You would think jesus would pay his bills. but i guess not.

Can a hypocrite aspire to non hypocrisy and fail, and if so, would that make his agreement with a previous statement false?

The art of deflection you employ is only needed if there is some truth you need to deflect from...it is a form of poison the well fallacy actually...but you knew that already, didn't you?

 

Can a hypocrite aspire to non hypocrisy and fail?

I suggest to first ask that question of yourself.
It's abundantly clear you're able only to recognize what you say is hypocrisy from the side of an argument you don't agree with.

What I do know and as seen in the quote above, is the habit of accusing other people of using the tactics being so eagerly employed by yourself.

 

You mean like this....??

 

Religious argument was not contrived to be questioned. That much is apparent from all of religion's arrogant and artful absurdity in trying to explain the known by the unknown.

 

Can a former failed theist aspire to atheism and fail to be a moderate atheist who does not have an ax to grind against theist? Can an angry at God atheist really detach from God for as long as the pain of failed theism burns his heart?

I suggest to first ask that question of yourself...

It is abundantly clear that your childhood wounding and disappointment from childhood is yet unresolved where the topic of God is brought to bear.

Thus clouding your reason from something dispassionate to a vendetta against theism. You are like a jilted lover who can't move on to a stage of acceptance that your previous beliefs burn your heart constantly.

I wish you peace of mind, but clearly there is none when there is such vitriol toward the beliefs of others.

You have my deepest sympathy, as your obsession with God only binds you with hate to God.

That is neither freedom nor reason....it is a private prison of hate and pain from childhood disappointment.

Logically, my condition has no bearing on the truth of your burning resentments toward theism...

 

Replying as you inevitably do, simply enforces the suggestion that because the religious argument is essentially arrogant and absurd, ad hominem, hypocrisy and deflection it's all you've ever got.

 

His piece reads like confession.

 

Have you ever been to confession? I've only seen it on TV looks kinda weird but interesting as heck. From the outside looking in all religious ceromonies are very intriguing. Makes you wonder about the human mind and what drives us to join groups and do and believe things that from the outside look totally primitive. It is hard to believe in the information age people still follow the ancient myths. Well I guess when you add in Scientology and the Mormans all the myths aren't ancient.

 

It does I agree, and horribly so too.

 

I don't wonder, I have a (personal) interpretation of Voltaire's, "if God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent Him."