Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
You last visited December 10, 2016, 3:19 pm
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Atheist converts after mock prayer to win $1M lottery is answered

Topic closed. 1632 replies. Last post 5 years ago by Todd.

Page 18 of 109
3.311
PrintE-mailLink
visiondude's avatar - eye3logo
light on my feet
United States
Member #356
May 20, 2002
2744 Posts
Offline
Posted: June 11, 2011, 1:06 am - IP Logged

  and the person you made the agreement with over the phone  can view my journal themselves.

 

What, are you kidding me? So because a third party sees your delusional notes for the past 3 years makes it true? Anyone can write things they believe are true, but doesn't make it so....DUH...You gotta do much better than that Vision. I really thought you were better than that.

This is a joke right?

in your world,  when you clutch desperation and squeeze the life blood out of it?   no

but to a man actually LOOKING to validate truth,  you bet your permannet marker it does.

it will establish my claims as being trustworthy thru documented evidence.

a man truly interested in truth will connect those dots when the dots are connectable.

i demonstrated once again my willingness to back mine up,  and your offering your newest "reason" why it's bogus.

i keep coming,  and you keep running

and to think,  you had the magnitude of audacity to claim you are '"agnostic".

agnostics just by definition are seekers,  they are not excuse makers every chance they get

it's the perfect scenario for you to 'prove' they are nothing more than "delusional notes"

if it's the perfect scenario for you to demonstrate i am a nut,  then why am i running TO do it,  and you are running away  from it? 

something doesn't sound right in your choice of directional GPS

the journals will tell the truth,  though "delusional" in the opinion of some at face value,  me proving it HAS occured everyday for 3 years makes a person HAVE to choose "coincidence" or "God"

once again,  i step up,  and you head for the exit

that is a treasure trove for you,  some unbiased arbitrary person you can pick to prove your case.

your the guy that screams the loudest at LP,  while being the guy that has the smallest committment

you should pen a song about that,  and put it on youtube.

at least i will head to the marquee and not the exit

            "i am .........."meant to"       

P.S.,  that RJoH  is a stand up guy.  thanks,  vision

         until further notice,  it's  france everyday


    United States
    Member #75358
    June 1, 2009
    5345 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: June 11, 2011, 1:07 am - IP Logged

    Just like you, the writers of the Bible wrote down the events that supposedly happened. And also like you, neither the Bible or any other religion has been able to prove their case without a shadow of a doubt.

    Give it up Vision. Your pathetic attempt to prove your case by written documents fails miserably. You are among the multitudes who claim this and that. The Bible is rife with fantastic claims that haven't been proved, along with other books written by other delusional folks who really mean well, but are confused, misguided, and desperate for an answer.

      visiondude's avatar - eye3logo
      light on my feet
      United States
      Member #356
      May 20, 2002
      2744 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: June 11, 2011, 1:09 am - IP Logged

      you are familiar with the justice system,  and all that prosecutors and defense attorneys go thru to get TO the truth of what really happened.

       

      yes I'm familiar with this. The prosecutor has to find EVIDENCE to show his claims, not hearsay.

      fine,  i can appreciate that.

      would you like to lie to the board that i have produced "none" ?

                  "i am .........."meant to"       

      P.S.,  that RJoH  is a stand up guy.  thanks,  vision

               until further notice,  it's  france everyday


        United States
        Member #75358
        June 1, 2009
        5345 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: June 11, 2011, 1:10 am - IP Logged

        fine,  i can appreciate that.

        would you like to lie to the board that i have produced "none" ?

        I already told you that providing testimonials is not proof. Anyone can write testimonials.


          United States
          Member #75358
          June 1, 2009
          5345 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: June 11, 2011, 1:27 am - IP Logged

          Vision, If you provide this info to a court of law as proof, they would close the case based on hearsay. No proof to back it up except that you told some people about this event. I can assure you that would not be sufficient evidence.

          If someone who is accused in a murder case, and can supply an alibi worthy of the court and/or the Jury's scrutiny, then and only then will the defendant be excused of the crime, along with more evidence on top of that. 

          In your case, telling a bunch of friends who share your beliefs is not acceptable.

            visiondude's avatar - eye3logo
            light on my feet
            United States
            Member #356
            May 20, 2002
            2744 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: June 11, 2011, 1:44 am - IP Logged

            you watch too much area51 "documentaries",  where you should mete out your time a little more judiciously,  because now you have descended down the ladder into lying purposefully.

            even you know within your lack of judge judy viewership that any "court" would weigh evidence on a collective scale.

            i walk into a "courtroom",   i present my documents i have written with dates and times on them, i offer the PM to todd that validates my claim at least on that date forward,  and i produce several eyewitnesses who will testify under oath i continually tell them it's still happening, while each one systematically recalls "when" i first told them

            a court scenario would only rule in my favor,  because i have evidence, and i can collect it and produce it to prove over time to prove what i said was true

            collective over time evidence.   that's how justice systems arrive at the truth.

            you remind me of those low life defense attorney's who will march into court to get a murderer off on "insufficient" evidence,  knowing full well they actually murdered people.

            lying about the evidence,  doesn't make the evidence "disappear"

            i made my case tonight,  and you did your usual schtick,  just don't drink yourself beyond recognition because you refuse the truth

            you keep to this path,  you will drive yourself crazy (over time)

            truth score tally tonight;

            truth 2,419 points

            joker 4 points

                        "i am .........."meant to"       

            P.S.,  that RJoH  is a stand up guy.  thanks,  vision

                     until further notice,  it's  france everyday

              visiondude's avatar - eye3logo
              light on my feet
              United States
              Member #356
              May 20, 2002
              2744 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: June 11, 2011, 1:45 am - IP Logged

              man up and earn your right to bloviate in here...

              go ask todd,  at least that will show a semblance of "manhood"

                          "i am .........."meant to"       

              P.S.,  that RJoH  is a stand up guy.  thanks,  vision

                       until further notice,  it's  france everyday

                visiondude's avatar - eye3logo
                light on my feet
                United States
                Member #356
                May 20, 2002
                2744 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: June 11, 2011, 2:48 am - IP Logged

                so i sign off of LP to spend time with the wifey,  we talk for a bit,  then i pick up a magazine i got in the mail yesterday to look thru it.

                it's a magazine that was not ordered by me,  it is for a different family member. 

                it has nothing to do with travel,  or anything remotely related to anything aimed toward being "france friendly" to make it easier to stumble onto to something,  but lo and behold,  there was a pic of the eiffel tower, with a small blurb about france.

                i could pick up a bike magazine,  and you can just about bet all your pork bellies there will always be something about "france" or "tour de france" in that.

                this magazine,  you wouldn't expect it

                look at the time date stamp between this post,  and the last one one prior to this post.

                it didn't take that long before i came across something totally beyond my control.

                i cannot "manufacture" a pic of the eiffel tower,  it occured without my "help"

                that's what i mean,  this has been happening to me beyond my control to "make it happen" everyday for nearly 3 years.

                go ahead and write it off to coincidence,  trouble is joker,  even if you did walk around with me and observe my life for 24 hr stretches,  and these things did occur,  you would still lie to yourself

                            "i am .........."meant to"       

                P.S.,  that RJoH  is a stand up guy.  thanks,  vision

                         until further notice,  it's  france everyday

                  Perfecttiming2's avatar - redcross

                  United States
                  Member #65961
                  October 11, 2008
                  162 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: June 11, 2011, 3:38 am - IP Logged

                  @Joker:  When you say, "I'm not an Atheist, I'm an Agnostic," you might as well call yourself atheist.  God won't see a distinction when the day comes.

                  "Joker, when you say: "I'm not an Atheist, I'm Agnositc, you might as well call yourself atheist..."

                  Todd,

                  Your comment speaks vloumes....there are atheist who would actually agree with you and they want the word "Atheist" to be defined as:

                  Anyone who doesn't believe that God exist....and not just people who believe that God doesn't esist....

                  Sounds like a mind twister but there is a very teeny tiny difference between

                  Not believing that God exist (agnostic)

                  And

                  Believing that God doesn't exist (atheist)

                  Not believing that God exist means that you don't believe in God but you also don't claim to know for sure that He doesn't exist....therefore you don't know either way.

                  Believing that God doesn't exist means that you absolutely believe God does not exist.

                  Atheist (some of them anyway) are saying what you are saying Todd, in that there should only be one category.

                  Now regarding the word "agnostic".....I asked Joker what kind of agnostic he was claiming to be because there are two kinds:

                  The "Can't" Know.....and...The "Don't" Know

                  Can't Know Agnosticism says: "I don't know if God exist and no one can possible know it either!"

                  **The problem with this is that a person would have to have absolute, total and complete knowledge to make that claim and the only ONE who has that kind of power is....GOD!

                  Don't Know Agnosticism says: "I personally don't know if God exist".

                  **The problem with this is anyone can find out who God is but they would have to humble themselves and open their heart and be willing to allow God to reveal Himself to them......Some of the accusations on this thread about God and the words spoken against Him are so crazy.... no wonder its difficult for those struggling to believe.

                  What's even more interesting about the word "agnostic" is

                  It is of Greek origin; however, its Latin counterpart is the word.....(wait for it)...........

                  IGNORAMUS

                  So basically, anyone who boast about being an "agnostic" is calling themselves an ignorant, know-nothing, uneducated person.....OUCH!....(I can see why some atheist want to downplay the usage of the word altogether).

                  "God won't see the distinction when the day comes"

                  Right you are again....and here is the scripture to back it up:

                  Psalm 10:4 (for the agnostic)

                  The willful, through pride of his countenance will not seek after God.  God is not in his thoughts.

                  Psalm 14:1 (for the atheist)

                  The fool says in his heart there is no God

                  (Sounds like they would be in the same category to me too.....)


                    United States
                    Member #93947
                    July 10, 2010
                    2180 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: June 11, 2011, 11:08 am - IP Logged

                    Perfecttiming2 says,

                    "So basically, anyone who boast about being an "agnostic" is calling themselves an ignorant, know-nothing, uneducated person.....OUCH!....(I can see why some atheist want to downplay the usage of the word altogether).

                    'God won't see the distinction when the day comes'

                    Right you are again....and here is the scripture to back it up:

                    Psalm 10:4 (for the agnostic)

                    The willful, through pride of his countenance will not seek after God.  God is not in his thoughts.

                    Psalm 14:1 (for the atheist)

                    The fool says in his heart there is no God

                    (Sounds like they would be in the same category to me too.....)"

                    ... which leaves me no choice but to quote myself:

                    http://www.lotterypost.com/news/232109/2092017

                    "I think all Joker17 is trying to say is that the multiplicity of human perceptions of what and/or who God is supports the position of the deist.  I am unable to defend atheism because, logically, it seems to me that our self-awareness requires that something beyond human-ness must exist.  But neither can I defend any of the anthropomorphic perceptions of God, such as the one espoused by Christians.  The Zen Buddhists have an interesting way of looking at things.

                    By the way, proponents of the Bible should be aware of their competition, with whom they share many beliefs..."

                    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hN-EJBCPonw&NR=1

                    --Jimmy4164

                      rdgrnr's avatar - walt
                      Way back up in them dadgum hills, son!
                      United States
                      Member #73904
                      April 28, 2009
                      14903 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: June 11, 2011, 1:29 pm - IP Logged

                      Perfecttiming2 says,

                      "So basically, anyone who boast about being an "agnostic" is calling themselves an ignorant, know-nothing, uneducated person.....OUCH!....(I can see why some atheist want to downplay the usage of the word altogether).

                      'God won't see the distinction when the day comes'

                      Right you are again....and here is the scripture to back it up:

                      Psalm 10:4 (for the agnostic)

                      The willful, through pride of his countenance will not seek after God.  God is not in his thoughts.

                      Psalm 14:1 (for the atheist)

                      The fool says in his heart there is no God

                      (Sounds like they would be in the same category to me too.....)"

                      ... which leaves me no choice but to quote myself:

                      http://www.lotterypost.com/news/232109/2092017

                      "I think all Joker17 is trying to say is that the multiplicity of human perceptions of what and/or who God is supports the position of the deist.  I am unable to defend atheism because, logically, it seems to me that our self-awareness requires that something beyond human-ness must exist.  But neither can I defend any of the anthropomorphic perceptions of God, such as the one espoused by Christians.  The Zen Buddhists have an interesting way of looking at things.

                      By the way, proponents of the Bible should be aware of their competition, with whom they share many beliefs..."

                      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hN-EJBCPonw&NR=1

                      --Jimmy4164

                      "... which leaves me no choice but to quote myself:..."

                      Yeah, as if there's anything you'd rather do. LOL

                       

                      I'd suggest a new name for you but Blowhard is already taken.


                                                                   
                                           
                                                               

                       

                       

                       

                       

                                                                                                                         

                      "The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing"

                                                                                                                  --Edmund Burke

                       

                       

                        Avatar
                        NY
                        United States
                        Member #23835
                        October 16, 2005
                        3475 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: June 11, 2011, 2:23 pm - IP Logged

                        "Joker, when you say: "I'm not an Atheist, I'm Agnositc, you might as well call yourself atheist..."

                        Todd,

                        Your comment speaks vloumes....there are atheist who would actually agree with you and they want the word "Atheist" to be defined as:

                        Anyone who doesn't believe that God exist....and not just people who believe that God doesn't esist....

                        Sounds like a mind twister but there is a very teeny tiny difference between

                        Not believing that God exist (agnostic)

                        And

                        Believing that God doesn't exist (atheist)

                        Not believing that God exist means that you don't believe in God but you also don't claim to know for sure that He doesn't exist....therefore you don't know either way.

                        Believing that God doesn't exist means that you absolutely believe God does not exist.

                        Atheist (some of them anyway) are saying what you are saying Todd, in that there should only be one category.

                        Now regarding the word "agnostic".....I asked Joker what kind of agnostic he was claiming to be because there are two kinds:

                        The "Can't" Know.....and...The "Don't" Know

                        Can't Know Agnosticism says: "I don't know if God exist and no one can possible know it either!"

                        **The problem with this is that a person would have to have absolute, total and complete knowledge to make that claim and the only ONE who has that kind of power is....GOD!

                        Don't Know Agnosticism says: "I personally don't know if God exist".

                        **The problem with this is anyone can find out who God is but they would have to humble themselves and open their heart and be willing to allow God to reveal Himself to them......Some of the accusations on this thread about God and the words spoken against Him are so crazy.... no wonder its difficult for those struggling to believe.

                        What's even more interesting about the word "agnostic" is

                        It is of Greek origin; however, its Latin counterpart is the word.....(wait for it)...........

                        IGNORAMUS

                        So basically, anyone who boast about being an "agnostic" is calling themselves an ignorant, know-nothing, uneducated person.....OUCH!....(I can see why some atheist want to downplay the usage of the word altogether).

                        "God won't see the distinction when the day comes"

                        Right you are again....and here is the scripture to back it up:

                        Psalm 10:4 (for the agnostic)

                        The willful, through pride of his countenance will not seek after God.  God is not in his thoughts.

                        Psalm 14:1 (for the atheist)

                        The fool says in his heart there is no God

                        (Sounds like they would be in the same category to me too.....)

                        "What's even more interesting about the word "agnostic" is

                        It is of Greek origin; however, its Latin counterpart is the word.....(wait for it)...........

                        IGNORAMUS

                        So basically, anyone who boast about being an "agnostic" is calling themselves an ignorant, know-nothing, uneducated person.....OUCH!"

                         

                        Ouch, indeed. It's clear that you're ignorant of, and have apparently chosen to remain an uneducated person in regards to, the origins and meaning of both words.

                        "Ignoramus"  as a modern English word comes from the 1615 play of that title and is much different than the original Latin word. The original Latin  ignoramus comes from the root "ignore" and simply means "we do not know".

                        Though derived from Greek origins, "agnostic" is not a Greek word and has no Latin counterpart. It is a modern English word coined by Thomas Huxley in the late 1800's from "agnostos".  Agnostos, like many Greek words uses the "a"  to negate the meaning of the root, "gnostos".  Gnostos means known or knowable, and agnostos simply means unknown or unknowable. Regardless of being derived from the original Greek meaning, the new word has it's own meaning. Huxley's original usage was to describe his philosphy that observable evidence was required for legitimate knowledge and that spiritual or mystical "knowledge" could not really be known.  In modern usage it simply means one who believes that  absolute knowlwdge about any number of subjects, including the existence of god(s), is unknowable.

                          rdgrnr's avatar - walt
                          Way back up in them dadgum hills, son!
                          United States
                          Member #73904
                          April 28, 2009
                          14903 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: June 11, 2011, 3:15 pm - IP Logged

                          "What's even more interesting about the word "agnostic" is

                          It is of Greek origin; however, its Latin counterpart is the word.....(wait for it)...........

                          IGNORAMUS

                          So basically, anyone who boast about being an "agnostic" is calling themselves an ignorant, know-nothing, uneducated person.....OUCH!"

                           

                          Ouch, indeed. It's clear that you're ignorant of, and have apparently chosen to remain an uneducated person in regards to, the origins and meaning of both words.

                          "Ignoramus"  as a modern English word comes from the 1615 play of that title and is much different than the original Latin word. The original Latin  ignoramus comes from the root "ignore" and simply means "we do not know".

                          Though derived from Greek origins, "agnostic" is not a Greek word and has no Latin counterpart. It is a modern English word coined by Thomas Huxley in the late 1800's from "agnostos".  Agnostos, like many Greek words uses the "a"  to negate the meaning of the root, "gnostos".  Gnostos means known or knowable, and agnostos simply means unknown or unknowable. Regardless of being derived from the original Greek meaning, the new word has it's own meaning. Huxley's original usage was to describe his philosphy that observable evidence was required for legitimate knowledge and that spiritual or mystical "knowledge" could not really be known.  In modern usage it simply means one who believes that  absolute knowlwdge about any number of subjects, including the existence of god(s), is unknowable.

                          Thank you for Huxley's opinion.

                          But because Huxley deigns something unknowable to him doesn't mean it's unknowable to anybody else.

                          Maybe Huxley was just what a lot of people said he was.

                          An arrogant dope.


                                                                       
                                               
                                                                   

                           

                           

                           

                           

                                                                                                                             

                          "The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing"

                                                                                                                      --Edmund Burke

                           

                           

                            visiondude's avatar - eye3logo
                            light on my feet
                            United States
                            Member #356
                            May 20, 2002
                            2744 Posts
                            Offline
                            Posted: June 11, 2011, 3:33 pm - IP Logged

                            Thank you for Huxley's opinion.

                            But because Huxley deigns something unknowable to him doesn't mean it's unknowable to anybody else.

                            Maybe Huxley was just what a lot of people said he was.

                            An arrogant dope.

                            you know, with modern technology and all,  it's just a crying shame that the steve job's of the world cannot design texting that works in eternity,  and then huxley could give us his unbiased opinion.

                            shoot,  depending on location restrictions,  huxley could tap into WIFI and go to "ineedafireextinguisherquick.com"

                            but that's just a facetious assumption on my part,  because people that notoriously mock God most of their breathing days,  are also notorious for death bed "just in case" conversions.

                            they act all brave until right before the dirt nap

                            huxley's "opinion" is far more important now,  now that he has had time to ponder it

                            "once a man dies,  the collective bargaining ends"

                            1st visiondude 2:7

                                        "i am .........."meant to"       

                            P.S.,  that RJoH  is a stand up guy.  thanks,  vision

                                     until further notice,  it's  france everyday

                              visiondude's avatar - eye3logo
                              light on my feet
                              United States
                              Member #356
                              May 20, 2002
                              2744 Posts
                              Offline
                              Posted: June 11, 2011, 4:06 pm - IP Logged

                              hey joker,  so i get up and cruise the internet to look at sites i always do everyday,  one of which is ajc.com

                              i read the atlanta journal constipation everyday,  because i use to live there.

                              wouldn't you know it,  a reference to "france" in the bottom left hand portion of the home page under the obits

                              coinciDUNCE?  it would be,  if i just had this conversation with you yesterday,  and it happened today.

                              that's what's called in personal science experiment circles as a "coinkadink"

                              but not when it's happened unbroken everyday for nearly 3 years

                              since you can't think straight for yourself at times,  i offered you the ability to take this out for a test drive yourself

                              your the one that keeps screaming about "proof",  and proofs that center around science and math,  etc.

                              this is totally up your alley,  the "odds game".

                              go ahead,  you won't strain a muscle.   no animals will be harmed in your personal exercise thereof.

                              you pick a like subject matter,  and see how many congruent days it comes your way by stumbling across it during the course of your day.

                              shoot,  it won't cost you money,  so you can't wuss out based on that excuse.

                              you won't even do this,  despite years of personal protestation "it's not true",  when you actualy ARE presented with an ability to test drive it and weigh it against the odds to observe the origin thereof.

                               YOU RUN THE OTHER WAY

                               which brings me back to my ongoing reason why i put you thru the washing machine truth cleaners,  is that you are SNOT the least bit interested in what is true,  you are ONLY interested in making it "not true".

                              that's not a "seeker"

                              that's a "destroyer"

                               tell you what,  i am a fair guy,  find a subject matter that parallels "france" in capability standards,  and if you go a full week of observance everyday straight in a row,  i will send you a 6 pack of heineken.

                              there is no boobie prize for you if it only lasts 3 days.

                              keep in mind,  mine has lasted nearly 3 years

                                          "i am .........."meant to"       

                              P.S.,  that RJoH  is a stand up guy.  thanks,  vision

                                       until further notice,  it's  france everyday

                                 
                                Page 18 of 109