I've read some very strongly worded attacks against incredibly praise worthy acts by professed Christians on this forum recently. Wording that, if directed at atheism in general, would bring a well deserved barrage of criticism for being unaccepting of alternative views. If this trend of refusal to attempt to see the good and attack anything which doesn't fit into the particular belief structure of devout atheism spreads, I foresee words spoken taken to heart by some listening and one more fanatical terrorist group spreading their gospel through random acts of masked violence.
If such a scenario were to play out, would radical atheism be more destructive than the radical splinter groups of their religious counterparts?
The most radical of Atheists write books, while the most radical of theists fly jets into buildings.
Why are you attacking the Atheists?
Interesting point, and one rather difficult to refute. When the "theism" drives the actions it seems the theist is far more violent than the atheist. I don't know that I've ever heard of an atheist killing anyone in the name of atheism, but the reverse is common.
You have apoint that violence has been common, however IMHO. Aetheism is far more dangerous for mankind.
Why would a lack of belief in gods be dangerous for mankind considering a belief in gods has and continues to be dangerous?
Its obvious that I am Christian and would like nothing better for everyone to go to Heaven. What is your reasoning for wishing to push your disbelief on a believer? What exactly do you accomplish?
So, in other words, what you want to believe is best for all, thus ignoring the wants and needs of everyone else.
YOU are the one who wants everyone to go to heaven. YOU are the one pushing beliefs.
And you didn't answer my question...what do you get out of trying to push your disbelief on others.
Exposing the irrational, illogical and ridiculous beliefs of the religiously indoctrinated is not pushing anything.
adj. push·i·er, push·i·est
Disagreeably aggressive or forward.
: not thinking clearly : not able to use reason or good judgment
: not based on reason, good judgment, or clear thinking
If you say so, but your pic was posted next to "pushy."
So, it's perfectly fine for you to insult others?
Everything you just said is offensive and yes you are pushing..answer the question..Why?
Religions are highly offensive, intolerant and propagate ignorance.
Aethiest are highly offensive, intolerant, and propagate ignorance..LOL...at least that is true of you...I won't throw all Atheist into that barrel
New chum in the water? Why not refocus on the subject, you're always saying how vital that is.
Actually, now that Ive looked at the title again, it appears you're right on target. Carry on.
I guess you didn't follow the entire conversation...I repeated what ATM said about believers and added a little LOL..no anger here...
Notice that we focus on criticizing the religions, the ideologies and the beliefs while you actually focus on insulting people? How very sad.
Atheism is a religion as not collecting trading cards is a hobby.
Disbelief in religion is actually a pretty large group of believers of disbelief...yea, I call that a religion lol...I am not "religious" I am Christian
If you dedicate a great deal of your time complaining about, arguing with, and opposing those who do collect trading cards, then yes, "not collecting trading cards", (since that would appear to be your passion), could be called your hobby.
Anyone else have difficulty following along? I would be happy to rephrase it if so.
Actually what you said make no sense at all but I understood what you attempting to say. If one spent time arguing with those who trade cards then it could be said his hobby is arguing with traders and not "not collecting trading cards".
Actually if you enthusiastically evangelize against the hobby of collecting trading cards, it seems reasonable to say "not collecting trading cards," is both your hobby and passion. Not collecting trading cards is what you are advocating, and collecting trading cards is what you oppose.
You could even start "Trading cards anonymous", and take your passion one step further, supporting your converts.
Sorry, but that fails in logic and meaning. Keep trying.
Others do get it, so to be fair to the rest of the class, I'm afraid you're going to have to stay after.
Yes, I can see what you're attempting to do, but it fails miserably. Keep trying, though, you might make some sense, eventually, maybe.
I guess I'm going to have to stay after school as well because I don't know what your talking about. Not collecting stuff a hobby?
Sammy used to collect trading cards. Every cent he earned went into it. He spent all his time trading on line or attending shows. It ruined his life. Sammy lost everything. He now hates everything about trading cards, blaming the hobby for all of his problems. Life would be so good if only Sammy had never seen a trading card!
In spite of all this, Sammy wrestles with the desire to collect again. He knows what havoc it has wrought for him, yet the addiction won't release him. Not collecting trading cards requires effort and focus, for to let down his guard for a moment is to drain his PayPal account with trading card purchases on eBay. Sammy knows this is true.
Not collecting trading cards is, for Sammy, not a lack of activity. Quite the opposite. Sammy wages a daily battle, with hardly a moment not locked in this pursuit. Evading this demon has become the bane of his existence. He frequents chat rooms and forums of card collectors, extolling the virtues of not collecting trading cards, and mocking those who still do. He pickets trading card shows, trying not to look upon the cards himself, for he knows how weak he still is. Not collecting trading cards, for Sammy, now defines his life.
Andy used to believe in God....
Nice parable. I understood your point, but you lost me on "Andy". Did you mean "Sammy"?
No, it was the beginning of another, similar story.
Andy would follow the same course, only in regards to his belief, then disbelief. Perhaps one day Andy will join us on line as one of our atheist friends, consumed with his new mission.
While I understand and appreciate what you're trying to say, I think it's a very broad brush that you're painting with. I enter into religious discussions because I spent so much of my life studying it - both in and out of the faith. I'm not trying to deconvert anyone, and I'd hardly call what I do "evangelizing" for atheism. I'm looking to exchange ideas, counter mis-information and have interesting discussions with a subject that I was force-fed for all of my childhood and finally found an escape hatch.
I've seen far too many believers on these forums resorting to personal remarks when faced with questions they're unable to answer. I've seen atheists retort. My usual position is that I treat people with the respect that they offer to others and to me. This is especially true when discussing things with Christians. I assume (perhaps erroneously) that the majority of Christians I encounter on the forums or in real life abide by the golden rule - treat others like you wish to be treated. If they start making it personal, slinging insults or insinuations and going off-topic, I assume that it means that's how they'd like to be treated.
It's easy to let emotions get the best of you in heated discussions and I've been just as guilty of it, but I've taken notice of it and worked to correct it. Unfortunately, the same can not be said of many others, atheist and believer alike. Do I agree with the approach of every single atheist I encounter? Absolutely not, in much the same way that a lot of Christians abhor the Westboro baptist church. The only thing atheists have in common with each other across the board is a lack of a belief in a god. There are strong atheists and weak atheists, there are agnostic atheists and atheist agnostics, etc. There are some people here that I simply have no respect for due to their behavior, and I try to ignore them as much as possible. There are others that only appear infrequently that I wish I could have more detailed conversations with.
I still haven't seen atheists flying planes into buildings or blowing up abortion clinics (or their doctors). Not all beliefs deserve respect. I wouldn't respect the belief that the earth was flat in this day and age. It's a ridiculous idea. The problem I see is that many believers are unable to separate their beliefs from themselves as an individual and therefore claim "attack" when someone challenges those beliefs without resorting to personal insults at all. I think that if you're going to put yourself out there and engage in these types of discussions, you need to have a thick enough skin to handle yourself or you're better off staying away. I would also recommend learning the difference between ridiculing a belief and a personal attack. No matter how hard some people try to claim otherwise, they're not the same thing at all.
Hello Julie. It appears you read far too much into my posts. I know your not "Andy" or "Sammy", nor was I claiming to be attacked or attacking anyone. In fact, the whole thing was a light-hearted, almost parodied exchange. I was trying to make what I thought was a simple point, but with a couple saying they didn't get it, I thought perhaps a little story would help.
I'm sorry, I picked your post to respond to, but my point was really about the whole thread, and as I kept writing, I just couldn't stop. I probably should have differentiated it better.
There have been times at HP where I was accused of "attacking" a christian just because I disagreed with him. It's things like that which really frustrate me about the current nature of discourse on these subjects. If even disagreement is seen as a form of a personal attack, I really don't think that any conversations can be productive or even meaningful at times. I also think that a lot of Christians are on the lookout for "attacks" because it makes their beliefs feel validated. After all, Jesus said that his followers would be persecuted and mocked - so if a believer can find even a miniscule amount of that behavior, however warranted it may be, it makes them feel better about themselves and their beliefs as a result.
Furthermore (I don't know why I can't stop typing tonight) I think that atheists are expected to know a lot more than believers generally are. I've seen Christians jump all over an atheist poster because of a missed word or different interpretation of a Bible verse, but then turn around and admit to having no knowledge of the culture/time of Jesus' life or the early church. If they ask a question about science or evolution and an atheist responds with "I don't know" they jump all over them for that too. I've noticed this a lot more in my real life interactions than on the HP forums, but Atheists are often expected to have all the answers about evolution, science in general, the Bible, the culture, the Koran, etc - while believers often act as though they're not responsible for having any answers at all other than "god did it and you have to have faith that he did in order to understand". Have you encountered any of that from the other side, or is it just me that this happens to?
No problem, Julie. In rereading all I posted I can see where you might have thought I was directing some of it at you, had we been in a discussion. You weren't even on my radar here, so I just wanted to make sure you didn't read something personal into it. You know me, I am not too shy to approach you directly if I have something to say.
Your observations and criticisms are valid, although someone need not be seeking persecution for being Christian to play the victim. It seems to be a normal human defense, and then again, often it has merit. I don't see these discussions, (atheist vs theist), as productive in terms of reaching any consensus, so when I do engage in them it is not for that reason.
I understand your point, here, and I think it is because atheists are seen more as being "anything but god", which is a pretty big pool to represent. I do experience a similar feeling, going the other way, which is largely why I moved on from the discussion.
Believing there is a creator and in spirituality, is not the answer in and of itself, but rather the very beginning of the questions. Those beliefs, or what I consider understandings, are the foundation on which the answers rest. This is why the bible presumes it's audience believes there is a god, even if they don't yet know who He is. It doesn't even try to speak to, and only briefly about, those who tell themselves there is no god.
All the answers provided by the bible, and the spiritual discernment to understand them, start with that established premise, and are pointless to try and explain outside of it. Still, dabbling in those conversations can be enjoyable, and often edifying in terms of better understanding the rationalizations others have for their beliefs. To many unbelievers, this is a cop out, and I totally get that.
Personally, I agree with the bible's perspective that there being a god is self evident, and if His creation does not stand as proof, nor the conscience, nor the drawing of the Holy Spirit, what can I possibly add to sway them? For those who feel that is all nonsense, well I guess I am just crazy that way, so let's focus on what we can discuss. Perhaps we can agree that we all still have a lot to learn.
I think you may have confused hobby with obsession or addiction.
That is not a hobby, it does not require any effort whatsoever to not collect trading cards or to not collect anything.
Now, you're talking about something completely different. You are no longer talking about collecting trading cards, you are talking about frequenting chat forums. That could possibly be seen as a hobby, but it isn't the same thing as collecting trading cards. Again, you failed.
And, now he doesn't.
I'm afraid ATM thinks the mouse in his pocket represents a great crowd of fellow enthusiasts.
What is offensive about his post? Why are you pushing him to answer a question he has already answered?
The question was WHY...I answered his question clearly and consicely...He just denies being pushy, he never answers the question...
He answered your question and denies being pushy. Do you deny being pushy as well because you've asked the same question many times and keep demanding a different answer?
Emile is confusing the word 'radical' with clarity. Believers hate clarity, they can't stand it when discussions are clear, concise and to the point. Their mish mash of word salads and gibberish are better preferred so that they never have to explain themselves, their motives or their beliefs.
In my opinion, Atheists questioning possible motives behind praiseworthy Christian acts of kindness does not mean Atheists are developing or will develop or splinter off into possible or eventual radicals. When something is done by anyone that is praiseworthy, whatever their "label" is should not matter. If their "label" (Christian, Atheist, Muslim, etc.) is emphasized in the act, of course suspicion may arise as to a possible motive for doing it. It's natural to do so but does not mean there is a radical reasoning behind the suspicion, it just means that things will likely always be questioned when any emphasis is involved and to me, that does not necessarily make it bad or the questioners ill intentioned. If it's specifically pointed out that the person performing the kind act is Christian (or whatever they may be) then it's reasonable then for non-Christians (or what have you) to point out that it possibly wasn't emphasized as a kind deed for the right reasons. Yes it is indeed very kind of this person (I know of the story you are referring to) to do what she is doing and she should be praised by all for sure. She is a wonderful person for being so selfless, but if the emphasis is on her being a Christian performing the act and not just the good act itself, motive behind the good deed will, most likely, then be questioned. How would it seem if the act of kindness was addressed as a praiseworthy Atheist act of kindness? Would that be immediately called out as Atheists seeking credit due to who or what they are and perhaps even be accused of performing the act of kindness just for the opportunity to spread their opinions and "beliefs" onto the recipients of the act? Would that not seem to be motive behind the kind deed? That's definitely possible. That wouldn't have meant that Christians were showing possible progression towards radical behavior if they had questioned the motives of the Atheists. I'm not saying it should have been questioned or pointed out or anything of the sort, but reversing the situation for me gives a perspective that I can understand from all sides. Perhaps Atheists are simply becoming more bold, vocal and openly opinionated now and for some that may be tuned to Christianity being the loudest opinion for so long, find this "different" group's questions and opinions upsetting or unsettling? This does not mean that Atheists are radical or overly aggressive, perhaps it simply means that they are finally being heard on the same level as others.
Is it possible that the theist's anger happens because they don't understand questioning? Atheists are taught to question everything, and do so. Theists are taught that if good can be claimed for god, then never question it.
When the atheist does so anyway, anger is the result.
I think you may be on to something here.
Just about every Theist that I have talked with tends to get angry when asked questions...especially ones they don't have answers for. I have been accused of attacking, or pushing my "beliefs" on them, when in fact all I have done was ask them questions about their own faith and beliefs.
It is often taken as attack, when the intent is merely to learn. Unfortunate, but also almost inevitable. When comments/questions are perceived as going somewhere the listener doesn't want to go, where they just might shake the foundations of their faith, anger is the most common reaction.
It's intersting to me...you attack a Christians beliefs but somehow are complaining of being attacked? Reminds me of fights between Republicans and Democrats...very sad
?? You lost me here - I indicate no attack on either the Christian or myself. Only the perception of an attack, brought on by a quest for knowledge.
Can you elucidate?
"It is often taken as attack, when the intent is merely to learn. Unfortunate, but also almost inevitable. When comments/questions are perceived as going somewhere the listener doesn't want to go, where they just might shake the foundations of their faith, anger is the most common reaction."
Aethiest can not shake the foundations of the faithful wilderness...that is a very arrogant and demeaning thing to say. I understand that you think you are right about all the things you say...I think I am right about all the things I say, but I do not then conclude that you or your kind are ignorant only mislead.
Sounds like Socrates...He asked questions of the "wise" to gain knowledge...and we know the results of that...The "wise" were not so wise...
I'm not pondering those such as yourself, but viewpoints that lack respect or consideration. Ones which refuse to search for good, but see only negative. Radical theism reversed, basically, into radical atheism.
This is a difficult question to answer really as we are dealing with a hypothetical situation...
There are those on these forums who are on the brash side. But that is just is what it is...
There is good being done...But I would think the argument is "is that good being done with an agenda"...An example I can think of is...Hitler did good for Germany...But the agenda was the eventual downfall of Germany....
I think it is a matter of Why can't someone just do Good without adding anything else to it...Feed the Hungry, House the homeless, Build schools.. things like that and leave the "religion" at home...
I have a hard time seeing a "Radical Atheist" as the very lack of their belief in "Gods" and lean more to the Humanistic view would lead to less stress...
Living by laws that benefit society as a whole, vice Laws that are bias towards some would be more what I would expect from the "Radical Atheist"..
But that is only my opinion...
Why would you think that an Atheist society would support biased laws? It seems to me that where secular governments are formed there laws apply to all equally. While that doesn't appear to be the case is non secular societies just as Iran.
I don't...I think they would support laws that benefit all...It is the "religious" that tend to follow Biased laws...Which is what I said..
Hmm. I suppose, if only Soviet Russia had known that before the wall fell. North Korea could probably benefit from that knowledge. You should send an email.
Communism is not the same as Atheist (ism)...Not even close.
Lets look at places like Sweden, Denmark, Finland
Emile won't look beyond her own boarders. But nice try.
Do you have a lot of experience with shrooms? It would explain a lot.
Well, if it would explain something in terms you can relate to, it would be a good thing. Alas, no. I've never eaten psychedelic mushrooms. I hate fungi too much to try.
Then does it make you feel good to call others fungi?
Oh, I don't know. I do find it funny that you appear to find offense in, what we consider to be, an innocuous term.
Oh, I don't take offence at all, just wondering why you chose shrooms. You can all me anything you like.
That's how we referred to ourselves in the office I used to work in when we were in the dark about something.
I'm certainly not attempting to imply that atheism is inherently evil. You may be missing the point.
It is the moral actions that make good or evil...
Belief or lack of, in a God doesn't make one Good or Evil...
Typically speaking believers tend to be more biased...Evidence...Gay Marriage...(Single example only)
That is the only point I was making...Someone without religious beliefs who is "Good" would lean more towards the good of everyone and not just those who think like they do.
Just my thoughts though..
We probably shouldn't clump people together under these labels. We are individuals. I never get angry while talking to Atheist, I never attack...I do feel sad for them, pray for them.
And, we feel sad for mankind being enslaved by religions.
I do not in anyway push myself or beliefs on others or in anyway wish for you or a muslim or any relious/ nonreligious person to be persecuted for their beliefs...I am a Democrat by the way...I believe every person should have the basic right to live as they so choose as long as they do so without harming others.
Perhaps, wilderness. But there may be those that have the thought process of, why question. I was one of those people once. Now I question everything and annoy everyone
Lol at everything about this post.
scary scary atheists, not having religion, next thing you'll know they'll be murdering nonbelievers and running planes into buildings...
Arrogant disdain for others breeds violence. Belief drives that violence., Belief that 'I know better' is a problem. I don't think atheists would fly planes into buildings, but history shows that atheism can drive genocide, pogroms and the subjugation of the masses. Yet, your average atheist refuses to accept this, like your average Christian thinks they aren't like those under regimes controlled by religion. Oh. But, wait. Atheism is so intellectually superior, it just couldn't support violence says the shroom.
Arrogant disdain. That's what I'm sensing from you post. With some anger mixed in of course. Why the anger?
And, where exactly does history show that?
Emile, the secret to a good defense from an atheist attack is to just ignore them and their comments. They like to lure you in with compliments such as "your one of the nicer Christians that is not afraid to discuss religion". They are my brothers and sisters, but ignoring them works wonders. Don't even read their posts. It is a waste of your time and every time you feel the need to defend your faith or explain it to them, they sit back and laugh at you inside. Don't give them a reason to hurt you.
No one is trying to hurt anyone, simply trying gain mutual understanding. I however understand why you feel the need to close yourself off, but it's not a healthy thing to do.
Well, they don't bother me. As my sister says they yap a lot and nip at your heels, but their teeth are too small to take a bite. I don't know that I have any firmly held beliefs that aren't backed by some type of evidence and I don't feel the need to have my opinions validated so they don't bother me, personally.
I just find it sad that someone can do something good and if they are a religious person some of the atheists here find it offensive. If an atheist was doing the same thing they'd be singing their praises. It's so one sided and hypocritical.
More ranting and vitriol against atheists. You should be banned for starting this thread.
Btw, Emile has failed to point out these alleged attacks and these alleged worthy Christians. We can probably conclude Emile just wants to rant because her arguments fail miserably in light of reasoned argument.
Atheists attack, indeed. Is this thread not an unfounded, unwarranted attack on atheists, Emile?
Granted it's presumptuous of me, but I would imagine she's referring to the young woman who gave up a comfortable life in America to run an orphanage in Africa and adopt 14 children. Im pretty sure you knew that too, but let the mudslinging begin.
Oh yes, yet another evangelist setting up missionaries in foreign countries in order to spread the gospel and destroy yet another culture.
So, how many cultures do Christians need to wipe out in order for everyone to be saved, Beth?
Well, ATM. I've never known you to be reasonable so I'm not sure who you are referring to. But, I do see some atheists (such as yourself, mind you) who are consistently negative, who attempt to belittle, who for some bizarre reason think they should be seen as authoritative voices when they show no reason to be considered as authoritative. I'm at a loss as to why anyone feels the need to attempt to lord themselves and their personal opinions over others.
That's what I wanted to know. Who exactly is this thread about and what attacks are you referring? So far, you have yet to produce anything here bit vitriol. Obviously, it is a thread to attack atheists for no reason at all. Sad, really.
I'm not attacking atheists ATM. I do, honestly, believe that the constant negativity displayed by some is counter productive. You would probably never do anything that remotely resembles violence, but words can embolden others to do just that.
You have never displayed an ability to be reasonable or respectful to anyone who doesn't kowtow to you or go out of their way to bend at your every whim. I'm not having a conversation with you. I never have. You engage simply to insult. You can certainly claim you don't insult people, but your manner and your words say otherwise. You simply want to rant, belittle and degrade anyone you think is different from you, philosophically speaking. I pity this type of mentality.
Yes, I understand how you believers are compelled to believe facing up to reality is a negative thing that is counter productive to your irrational beliefs.
Well, it sure looks like your words "emboldened" me.
Do you feel better now that you've got yet another rant off your chest? Why don't you just tell us how you really feel?
She did. She said what Ive said 100 times. You bully ppl. That's what "belittling" and "degrading" behavior is.
Actually he doesn't. He simply attempts to show you the errors in your thinking that can be destructive to you and others.
Actually he does. That's why ppl tell him that every day.
Biased. Obviously. If a religious person spoke to you in the same manner ATM feels he has the right to speak to them, you'd be complaining. I've seen you do it time and again. I simply do not understand why the religious can't see past their prejudices. And, yes, this type of devout atheism constitutes religious behavior, imo.
"Bullying is the use of force, threat, or coercion to abuse, intimidate, or aggressively to impose domination over others."
Notice that is the second time I have posted the definition of 'bullying' for you Beth, obviously you ignored it the first time, just you like you ignore other things people post for you.
Also notice, that based on the definition, it isn't possible for anyone to bully anyone else on a public internet forum.
Am I using force, Beth?
Am I threatening anyone, Beth?
Am I coercing anyone, Beth?
Am I intimidating anyone, Beth?
Am i aggressively imposing domination over anyone, Beth?
That answer to all of these questions is obviously, no, Beth. I know that and you know that.
So, to continuously claim that I am bullying someone shows and incredible willful ignorance and denial on your part, sheer dishonesty, which is what we've come to learn about how you behave here.
Will you now state that this post was me bullying you, Beth?
You do intimidate thru words.
You do use abusive words.
You bully... it's called internet bullying.
It's a thing and you do it.
I'm afraid your emotions are inhibiting your ability to think rationally. I have not done a thing except ask a simple question. If that question causes you to be upset, that is your problem. Not mine. I do realize you do not appear to understand the concept of personal responsibility but, again.....not my problem.
Is that what you call your rants and vitriol? This thread?
Well, it has been my observation if I am not actively cheering you on I am considered somehow at fault. You don't scare me ATM and posts such as Melissa's are expected. Courtesy, mutual respect and good manners appear to be beyond your ken. When in Rome, I say. Don't whine when you get back exactly what you dish out.
LOL. He talks as if he went insane.
"If you drive God out of the world, you create a howling wilderness."
And that may very well be true for him, but that doesn't make it true for everyone or anyone else. This is the common theme that I've found among theists. They assume everyone else is like them.
He may in fact need his delusion to survive and he may in fact think others do.
Actually believers never assume that non-believers are like them.
Sure they do. You can at the very least be honest. They assume everyone needs saving…
Assuming everyone needs saving and assuming believers and non believers are alike are two very different things. Of course we are all alike on a human scale..two eyes and all..But believers are painfully aware of the "world" inwhich we live.
They are painfully far from aware of the world in which they live, instead focusing on fairy tales and delusions while ignoring reality.
Why? You assume we all need religion in our lives and you assume it's a particle brand of religion so you lump everyone together and then claim we all don't need the same things?
Not sure I understand this post...I don't persume all need religion, I know all need Christ
Not pushing, only stating a fact ATM...but you do not need to accept that fact, I will not call you ignorant..your life, your soul, is your own
There you go. Can't see past yourself and assume everyone needs what you have. Funny.
There in lies the point. Calling people delusional implies you believe you know better than others. It implies your thought processes are superior. It implies your conclusions ate superior. It's quite sad, really. Simply because it is no different than devout religious thinking and it can be used to feed a violent ego.
Tick, tick, tick.
And yet, the same can be said about any assertions on a cosmic scale. But, everyone with beliefs refuse to accept this. (in case you didn't follow that the comment includes your beliefs)
Why the hatred Emile? Perhaps you should talk to someone about that.
Tell me Emile, what do you say when someone knocks on your door and tells you that the tooth fairy is watching and judging your life?
BTW ATM...I am also a fitness freak, but I dont go drag the obese and unhealthy off their hover-rounds off the isles of the Wal Mart and drag them to the gym which would be execedingly better for them, but not my call lol...BUT, if they ask me how I became so fit I would enjoy telling them all about living healthy. Likewise, anyone who asks why I am so perky, I will share my joy of the Lord.
Likewise, when folks talk about their gods, I will expose their nonsense.
Sorry, nothing obvious about that...only to you and your kind ATM...We believers also think our beliefs are quite obvious.
If you're beliefs were obvious, every person on the planet would agree with them. However, you Christians can't even agree with each other.
Religions disagree...Christians are of one belief...Thank God it's not up too us mere humans to sort it all out Peace and love to all! Must run after my sugar booger now..TTFN
Yes, that's why there are over 38,000 registered denominations of Christianity, because they all agree with other.
Oh right, so you agree with the mormons and the book of Mormon?
This may be true...Be sure to let us all know who the actual Christians are though... if you would be so kind...
If Tammy is like the other Christians I've discussed that with, it means anyone that matches her own belief.
In other words, Tammy. As no one else will share ALL her beliefs, she is the only Christian.
At least that what it seems like; Catholics are not "true" Christians, Mormons are not "true" Christians, Scientologists are not "true" Christians, and so on. And so on, and so on and so on.
So she is actually correct...The Christian (single person) is of the one belief...That makes sense..
LOL Hadn't put that one together, but you're right. No offense to Tammy at all - she has her head on straight - but that's about the way it is for an awful lot of Christians and all the far right radicals.
To all my Haters lol: Actually believeing in the christ that died to save you from your sins , this is all one needs to be a "real" Christian...Christ..ian. All of the rest is as debateable as all of your intelligent scientific theories Enjoy the day fellows, it's 70 degrees here in beautiful TN, I'm going out to enjoy all of God's beautiful creation
No hate Tammy... Just a little picking on my part...
Enjoy the day and the weather
You say that, I say that, but we are badly outnumbered in these forums in thinking that way.
And no fair going outside. It's cold, rainy and ugly here. Can I come with you?
Notice how you keep focusing on insulting people?
Yes, which means it's perfectly fine to call anyone who doesn't share your beliefs a hater. Is that what a "real" Christian does?
And yet, you and every other Christian depend entirely on those intelligent scientific theories, of which without, you'd still be living in caves.
easily perceived or understood; clear, self-evident, or apparent.
Allow me to acknowledge in advance the outcry that what follows is an appeal to: numbers, public, popularity, whatever.
Still it is worth noting, that if something truly were "obvious", the majority of humanity would not reject it...or do you contend they would? Your belief there is no god, is rejected by most...by a long shot, so "obvious" may not be the word you were looking for. Is everyone but your small band delusional? Only the "brights" are illuminated, perhaps?
I agree that the majority of people believing something is not conclusive evidence that it is true, but it still is evidence to be considered. Evidence that weighs in favor of the idea that it is the small group of bio sensors who are missing something.
Which part would that be, when you said my pic was next to the definition of pushy or when Tammy called us haters? Inquiring minds want to know.
ha·rass (h-rs, hrs)
tr.v. ha·rassed, ha·rass·ing, ha·rass·es
1. To irritate or torment persistently.
2. To wear out; exhaust.
3. To impede and exhaust (an enemy) by repeated attacks or raids.
These are your quotes... tell me they are not insulting or demeaning. Tell me that the constant, repetitive posts to specific ppl are not harassing.
"Have you even read any of other scripture from other religions? It would appear you haven't, hence you can't make any intelligent comments regarding any differences.
You actually have no idea what you're talking about and just making up stuff as you go along. Hilarious.
Saying that merely makes you look incredibly ignorant and deluded or just something a small child would say in a kindergarten playground.
Sorry, but the Bible does not talk about the brain or how it works because no one back then knew anything about it. You should try reading books sometime.
You obviously have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
Yes, you are talking nonsensical gibberish.
The difference is that you don't use yours. (brains)
That is a terrible score, a complete fail. It clearly shows you're critical thinking skills are abysmal and your posts here confirm that.
Wow! How does someone like this actually function in society?"
These are all posts to one person... by definition you are harassing this person with derogatory remarks... that is cyber bullying. You are a cyber bully. Any one who makes excuses for you becomes just as guilty as you. I could have posted hundreds of similar comments, but what's the point? We've all heard you speak this way and some of us are not willing to pretend you're not trying to hurt ppl with your words.
Ah, I see now, you're switching gears to something else and are now stating I'm harassing others here. Are there no bounds or limits to your dishonesty, Beth?
Oh, so now I'm a cyber bully? You do realize there are laws against cyber bullying, don't you, Beth? In other words, my actions would warrant arrest and incarceration if I was indeed a cyber bully. Once again, you are compelled to fabricate these things for some strange reason.
So, tell us, Beth? Why do you make this stuff up? What compels you to do these things?
I'm asking why you're compelled to fabricate claims that are obviously false? You called me a cyber bully and yet there are laws against being a cyber bully.
It would appear that it is you who is attacking me with false accusations, very serious ones. Will you be following up with the authorities to have me arrested? Or, will I be following up with the admins here to have you banned for making serious false accusations?
That ball is in your court, Beth.
This is the definition of bullying:
A definition of bullying
Bullying is repeated verbal, physical, social or psychological behavior that is harmful and involves the misuse of power by an individual or group towards one or more persons. Cyberbullying refers to bullying through information and communication technologies.
Bullying can involve humiliation , domination, intimidation, victimization and all forms of harassment including that based on sex, race, disability, homosexuality or transgender. Bullying of any form or for any reason can have long-term effects on those involved including bystanders.
Bullying can happen anywhere: at school, travelling to and from school, in sporting teams, between neighbors or in the workplace.
Bullying behavior can be:
verbal eg name calling, teasing, abuse, put-downs, sarcasm, insults, threats
physical eg hitting, punching, kicking, scratching, tripping, spitting
social eg ignoring, excluding, ostracizing, alienating, making inappropriate gestures
psychological eg spreading rumors, dirty looks, hiding or damaging possessions, malicious SMS and email messages, inappropriate use of camera phones.
So now that bullying is defined, and harassment has been defined and your direct quotes have been printed to show you clearly do both, I guess you are simply needing a definition of cyber or internet?
cy·ber adjective \ˈsī-bər\
Definition of CYBER
: of, relating to, or involving computers or computer
I don't want to suggest, as Emile did, that you buy a dictionary, but this *is a lot of effort on my part.
You should then I guess do the right thing and call the authorities as your accusations are very serious.
It's just a game to you. Kinda gross. We shouldn't all be held all to the same standard? We can't talk to one another without calling the other person a child, stupid, brainless? All of those comments were directed at ONE person. You get upset when someone tells you you've spelled something wrong, you can't imagine how it would feel to be on the receiving end of those harsh, unkind comments of his?
Actually Beth I don't get upset when someone tells me I spelled something wrong. I do find my spelling errors frustrating.
But I have been called all kinds of names over the last while. Mostly from Emily, the latest was a shroom. I think her explanation was something like being left alone in the dark. doesn't really bother me at all.
And no, it's not a game to me when someone accuses someone of bullying. If you feel charges should be laid you should consider it.
So, because you insist on calling me a cyber bully, which is a serious accusation, I have no choice but to contact the admins here and report you.
Goodness. There has been no foul. What has gotten you so upset ATM? This is, although not unlike you, troubling in that your behavior appears more irrational than normal.
With a very few exceptions, all I see in this thread is Christians saying that atheists attack them, and then Christians proceeding to attack the atheists.
Except Emile, that is, who says she's not insulting then insults in the very next sentence.
With the exception of ATM... who is being his normal charming self... The only mud is being flung by the Christians... oh, and the semi-quasi-agnostic-leaning-christian-apologist, who chose her philosophy, I think, just so she could argue with herself when no one else was available.
Again, defensiveness is unattractive... and counter-attacking when there was no attack in the first place is aggressive... which is also unattractive.
I agree with the one poster (too lazy to go back and look which one) who basically said Christians need to learn the difference between an attack on their beliefs and a personal attack. My beliefs have indeed been called all sorts of things on here. Stupid, irrational, delusional etc. I've never been called those things though. Since I'm not my religion, it doesn't bother me. Now, I have been attacked personally by Christians... and on a few occasions a semi-quasi-agnostic-leaning-christian-apologist... Wonder why that is?
Well, I don't know of anything I have ever done on this site that you don't attempt to find fault with so, I suppose it is business as usual. I guess it would make sense that such behavior patterns are not perceived as negative by you, since you engage in them almost every moment you post.
I've read some very strongly worded attacks against incredibly praise worthy acts by professed Christians on this forum recently. Wording that, if directed at atheism in general, would bring a well deserved barrage of criticism for being unaccepting of alternative views.
This is how the thread started. This has nothing to do with how the thread has gone. I was simply flabbergasted at the vitriol thrown out on a thread that simply pointed out the good works of a very admirable young woman. Vitriol that would not have been directed at any one else attempting to do good works. She was marginalized simply because her beliefs don't fall in line with the beliefs of others. Don't blame me for the constant whining and attempts to pull it off of the opening remark. And, yes Melissa; you are consistently haughty and negative.You spam a thread with remarks that are completely off topic. You attempt to imply that you should somehow be listened to as an authority and when you aren't you cry foul. Sorry you want to make others miserable. It doesn't work on me. I see it for exactly what it is.
No, her book states emphatically that she moved to Africa to start a Missionary and spread the word of the gospel. In light of what other Missionaries have done to destroy the cultures of others in foreign countries, we have every right to criticize that action.
Yes. Taking in children and giving them a home is such a heinous act. Grab the torches and pitchforks. We's gonna have ourselves a lynching.
ATM. I haven't read the book and don't care what she thinks. Her actions are to be commended. Our media has done more damage to other cultures in our lifetime than Christianity could hope to accomplish. You are chasing shadows.
No. It isn't the problem. It isn't what we believe which matters. It is what we do. How we attempt to make the world a better place. I do sympathize with your inability to overcome prejudice. I can't empathize.
by Dwight Phoenix2 years ago
What are the most annoying responses Christians give to questions atheists ask?I'm a christian and I think that it would be helpful in ministry, if Christians new a bit more about how atheists felt about a Christian's...
by M. T. Dremer4 years ago
Why are some Christians threatened by Atheists?Atheists are not a particularly large or unified group, so why is there this impression (in religious media and discussion groups) that atheists are a threat? Usually it...
by Pauline C Stark4 months ago
Why Do Religious People Get So Angry At Atheists?When it comes to Atheism, most religious people get angry and even combative when it comes to this subject. I wonder why, especially in this day and age, one would feel...
by Claire Evans11 months ago
This topic is old, I know, but I'd like to ask it anyway. Many Christians will ask an atheist, "Why are you here if you don't believe God (should it be a Christian thread)?" Some will answer,...
by The Minstrel6 years ago
I would think it would be irrelevant to you. You don't believe in God.
by Christin Sander3 years ago
What are the biggest lies/misconceptions spread about atheists and agnostics?It seems there are a lot of opinions about atheists and agnostics without a lot of facts. Some of the more common ones are lack of...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.