Why do atheists spend so much time thinking and debating about God?

1. 70

   aguasilverposted 9 years ago

   Why do atheists spend so much time thinking and debating about God?
   
   I mean why spend time over something they say they do not believe exists?
   
   I don't believe in global warming, maybe a wrote a hub sometime explaining why, but then I moved on.
   
   Before I came to faith, I never gave God a thought, why would I, why would any non believer?
   
   So what's the fascination with something you don't believe exists?

   report
2. 68

   JMcFarlandposted 9 years ago

   I can only answer for myself,  but talking about it is one way of exposing myself to new and varying ideas and possibly new evidence.   If I simply focus on atheism,  I'm not keeping the open mind that I claim to have.
   
   Additionally,  living in a country that is predominantly Christian with elected officials trying to push their interpretation of Christian morality on the entire population,  it's important to take a stand and educate yourself.
   
   Lastly,  I spent over 25 years as a Christian.   My parents were missionaries and I went with them overseas.   I went on youth mission trips as well.   I went to Bible college.   A large chunk of my past and my education had been in theology and the Bible,  and discussing it interests me.   As a history student eventually working towards a doctorate degree,  it is impossible to study Western history without studying religion.   My interests and passions for the subject didn't disappear when my belief changed,  nor should it.   Why ignore my education and my interests just because I no longer believe it to be factual or true?

   report
   1. 60

      Robert the Bruceposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Excellent answer.

      report
   2. 68

      JMcFarlandposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Not to mention,  the conversations amuse me.   They're fun,  and it's a fun and interesting hobby to have.   As soon as it stops being fun,  I imagine I'll stop.   In reverse,  though,  why do so many believers target and start conversations with us

      report
   3. 70

      aguasilverposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      "......predominantly Christian with elected officials trying to push their interpretation of Christian morality on the entire population."
      
      If that's true then the officials are obeying the wishes of the majority, which is called democracy.

      report
   4. 68

      JMcFarlandposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      A Republic Democracy exists to protect the minority from the will of the majority,  and these elected leaders are breaking the establishment clause to pursue their agenda.   No,  it does not have to be tolerated or supported.

      report
   5. 72

      manatita44posted 9 years agoin reply to this

      You are a good man Robert. I feel so much better to feel your heart and not your doctrine. Higher blessings Bro.

      report
   6. 70

      aguasilverposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      "A Republic(an) Democracy exists to protect the minority from the will of the majority."
      
      Good luck with that, it's like a sheep asking the wolves what's for dinner!
      
      " No, it does not have to be tolerated or supported."
      
      Agreed... got a plan?

      report
   7. 66

      Asa2141posted 9 years agoin reply to this

      It still does not answer why you would be offended at a nativity scene or a Cross. If you are certain God does not exist, you would not be offended any of that.

      report
   8. 68

      JMcFarlandposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      I'm not offended by them.   I want them to abide by the law and not rely on Christian privilege

      report
   9. 60

      Robert the Bruceposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Asa, your simplistic reasoning shows ignorance about law and civics. An atheist may rightfully be offended if a nativity scene were set up by Congress on the Capitol lawn. A Christian should be offended as well if he understands separation of C &

      report
   10. 66

       Asa2141posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Robert the Bruce - typical of someone who does not have an answer. Vilify your opponent. Atheists have taken Christian to court over more than nativities on government land but also on their private land. Slick answer though.

       report
   11. 60

       Robert the Bruceposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Think what you will, asa. I don't agree with everything those atheist groups do, but the US government was set up to be run in a secular way. No religion was to dominate the country through the laws. Some things are changing for the good.

       report
   12. 66

       Asa2141posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       The entire Constitution, Declaration of Independence, and nearly every document of early America is based solely on Christian and the morals laid out in the Bible. If you don't read history, don't make comments about it.

       report
   13. 60

       Robert the Bruceposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Asa, you just don't know what you are talking about. Please put down your ABeka history book. The founding documents are based on reasoning, independence of thought, etc...just because God is mentioned does not mean its based on the Bible.

       report
   14. 0

       JThomp42posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       I totally agree with you Asa.

       report
   15. 60

       Robert the Bruceposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       The morals contained in the founding documents are not exclusively Christian. Can you name any that are only found in the Bible? If not, your premise is discredited.

       report
   16. 0

       JThomp42posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Robert... can you name any other religion that clearly comes in to play as far as our forefathers?

       report
   17. 68

       JMcFarlandposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Deism.
       http://infidels.org/library/modern/farr … /myth.html

       report
   18. 0

       JThomp42posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Im pretty sure I asked Robert this question. Deism is such a far fetched idea. Do you have proof?

       report
   19. 68

       JMcFarlandposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Proof that several of the founding fathers were deists?  Yep.   Try looking it up.   It's not exactly obscure or hidden.   It's even in their own writings if you bother to read them.

       report
   20. 0

       JThomp42posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Deism is still a part of Christianity. Their beliefs just differ as many denominations in Christianity differ.

       report
   21. 68

       JMcFarlandposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       No,  it isn't.   It rejects miracles and the supernatural, as well as the trinity and infallability of Scripture.  http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism

       report
   22. 0

       JThomp42posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       That is not exactly denying God.

       report
   23. 68

       JMcFarlandposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       No,  but Christianity does not have a monopoly on accepting god.  Many religions do.   That doesn't make them all part of Christianity,  which is what you originally said.

       report
   24. 0

       JThomp42posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Like it or not, this country was founded upon Christian beliefs and ideology. You as a history major should know this Julie. Unless of course academia is leaning towards political correctness.

       report
   25. 60

       Robert the Bruceposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       JT, I'm not denying that the founding fathers were influenced somewhat by the Christian religion...this was dominant in England and the colonies. But that is a lot different than saying all the founding documents are BASED ON the Bible.

       report
   26. 68

       JMcFarlandposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Except everything you've claimed so far about deism and the founding fathers had been incorrect.   So why should I accept your assertion?   Does it mention a creator?  Deism claims a creator.   But that one reference is all you have.   Nothing more.

       report
   27. 0

       JThomp42posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Point proven.

       report
   28. 68

       JMcFarlandposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       I don't think you understand the distinction between possibly influenced by and based upon.

       report
   29. 0

       JThomp42posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       That goes both ways Julie.

       report
   30. 68

       JMcFarlandposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       No,  pretty sure that I know the distinction.

       report
   31. 0

       JThomp42posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Agree to disagree

       report
   32. 0

       jonnycomelatelyposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       @ JT42 :   "Agree to disagree."   Meaning, " I will not consider in depth any other argument if it does not concur with what I already know (believe!)."

       report
   33. 70

       aguasilverposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Johnny: Meaning, " I will not consider in depth any other argument if it does not concur with what I already know (believe!)."
       
       Are you sure that's not a two way street?

       report
   34. 60

       Robert the Bruceposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Agua, are you going to address the rebuttal to your shoddy "research" in response to Rachael Tate? Or are you just ignoring that because I called your bluff?

       report
   35. 0

       jonnycomelatelyposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Agua, often I have shown that I do recognise it as a "two-way street," it is the ardent christian who wants it to be only one way!

       report
   36. 70

       aguasilverposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       I know Johnny, it's just that you only mentioned one side of the street, folk could be confused into thinking it was one way traffic!
       
       Off to bed now, early start, maybe someone will answer the question tomorrow?
       
       Nite all...

       report
3. 86

   M. T. Dremerposted 9 years ago

   Quite simply, theism is the majority (particularly in the U.S.) An atheist could walk through any town and, without even really trying, stumble upon a church. In this way, an atheist can't really 'forget' about god, when there are constant reminders everywhere (also on money and the pledge of allegiance).
   
   It's true that an atheist doesn't have to talk or debate about god, but considering they are the odd ones out, there is an underlying need to defend one's chosen viewpoint, not because they feel it is flimsy, but because, if it's brought up, few understand their choice. If I announced to a room that I'm an atheist, there is a good chance that most people will ask me why, or where do I get my morals, while a small number might even hate me, thinking that I'm 'what's wrong with America'.
   
   Granted, the latter group is not the majority, but you can see how an atheist might want to talk about it so as to spread awareness. We aren't abnormal, we're just different. But, as the minority, it falls on us to spread that awareness because the majority has no incentive to learn more about us.

   report
   1. 70

      aguasilverposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      "an atheist might want to talk about it so as to spread awareness"
      
      As in evangelising to gain converts you mean?.... just like any other 'religion', except it's a religion of disbelief!

      report
   2. 68

      JMcFarlandposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      No,  as in correcting wide spread misinformation and outright less about atheists and atheism.   That is a far cry from evangelism.

      report
   3. 60

      cjhunsingerposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      agua--That you believe in a different god than a Muslim, you are the atheist. That I believe in one less god than you, I am the Atheist. I believe in the sanctity of of human life, the dignity and promise of man.  You are the unbeliever.

      report
   4. 70

      aguasilverposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      CJ the answer there is that we all will find out who is right or wrong when we die, or if one is an atheist, possibly not even then.
      We make our choice and stand or fall on our decision.
      
      JM: not really both seek to educate the opposing opinion.

      report
   5. 68

      JMcFarlandposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      I don't find a lot of Christians seeking to educate.   I see them trying to proselytize and convert by whatever means necessary.   If someone thinks I eat babies because I'm an atheist,  I am going to educate and correct them.  No conversion.

      report
   6. 60

      Robert the Bruceposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Agua, your statement, "we all will find out who is right or wrong when we die," is very telling. You see, we are all on the same level of knowledge when it comes to death---but you (as a Christian) would say you "know" (guess) according to the Bible.

      report
   7. 70

      aguasilverposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      JM "If someone thinks I eat babies because I'm an atheist, I am going to educate and correct them" I don't think you will find many people who think that. Generally Christians should feel concern for you, over your atheism, not fear.

      report
   8. 86

      M. T. Dremerposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      As JM said, by 'spreading awareness' I meant 'correcting misinformation'. My goal isn't to convert people to atheism, it's to prevent theists from using us as a scapegoat for the world's problems.

      report
   9. 0

      jonnycomelatelyposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Aguasilver, " Generally Christians should feel concern for you,..." is the most self-righteous, arrogant statement, indicating that you have it right, I have it wrong.  You wonder why I discarded christianity?

      report
   10. 70

       aguasilverposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Johnny, you don't have to receive their concern, I am illustrating that if a Christian was NOT concerned for you, and your eternal soul, I would doubt their actual understanding of what Christ came to do, and their obedience to His commands.

       report
   11. 60

       cjhunsingerposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       aqua--I find this quote from James Madison fitting and responsive to your assertions, "The divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity."

       report
   12. 70

       aguasilverposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       I find this quote from James Madison fitting and responsive to your assertions, "The divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity."
       
       ....and that answer the question?
       
       You waste your ONLY life to discus an absurdity?
       
       How sad.

       report
   13. 61

       Link10103posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Agua, I dont know why you equate discussion of a topic with devoting ones life to it. I could spend all day talking about the color purple, it doesn't mean I have devoted my life to praising the color purple. Wake up, this is the internet

       report
   14. 70

       aguasilverposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       I could spend all day talking about the color purple, it doesn't mean I have devoted my life to praising the color purple.
       
       That would be an equally sad waste of life, why waste time? in fact I will kill the question as there are no answers

       report
   15. 61

       Link10103posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       You realize you are wasting your life by telling other people that they are wasting their life right? So you are either incompetent or just being an internet troll at this point.

       report
4. 72

   Old-Empresarioposted 9 years ago

   Because people are always asking us about it and want to debate us on the subject. Christians come to the front door and want to talk about religion when I have things to do. Also, "thinking" is the optimal word in your question. Atheists are thinkers. Christians are believers.

   report
   1. 70

      aguasilverposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Well when I was an atheist, I treated anybody on my doorstep selling something equally, I stated my lack of need, thanked them and said goodbye, never thinking of them again, unless I found I needed their product.

      report
   2. 66

      Asa2141posted 9 years agoin reply to this

      You have just as much faith as any religious person. For example, the theory of the Big Bang… you have never seen this happen or have any evidence, but you believe it. Everyone has faith, especially atheists.

      report
   3. 60

      Robert the Bruceposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Asa, you clearly do not understand atheism. Faith requires an OBJECT...you believe IN or ON something or someone. Most atheists believe what can be proved. The Big Bang is still unproven as far as I know, but it is a good guess.

      report
   4. 66

      Asa2141posted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Atheist cannot prove the Big Bang or any other origins of the earth argument (such as everything got started when a rock got struck by lightening). They take it on faith that this happened. Everyone has faith.

      report
   5. 60

      Robert the Bruceposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Do you have trouble reading, asa? I agreed that the Big Bang was still unproven. I won't see it as fact until evidence proves it. As you can see---no faith is required. I'm content to wait for evidence.

      report
   6. 60

      cjhunsingerposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Asa--The Big Bang is a testable theory and is accepted through out the scientific community. Evidence points to the BB as the beginning of the universe 13.9 billion years ago. To argue this equals arguing against the speed of light.

      report
   7. 60

      Robert the Bruceposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Thanks, cj. I'm learning new things every day. Where is the best place to read about this?

      report
   8. 60

      cjhunsingerposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Robert---Really fascinating stuff. I pulled this link up from NASA to get you started. The big discovery was two scientist working for Bell labs that accidentally found the residual effects. Good reading.http://science.nasa.gov/astrophysics/focus-are

      report
5. 60

   cjhunsingerposted 9 years ago

   agua
   
   Religious belief is not passive; it is an aggressive ideology that would prefer itself, as a theocracy. This is not only historically accurate for Judaism and Christianity, it is blatantly obvious with Islam.
   Christianity was spread throughout Europe with a sword, witch burnings and other spiritual tortures. The New Word was converted to Catholicism and Protestantism by virtue of the sword. Europe was ravaged with religious wars for several hundred years, as each version of the 'truth' was shoved the people throats. America was settled with religious bigotry and hatred, to the point where Catholics were not allowed to land after the voyage across the Atlantic.
   In 1801 the Bishops of Danbury wrote T. Jefferson asking for an endorsement of a religious mandate by the Federal Government. Jefferson asserted that the belief in a god was between god and a man and essentially not the business of the State. It is interesting that Jefferson rests his case on "the Supreme will of the nation" a totally secular notion and not on a religious ambition.
   It is not that I argue for Atheism or against a perceived deity.  I argue against the mindset that at any given time religion would take whatever opportunity to re-insert itself, as a theocracy, because, as with Islam, this too, is perceived as a command from a god.

   report
   1. 70

      aguasilverposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Well the only involvement I see mandated in scripture is to pray for those in authority and trust that God allows the right person to rule.
      
      We get the rulers we deserve.
      
      Best pray for the right ones, with wisdom, virtue and honesty.

      report
   2. 60

      cjhunsingerposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      aqua---Deuteronomy Chap 17--- and shalt stone them with stones, until they die. "Trust that god allows" What happened to free will. Is that what happened to the Germans, he did not allow?

      report
   3. 66

      Asa2141posted 9 years agoin reply to this

      It's obvious you don't have a very good grasp of history, CJHUNSINGER.

      report
   4. 60

      cjhunsingerposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Asa
      As the man said, i am always willing to take a lesson or give one.  What would you like to teach me.

      report
   5. 66

      Asa2141posted 9 years agoin reply to this

      You cannot "shove" your beliefs down anyone's throat. You cannot force someone to believe in something they do not. Your whole comment is a joke.

      report
   6. 60

      cjhunsingerposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Asa- You are loosing your demeanor there Asa. This is always an indicator of a lost argument and no where else to go. Take a deep breath and this conversation should probably end, as there is no where to go from here.

      report
6. 66

   Asa2141posted 9 years ago

   Atheist sure go to a lot of trouble trying to denounce a God they are certain is not there. I don't believe in aliens, but I do not give myself the title of an "analienist". Nobody gives themselves a title according to their non-belief. There are a million things each of us don't believe in. The very fact that atheists do this proves, to me, they know the Christian God exists.
   
   Atheists (so-called) direct all of their energies against Christianity. Just google atheist slogans and see nearly every epithet is directed at Christianity or the God of the Bible. This makes sense, they know other religions are not true so why spend time hurling insults at them?

   report
   1. 60

      Robert the Bruceposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Did it ever occur to you that atheists don't believe in Zeus, Thor, Osiris, etc...either? Do you believe in these gods? If not...you are an atheist. Also, Christianity is dominant here in the west...of course it will receive the main criticism.

      report
   2. 66

      Asa2141posted 9 years agoin reply to this

      I can't believe you just said that! I'm an atheist?? I believe in the God of the Bible without believing in Zeus etc. The very definition of an atheist is a person who does not believe in any deity. I did not know I was debating a 12-year-old.

      report
   3. 68

      JMcFarlandposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      the definition of atheism is literally "without theism".  You do not believe in Zeus, so you are atheistic in regards to Zeus.  You do not believe in Allah, so you are atheistic in regards to Allah.  Atheists are simply without belief in one more god

      report
   4. 60

      Robert the Bruceposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Asa, you asked in the last sentence of your answer above why atheists "spend time hurling insults..."  So...how is calling me a 12-year old any different? I guess Christians are allowed to hurl insults when defending their beliefs?

      report
   5. 68

      JMcFarlandposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Want some history?  Christians were initially called atheists by the Romans because they did not believe in the Roman pantheon.  It's history, and it further proves our point.  Insulting us doesn't make us wrong, but it does make one look silly.

      report
   6. 66

      Asa2141posted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Atheist - noun
      a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.
      
      You do not have an answer, so you are denying all terms and definitions. Nice try.

      report
   7. 68

      JMcFarlandposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      from the latin:  Without THEISM.  Literally.  Here's a Christian source who proves my point: http://www.christianpost.com/news/chris … sts-48633/

      report
   8. 61

      Link10103posted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Asa, would it be accurate to say you deny and disbelieve in Zeus/Allah? If so, then by your very definition you are an atheist to people of those religions. This was already covered, yet you ignored it. I guess you are the one lacking answers...

      report
   9. 0

      jonnycomelatelyposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      When I was a boy, it was common to see a carthorse struggling to pull a heavy load of coal for the master.  The eyes were shielded and directed by blinkers.  Were all the carthorses christian, I wonder?

      report
7. 0

   editionhposted 9 years ago

   Because an atheist is the other side of a theist, only when you have reached agnostic level you will gain peace of mind. .

   report
   1. 60

      Robert the Bruceposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      What do you mean by peace of mind as an agnostic?

      report
   2. 61

      Link10103posted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Agnostics couldnt care less one way or the other is what I would assume is what Edi means. I would have to agree

      report
   3. 60

      Robert the Bruceposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Maybe, but I hope editionh has a change to answer. I don't think most agnostics "couldn't care less." I think they have come to realize no one can prove it either way so they have ceased to be dogmatic either way.

      report
   4. 0

      editionhposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      peace of mind means no dependence on the idea of god positively or negatively, no need to praise no need to reject.

      report
8. 93

   peeplesposted 9 years ago

   I can only speak for myself. I don't go around in real life having conversations about my lack of belief. Why? Because I am a minority and will be treated as if I have a horribly contagious disease if people knew I was atheist. This is one reason I speak so much about it online. I hope to show believers that my lack of belief does not make me less human.
   Another reason I debate it so much is I don't find the belief in a God as logical, and I hope from debate I will be able to better understand. My husband is a believer, so I have a need to understand how someone can believe.
   On top of all that laws are in existence based purely on belief in a God. Why should my best friend not be able to marry the woman of her dreams because of religious people. Why should any law be put into place based off of faith? It makes no sense. Christianity is the majority here, and the minority should be protected.

   report
   1. 60

      cjhunsingerposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      peeples
      
      Very insightful and well stated/

      report
   2. 70

      aguasilverposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      peeples, no one should think you less human for being an atheist, if anything you are more human, being less spiritual!
      
      Marriage is a particular term associated with God, ad specifically a man to a woman.
      
      Civil partnerships fulfill the needs.

      report
   3. 93

      peeplesposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      It's associated with a God, because you believe in that god. Marriage is a piece of paper that entitles both partners to equal rights to each other and their belongings/benefits recognized by law, a god should hold no relation to law.

      report
9. 69

   Rachael Tateposted 9 years ago

   When you are raised to believe something it requires thought and debate to reconsider that view. Once you have reached a decision on something it's good to test it to see if there are any cracks in the argument. Additionally a lot of self proclaimed atheists are in fact spiritualists that do not believe in a humanised deity.  Nobody really wants death to be the end but we have no substantiated evidence to the contrary. Prove me wrong please I'd love to be floating about on a cloud with a harp - everyone looks good with a harp!

   report
   1. 60

      Robert the Bruceposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Well put, Rachael. Welcome to Hubpages.

      report
   2. 70

      aguasilverposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Hi Rachel, here's some food for though!
      
      GERMAN SCIENTISTS PROVE THERE IS LIFE AFTER DEATH
      http://www.surfingtheapocalypse.net/for … ?id=286205

      report
   3. 60

      Robert the Bruceposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Agua, a little bit of research shows this "study" to be a hoax. You might want to brush up on your research skills or was this an intentional lie? Besides, near-death experiences are not the same as actual death. Nice try though.

      report
   4. 70

      aguasilverposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Robert, did I say it was proven or reality?
      I said it was food for thought, however there are plenty of NDE accounts out there if you choose to look for them, you can discount them, or believe them and it makes sense to discount them as an atheist.

      report
   5. 60

      Robert the Bruceposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Why the childish word games? You presented the "study" to lend credibility to your beliefs. No, you didn't outright say it was proven, but you still used it (erroneously) for your agenda. Also, I'm not an atheist. I'm agnostic. See my Q about NDE's.

      report
   6. 70

      aguasilverposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Robert, you accused me of lying, so that's not a word game?.
      
      If you are agnostic why even try to answer a question that does not apply to you? - I know why you are seeking confirmation or denial, however neither will be found here, ask God.

      report
   7. 60

      Robert the Bruceposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      No, not a word game. It's evident that you either (1) deceitfully used the fake study to support your cause or (2) or you don't know how to properly research something. Which is it?

      report
   8. 70

      aguasilverposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Robert, I saw the article, could not be bothered to waste time 'researching' it, posted it as a discussion piece and really could care nothing about what you think, believe or not believe.
      
      You have not answered the question I asked.

      report
   9. 60

      Robert the Bruceposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      You are irresponsible to post a flimsy story to prove a point. I can see honesty is not one of your strengths. My answer---I answer these Q's to help reveal error for my own sake and for others. Satisfied?

      report
   10. 70

       aguasilverposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       I answer these Q's to help reveal error for my own sake and for others. Satisfied?
       
       No not really, as all you have done is sniped and quibbled, and insulted me, which is OK by me, if it makes you feel better about not knowing.
       
       NDE is proven.

       report
   11. 60

       Robert the Bruceposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       I have answered your question as stated. It's unfortunate that you don't like the answer and have chosen to whine about it. But that's not my problem. If you are up to it, please see the question I posed today about NDE's.

       report
   12. 61

       Link10103posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       I am going to assume you mean NDE that involve instances of "heaven" and "hell" are proven (source that you actually care to verify?), since it is painfully obvious NDE's happen all the time Agua. Daily in fact.

       report
   13. 0

       jonnycomelatelyposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       I wonder if God has taken out a patent on that Cardiopulmonary Recitation Machine.  Maybe he's going to write some new poetry  or hymns - like music to our ears!

       report
10. 61

    Link10103posted 9 years ago

    It isn't rocket science to realize that in places like the US, the dominant religion is Christianity. That in itself doesn't warrant discussions about god left and right. When laws are influenced by principles from an outdated, non credible, and illogical book however...
    
    For a nation that was meant to have a separation of church and state, it seems to be trying mightily hard to incorporate the church into its state. If rights are sacrificed for the sake of religion, the majority has no say against the minority. It's pretty much why gay marriage is being legalized across the nation finally.

    report
    1. 0

       JThomp42posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       The dominant religion in the WORLD and the United states is Christianity.

       report
    2. 60

       cjhunsingerposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       JT
       Is that why there is such a mess?

       report
    3. 0

       JThomp42posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       No cj.... Christians have become targeted by EVERYONE. Including the second largest religion Islam who unlike Christians are still living in the dark ages. And do not give me that nonsense what Christianity has done in the past. Islam is the problem!

       report
    4. 61

       Link10103posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       JT, is there a reason you are shifting attention to Islam? Islam is the furthest thing from a problem within the US.

       report
    5. 0

       JThomp42posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       link.... do you even know what is going on in the world? WOW!

       report
    6. 61

       Link10103posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Clearly you have problems reading so I will repeat myself. Within the US, not the world, what problems are being caused by regular Islamic people? Feel free to provide news sources and such so I can read up on it.

       report
    7. 0

       JThomp42posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Just wait and see link. And remember I said it!

       report
    8. 61

       Link10103posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Plenty of people have said the world was going to end on several dates over the years. Still waiting for that to, I feel like this may be something similar.

       report
    9. 60

       cjhunsingerposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       JT--It is still early and you are already getting upset. I did not point to the savage history of Christianity, but if you are to hire someone, would you not want to know their history?
       I posted a question for you.

       report
    10. 0

        JThomp42posted 9 years agoin reply to this

        link.. it is not my place or anyone else to say when the world will end. Im just saying that there will be a shift in the world as we know it. Genocide is being performed against Christians in the Middle east. This their ultimate goal.

        report
    11. 61

        Link10103posted 9 years agoin reply to this

        Do you plan on getting back on track at all JT? I think you are the only person on this entire thread to have brought up Islam for little to no reason at all.

        report
    12. 0

        JThomp42posted 9 years agoin reply to this

        I'm right on track about Islam. Link, seriously have you been hiding under a rock? This is not said in a hateful way. But, you seem so confused and uninformed. I would suggest educating yourself on Islam and Sharia law.

        report
    13. 60

        cjhunsingerposted 9 years agoin reply to this

        JT--You are right here. Islam is a militarized religious belief and, as such, is justified in what ever action or destruction it deems necessary to achieve a godly kingdom here on earth.

        report
    14. 61

        Link10103posted 9 years agoin reply to this

        I never said you were incorrect with what you are saying, has your inability to read properly blinded you to that?
        What you seem to be missing though is that this thread has nothing to do with Islam. So again, do you plan on getting back on topic?

        report
    15. 0

        JThomp42posted 9 years agoin reply to this

        Link... why be so condescending? Not that you care, but I lost a lifelong friend today and I do not feel like going back and forth with you. CJ asked me a question, I responded. That is it. And yes I can read link.

        report
    16. 61

        Link10103posted 9 years agoin reply to this

        You brought up a random topic no one here, as I have seen, was talking about then implied I was completely ignorant of said topic when I never disagreed with what you said. Yet I am condescending?
        Sorry for your loss, but that doesn't excuse anything

        report
    17. 0

        JThomp42posted 9 years agoin reply to this

        I would not expect anything less of you link. I will ask you the same question; can you not read what CJ asked me?
        
        Thank you for your condolences.

        report
    18. 61

        Link10103posted 9 years agoin reply to this

        Unless CJ says otherwise, where in that question did you see anything relating to Islam? You answered the question in the first sentence to then specifically target Islam directly after.

        report
    19. 0

        JThomp42posted 9 years agoin reply to this

        Link... do you like horses? Because you sure like to beat dead ones. Let it alone! SMH

        report
    20. 61

        Link10103posted 9 years agoin reply to this

        Your hypocrisy is amusing JT.

        report
    21. 0

        JThomp42posted 9 years agoin reply to this

        And now you call me a hypocrite for what reason?

        report
    22. 61

        Link10103posted 9 years agoin reply to this

        Still talking JT? You sure you dont like to beat dead horses as well?

        report
11. 70

    aguasilverposted 9 years ago

    I see lots of comments, (that's good) but few answers to the question, and none that I could nominate as a 'best answer'.
    
    Once again folk use the question to chip away at others faith or lack of faith, when in reality we should try and logically work out why people spend their valuable and ONLY life (as far as they know) thinking, talking and arguing about a God they state they refuse to believe exists.
    
    I take the argument that the majority American Christian population push religious views onto non believers, and that this is wrong, because it is.
    
    Atheists should be able to claim exclusion from certain laws or social norms due to their 'lack of religious belief', just as believers claim exemptions due to their religious beliefs.
    
    Secular beliefs should be protected in the same way that religious beliefs are, or are desired to be.
    
    In effect secularists, having declared their secular status, should have an amended set of laws to obey, tailored to their beliefs (or lack of the same, to appease you purists, but in effect you have beliefs just like believers, just not about God).
    
    But none of that answers the real question:
    
    Why do atheists spend so much time thinking and debating about God?

    report
    1. 60

       Robert the Bruceposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       What you seem not to understand is that most atheists and agnostics don't "refuse to believe" a god exists. They by default remain so because the evidence for a specific god is low or non-existent. Why don't you believe in Allah?

       report
    2. 70

       aguasilverposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Robert , I see the same 'lets change the subject' approach in Muslims who get cornered.
       
       I do believe in Allah, he's a desert god used by Satan to deceive 1.8 billion people.
       
       Unfortunately 10-15% of them are also murderous, the rest are peaceful.

       report
    3. 60

       Robert the Bruceposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Not so fast, agua. You know what I was asking. Do you believe that Allah is a god...that he is the supreme being who created the world and who will reward Muslims for being faithful?

       report
    4. 70

       aguasilverposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Not in the least Robert, I know Allah is not God/Jehovah not the supreme being, just a copycat god set a task of deceiving those 1.8 billion souls, but still a minor god, empowered by the words, deeds and actions of his followers.

       report
    5. 60

       Robert the Bruceposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Ok. Then for some of the same reasons you do not believe in/fear Allah, atheists and agnostics do not believe in your God. There's no verifiable evidence that either the God of the Bible or Allah is (1) real or (2) the only true and supreme god.

       report
    6. 70

       aguasilverposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Whatever makes you feel good Robert is OK with me, I sought, I found faith, I received evidence.... God seems not to want or need to prove Himself to those who demand proof first.
       
       A broken spirit and contrite heart He will not deny, but froward....

       report
    7. 61

       Link10103posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       For an all loving and caring deity, seems somewhat selfish of him to ignore people who genuinely wish to believe in him.
       
       But I digress...

       report
    8. 60

       Robert the Bruceposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       So your god created the human mind to be reasonable and logical, then demands that we be unreasonable and illogical when believing in him? If this is so, please stop referring to him as loving. This is not the work of a compassionate being.

       report
    9. 68

       JMcFarlandposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       I apologize that you don't seem to be getting the answer that you're hoping for, but that doesn't mean that no one has actually answered the question.  Many of us have.  Not liking the answers you've gotten doesn't mean you haven't gotten any.

       report
12. 0

    jonnycomelatelyposted 9 years ago

    Because the evangelical christian person has one objective:  i.e., to convert me, jonnycomelately, to christianity.   Remember I was once christian in my thinking and understanding.   Now I am non-christian, having done a lot more thinking and reaching a new understanding.
    
    Without knowledge about the christian person's beliefs regarding their god, I would have no basis on which to discuss. 
    
    I have no desire or intention to "convert" a christian person to atheism.  That is neither necessary nor appropriate, because it's in individual matter.  Your choice in whatever you wish to believe.  Yet do you allow me an equally weighted choice?  No you don't because you presume that you have it right and that I don't.
    
    That's christianism in a nutshell.

    report
    1. 70

       aguasilverposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Johnny, being a Christian is defined by John 3 16:19, and believing that you are 100% right is essential to the choice believers make.
       
       By that criteria, you must be considered wrong by ANY believer in Yeshua, but it should make no difference to you.

       report
    2. 0

       jonnycomelatelyposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       ....and with that belief of self-righteousness christians have changed the world, often not for the better.
       On your criteria for sure I am 100% wrong, but you are right in one thing:  It matters not to me.

       report
    3. 70

       aguasilverposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Oh dear, now you are making me late for bed... not self-righteousness, none of us are righteous, it's Christ's righteousness that we stand under, hidden in, saved by, sanctified despite our selves. Nite Johnny.

       report
    4. 0

       jonnycomelatelyposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Never mind Agua.  A bit of hilarious entertainment might help you sleep.  Good night.

       report
13. 71

    Aime Fposted 9 years ago

    Because they find it interesting? Mentally stimulating? I don't know, why does anyone think about or do anything that isn't directly or objectively productive?
    
    While I don't believe in God, I am open-minded and enjoy thinking/learning about religions and talking to people with opposing views. Through these discussions I have learned a lot about myself. People ask me questions I've never asked myself and through that I become a little bit more enlightened and either a little more or a little less confident in what I believe.
    
    Time is universal but each of us have our own little piece of it and we choose to do with it what we wish. If people find debate to be interesting, then who are you to deem it not worthy of their time?

    report
    1. 68

       JMcFarlandposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       Great answer, Aime.  I completely and totally agree.

       report
    2. 60

       Robert the Bruceposted 9 years agoin reply to this

       That's an excellent way to put it, Aime. I can relate to your answer.

       report
14. 60

    Aniket Lawandposted 9 years ago

    It isn't that all the atheists try that. It is like some believers want to prove existence similarly some atheists want to prove that God does not exist. It is just that it is the nature of some people. You cannot single out atheists, the theory applies to believers as well. Certain segment who love the art of debate will continue even if the world will in another direction. And if they are proved otherwise they will start debating otherwise.
    So it is more to do with the nature of the person and nothing to do with believers or non-believers.
    The debaters in long run become the marketing guys for the Group.

    report