• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About cuchulain

  • Rank
    Stoic Atheist
  • Birthday 03/24/1978

Helpful Information

  • Title, Name/Nickname
  • Gender
  • Marital Status
  • Location
    citizen of the world

Friendly Details

  • Interests
    reading, friends, philosophical studies, science fiction, logic. Trying to understand others, and get them to understand me.
  • Pets / Animals
    a few
  • Grateful For
    Good friends and family
  • Your Motto
    Always try to be your best self
  • Doctrine /Affiliation
    stoic atheist

Other Details

  • Occupation

Recent Profile Visitors

4,620 profile views
  1. Not knowing, or being unable to know, leaves the default of either untrue or don't care...for me. I can't know, given current info, whether exodus really happened as claimed. Therefor i reject the claim. A claim is not true until is true when proven, to me.
  2. Left off the 'genuine interest'...guess you can't rightly claim atheists have no genuine interest and that equally defeats your point so its. best not to admit you were wrong, eh?
  3. Dan said it precisely...but now that we have also agreed to what he said he will go back to refuting it... even though he said it first.
  4. You dont believe in zeus even though you can't disprove he exists... Your logic is clearly flawed.
  5. Look at dan's posting history vs atheists and in conjunction with fellow believers. His comprehension level is magically different, he gives believers the benefit of the doubt, and tries...TRIES noticably not to insult them. Atheists have repeatedly pointed out the insult that his comprehension just cannot grasp, he will disagree with things he himself has said if we say it, and he continually plies the SAME insult... Yep. That's the definition of bias.
  6. Disbelief: The inability to accept something that is true. This is the insult you repeatedly bait with, dan. That we cant handle the truth. Time to grow up, man.
  7. My view does change. I consider it wisdom to change when shown to be wrong. Your quote is in error, for example. It speaks for all atheists as if we all believe that. But your view doesnt seem to allow for change when shown to be in error. Just my observations.
  8. Various unknown writers and some of the books were left out...they like to gloss over that.
  9. The bible isn't cohesive because the main character, existing separate from time, changes halfway through. As does the message. The theme? In the beginning books, god is all about killing if you dont follow the law, lots of stonings. Bears maul 42 kids because one made fun of his prophet, but 41 did nothing and still bit it...and the bible doesnt specify the perp being one of the dead. From that to a theme of forgivness, the opposite of revenge or justice? No...not a consistent character at all.
  10. Can you define argument? It's classically meant as a person's point in a debate, so when you say that the argument is getting silly, I responded by saying it takes two...unless you want to play the unwitting participant. But you complained about the silly argument...then kept going. I think that is silly as well. Or do you need to have the last word in a silly debate?