Hey Stupid, It's Deism, Not Atheism

bwinwright said:
:D Hey Stupid, It’s Deism, not Atheism ...Hey stupid, it’s Deism, not Atheism!!
Click to expand...
Great way to package your message on a board mostly peopled by atheists, skeptics, and agnostic, as well as a few Deists.

Not.

I also note the "post and run" technique.

Back under the bridge, eh?

DR
 
hgc said:
Can anyone provide any evidence of Flew's noteriety as an atheist from before his conversion? Did he write books? Did he give speeches? If he only became famous after his conversion, then he can only rightly be called the world's most infamous ex-atheist, which may be a well deserved title. Though I never heard of Flew except from spamming cranks on this board, I also can't think of any other ex-atheist.
Click to expand...
He was better known in the 50s, 60s and 70s. Lots of books, plenty of debates and lectures, a few radio and TV appearances. Here's something of his you may recognise:
Imagine Hamish McDonald, a Scotsman, sitting down with his Glasgow Morning Herald and seeing an article about how the "Brighton Sex Maniac Strikes Again." Hamish is shocked and declares that "No Scotsman would do such a thing." The next day he sits down to read his Glasgow Morning Herald again and this time finds an article about an Aberdeen man whose brutal actions make the Brighton sex maniac seem almost gentlemanly. This fact shows that Hamish was wrong in his opinion but is he going to admit this? Not likely. This time he says, "No true Scotsman would do such a thing."
—Antony Flew , Thinking About Thinking (1975)
​
 
I was also an atheist before ever hearing of any of them. I probably didn't even know the word atheist before I became one. It was at an early age and it was just a natural conclusion, despite a mildly theistic religious upbringing (Conservative Judaism).

So Dawkins doesn't get the blame for my case.

I was lucky that the actual meaning and content of religion wasn't discussed in my home. It was just an abstract, and I was left alone to form my own conclusions.
 
Last edited:
Gotta love a thread title with "Hey Stupid" in the title. My bad for opening it. ;)

I'm not a deist, but an atheist. I see no reason whatsoever to suppose there's some intelligent design behind the creation or maintenance of this universe, partly because it's so much better explained by natural processes, and partly because it doesn't answer who or what designed the designer.

I was raised without any religious beliefs, and as much as I appreciate love and beauty and natural majesty, I've never been into the spiritual or mystical. There's no added value.
 
:tr:There's nothing wrong with being an atheist, a deist, or whatever mode of thought speaks most honestly to your own questions about life, the universe and everything (even if that answer is 42...42ism?)...

So...

I can't help you. I don't have any troll food. I already dolled the last bit out and don't plan on buying any more.
 
bwinwright said:
:D Hey Stupid, It’s Deism, not Atheism

People who label themselves atheists are simply stupid, insecure, and lost little sheep following the teachings of greedy con artists and disinformation agents like Richard Dawkins, currently the world’s most notorious atheist. Dawkins, a professor at Oxford, reportedly an expert in the sexual practices of farm animals and a devout follower of the racist Charles Darwin, has made a fortune selling his flawed and destructive atheistic philosophy to millions of pseudo intellectuals who falsely believe denying any god is somehow cool.

Richard Dawkins has replaced Anthony Flew as the world’s leading atheist, because Flew learned the scientific truth and now believes in deism. While both men have taught at Oxford, Anthony Flew is a real philosopher in pursuit of the truth while Dawkins is not. Anthony Flew has always practiced the philosophy of Plato’s Socrates who taught, “We must follow the argument wherever it goes.”

<snip>
Click to expand...

So do you have anything besides the above highlighted ad hominem attacks? Any, you know, actual evidence for deism? If you don't, you just make yourself look immature - so insecure in your belief that the only way you can justify it is to insult all those who disagree.

In addition, Charles Darwin’s Theory of Evolution has been proven to be false.
Click to expand...

No, it hasn't. This is a flat-out lie.

Simply check out David Wilcock and Tim Harwood. They will lead you to the truth about the many flaws in Darwin’s “theory”.
Click to expand...

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

I am just embarrassed for the many stupid people, living in the 21st century, who continue to label themselves atheists in light of such overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Hey stupid, it’s Deism, not Atheism!!
Click to expand...

Hey, bwinwright. It's critical thinking, not schoolyard insults!
 
Jesus taught that Christians are supposed to lead by example, and let people be naturally attracted, as they are to anything they discover on their own that seems good or correct.

Browbeating people drives them away from Christ. If this is how Christians react, then that makes me hate Jesus, which will send me to Hell. Since they sent me to Hell by acting not in accordance with Jesus, they are going to Hell, too.


It's all so logical.
 
When i see religious loonies rattling the bars of the cages their brains are trapped in, i walk past with a sigh of relief.
 
justcharlie09 said:
:tr:There's nothing wrong with being an atheist, a deist, or whatever mode of thought speaks most honestly to your own questions about life, the universe and everything (even if that answer is 42...42ism?)...

So...

I can't help you. I don't have any troll food. I already dolled the last bit out and don't plan on buying any more.
Click to expand...

I see you haven't studied the finer points of doctrine of THGTTG*. 42 was the wrong answer given out by a computer(so much for your science) but the Guide's answer is made of a more finely woven cloth and you have to understand the subtlety's of It's doctrine and the intricate weave of the threads of the arguments before you have any hope of refuting anything about It.

*Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy or just Guide
 
tsig said:
I see you haven't studied the finer points of doctrine of THGTTG*. 42 was the wrong answer given out by a computer(so much for your science) but the Guide's answer is made of a more finely woven cloth and you have to understand the subtlety's of It's doctrine and the intricate weave of the threads of the arguments before you have any hope of refuting anything about It.

*Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy or just Guide
Click to expand...

Ah, well then, I am forced to doff my hat out of respect for knowledge that surpasses my own in such weighty matters. ;)

Besides, I never made it all the way to the end of the Infocom game (anyone remember that?)...
 
justcharlie09 said:
Ah, well then, I am forced to doff my hat out of respect for knowledge that surpasses my own in such weighty matters. ;)

Besides, I never made it all the way to the end of the Infocom game (anyone remember that?)...
Click to expand...

I had it on the Commodore 64
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom