head.

Hey, another attack by Pope Joe!

[AZGrizFan]

This thread is JUST like Church. It puts me to sleep.

[D1B]

I didn't lose my composure. He called me a liar, so he got what he deserves.

I've never, ever called D1B a liar.

And I'm serious that I'm through with him.

No one ever said you did Joe. You're the liar, I'm the underread dupe.

Just saying you lost your composure, again.

[D1B]

You left it in the confessional.............

Don't belong to a church, quippin' kitty. See discussion of Kierkegaard.

There's been a lot of thought-provoking wisdom posted by Cleets and Joltin Joe on this thread. If you and "1TP" (OneTrickPony) were as open-minded as you ENVISION yourselves, you'd understand the value of these discussions and knock off the "Chicago-esque" belittling/name calling.

Hey dipshit, look at Joe, you dumbass. He's doing almost all the namecalling.

You are the world's biggest asshole, hands down.

[Cap'n Cat]

Now, how could anyone NOT like lovable old Uncle D1B?