You know, taking atheist comments about gods and their believers and then «reversing» them to be
about atheists generally results in nonsense.
Not exact matches
there are exceptions on each side, but
generally,
atheists know more
about the bible than the chrisitans who say they follow it.
Taking
atheist statements
about religion and then substituting atheism for religion
generally results in nonsense; all of your posts do that.
You know that taking
atheist comments
about believers and twisting them to refer to
atheists generally results in nonsense.
Nii, the irony of your ignorance is that
atheists generally have more knowledge
about the teachings of the bible than the majority of its followers.
I don't talk
about it a lot because rather than exploring belief and how I came to believe it, I
generally just get bombarded by both
atheists and Christians (primarily, though other theists have bashed me too) for being irrational and stupid and other less interesting insulting things.
Like many
atheists (who are
generally lovely moral people like my father, who would refuse to enter heaven and instead wait outside with his Miles Davis LPs), I started out snarky and defensive
about religion, but eventually came to think it was probably nice for people of faith to have faith.
I want glory — I pray for it in my own
atheist way — but honestly not sure what the answer is — we appear to be stuck between two stools — on one the one hand there is the well - run club, Corinthian ideals, attractive football,
generally competing or being there or there
abouts, being respected in the wider community etc and on the other hand wanting to join the new age idea of a football club and «f $ % k this for a game of soldiers and lets just deal with this by spending mega-money and sod the consequences brigade».
Members of the British Association for the Advancement of Science had been complaining
about the lack of a good term at recent meetings, Whewell reported in his review; alluding to himself, he noted that «some ingenious gentleman proposed that, by analogy with artist, they might form [the word] scientist, and added that there could be no scruple in making free with this term since we already have such words as economist, and
atheist — but this was not
generally palatable».