The [unauthorized] non-nit definitions:

I don't believe in a deity = atheist
Not sure, don't care = agnostic
I believe in a god = theist
Anyone who thinks they know for sure = *******

I appreciate what you're saying here, but that's why we're arguing over this...

gnosticism refers to knowledge and theism refers to belief. So it's incorrect to say that agnostic = Not sure, don't care. What it really is, is the admission of ignorance. That might sound like a nit, but I think the distinction is an important one.

You have made literally dozens of unbelievably dumb comments in this thread, but I have to admit that this last one is the dumbest. I do not believe that you are a real person.

Yes, but he's denying it ...

The problem is (and what frustrates me) is that he's getting some of what he says right. It was much more reasonable to believe in god 100 years ago. More specifically, +150 years ago. It's completely untrue that believers are uneducated on the subject.

Secondchance might be a fan and means well, but he doesn't belong on the field.

Ignorance in my book is pretty much "not sure, don't care". Still nitty but I get your point. However, on an Internet forum like this one, I think it's kind of irrelevant (not totally).

Well, then is it useful in this forum? Is it a useful term when discussing religion with other people?

Is it a useful term to use on earth:

?

Actually, everything I've said has been correct. You're just clueless about certain things

Can you please post one post in this thread that you feel was correct? I have looked, but can't find one.

"Variance" explains things better than "god" ever will

and

As time progresses and we learn more and more about the universe (and the internet develops thus helping the spread of information) , people realize more and more how ridiculous the beliefs that people had 2000+ years ago are

Those are both your opinions, you cannot prove neither. I don't even think your opinions are shared by the majority.

I think the majority thinks God explains things better, and i think the majority thinks that these last 2000 years are more proof God exists.

This is pretty much the same thing as you thinking a post like "God is fake".

The "majority" of people don't even know what variance is, and if you truly believe that the number of religious people hasn't gone way way down in even the past 20 years or so, you're ******ed with regards to the subject matter. Moreover, you're treating everyone's opinion as equal, when they are clearly not, as if the "majority" has any meaning whatsoever, when it includes crazies like yourself

By the way, neither of those statements are opinions


Summary: you're crazy, literally, GO TO SLEEP

You are treating your own personal opinions that you have no proof of as correct statements. Now that is crazy.

And you don't know me and you don't own me so it is also crazy for you to tell me i am crazy and to go to sleep.

There is plenty of proof out there that the # of religious people has vastly declined since 100 years ago, and since 20 years ago as well.

There's also proof that variance explains things better than god as well

The problem is, you're crazy, so you actually don't comprehend simple things, even when they are explained to you multiple times. It's futile arguing with you, since you'll never understand anyway. One of the problems with having bad genetics

I know enough about you to know that you are definitely crazy

The claim that "there is plenty of proof out there that the # of religious people has vastly declined since 100 years ago, and since 20 years ago as well" is not even what we were discussing...however i doubt that is even true.


So you should be able to provide this proof. Look forward to hearing it.

The rest of your post is all baseless assumptions to try to make yourself look right.

You're crazy, go to sleep

And why do people feel the need to complain so much about a duplicate thread???

Do people think they are being righteous by pointing out that the thread topic has been created before?

How about just not opening or bothering to read the new one if you are so worried about wasting time.

"Because its clogging the forum". Please.

Why does SecondChance have to be such a douche? Superiority complex anyone?

?? You sure this is what you really mean?

Nobody got a kick out of this but me?

Unless there is someone else not capable of reading.

You mean like yourself? If you read my post, I'm pointing out how ironic that a theist/believer such as yourself is calling someone out for proof (of anything). Furthermore, you point out that the rest of his post is "all baseless assumptions" (another case of irony imo). I'm not surprised that you didn't get it though, that's for sure.

** Nothing personal, but I love it when Christians point to the Bible as any source of proof for anything (like God's existence). Jack and the Beanstalk is a book.. but you don't see people using it as proof to show Jack was a real person. The Bible has been proven to be about as historically accurate as stories of Atlantis or King Arthur and The Round Table or Shakespeare or Robin Hood or Spartacus or any other LEGEND. While there are similarities to reality and history in them, the majority is fairy tale made up ****. Some people think the Bible is different. It is, but not in the way you would like it to be.

This is all of course just my opinion. If I could provide proof, I would. But unfortunately we're both in the same boat.. I just wish I could kick you off of the boat to make room for someone more worthy of the space.

Well you were wrong that 99.99999% of people who believe in god are ******s and if you're going to be that wrong about something then the rest of what you say doesn't carry much weight.

idk, I don't need it. The default assumption is that an invisible entity which does not manifest itself in reality, cannot be tested for, or observed in any way, doesn't exist. Or at least it may as well not exist. You think it does? Okay, let's go from there. But you don't need to pin a label on me, an objective observer who's trying to understand your claim. Again, just think if we had to do that in every other walk of life. This guy thinks there are mermaids. So let's label everyone else on earth who isn't compelled to believe this claim as a-mermaidists. Hey, excuse me... Do you believe in mermaids, or or you an a-mermaidist? Another guy thinks it's possible to bend metal with the mind. Do you believe this, or are you a non-mind bending metal person? That's ridiculous. And the only reason it doesn't seem just as ridiculous when talking about god is because so many people believe in one.

The irony of Gunth's argument against this troll is starting to make SC my favorite new RGT poster.