Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Atheism: The Death Of Hope.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by The Pixie View Post
    So you define an atheist as some who paints people of faith as idiots? We will have to agree to disagree on that, but I suspect the dictionary would confirm my own defintion as someone who does not believe there is a god.

    I await to see what your second point will be.
    No, not all atheists, I have a good friend who is an atheist, who does not actively evangelize his atheism. As opposed to a Dawkins that speaks at public rallies that says that people of faith should "publicly mocked."
    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by seer View Post
      No, not all atheists, I have a good friend who is an atheist, who does not actively evangelize his atheism. As opposed to a Dawkins that speaks at public rallies that says that people of faith should "publicly mocked."
      So basically you are reduced to arguing semantics.
      My Blog: http://oncreationism.blogspot.co.uk/

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by The Pixie View Post
        So basically you are reduced to arguing semantics.

        Nonsense, when the likes of Dawkins are publicly stating what they do? With thousands of listeners/followers? Belittling people of faith, destroying hope when they themselves are clueless. This is not mere semantics Pixie, and the fact that you couch it in such terms really just proves my point. You are no more in search of "truth" than Dawkins...
        Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by seer View Post
          Nonsense, when the likes of Dawkins are publicly stating what they do? With thousands of listeners/followers? Belittling people of faith, destroying hope when they themselves are clueless. This is not mere semantics Pixie, and the fact that you couch it in such terms really just proves my point. You are no more in search of "truth" than Dawkins...
          When you say: First, this is not how many atheists approach the subject, many high profile atheists. If you really think like you stated above then I wouldn't call you an atheist but an agnostic. you are reduced to semantics. You are trying to relabel things to suit your agenda.

          You complain about Dawkins belittling people of faith; will you also complain when people of faith belittle others? Will you condemn the demonisation of Darwin, for example? Or is it only when your own side is belittled that you object?

          In fact, you describe Dawkins as "clueless". So it seems you are perfectly willing to belittle others yourself. Is that not a little hypocritical?

          On what basis do you describe Dawkins as "clueless"? Is this really a true claim, or are you as lost to truth as you say I am?

          Dawkins does what he does to educate people. You may think he is wrong, but he does not. He may not be 100% sure (I do not know), but he is sure enough to feel he is doing the right thing. That is why he does it. What he is doing might be destroying hope, but it might also be destroying fanatism, and I for one would applaud that. He might be educating people to think for themselves, and I would applaud that too.

          Or can you suggest some other reason why he attacks religion?
          My Blog: http://oncreationism.blogspot.co.uk/

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by The Pixie View Post
            When you say: First, this is not how many atheists approach the subject, many high profile atheists. If you really think like you stated above then I wouldn't call you an atheist but an agnostic. you are reduced to semantics. You are trying to relabel things to suit your agenda.
            Nonsense, again it is not about semantics for all the reasons I gave in this thread. Remember I started off speaking of "militate atheists" not necessarily all atheists.

            You complain about Dawkins belittling people of faith; will you also complain when people of faith belittle others? Will you condemn the demonisation of Darwin, for example? Or is it only when your own side is belittled that you object?

            In fact, you describe Dawkins as "clueless". So it seems you are perfectly willing to belittle others yourself. Is that not a little hypocritical?
            More nonsense, I don't go around suggesting that atheist should be charge with child abuse for teaching their kids atheism - as both Dawkins, and I believe Dennett, do when it comes to religion, or that teaching your child your faith is "permanently more harmful than sexual abuse." I don't call for public mocking and marginalizing of people with no faith. And Dawkins is clueless since he can not, on any level, prove his claim.


            Dawkins does what he does to educate people. You may think he is wrong, but he does not. He may not be 100% sure (I do not know), but he is sure enough to feel he is doing the right thing. That is why he does it. What he is doing might be destroying hope, but it might also be destroying fanatism, and I for one would applaud that. He might be educating people to think for themselves, and I would applaud that too.
            And Dawkins and his ilk are not fanatics? Oh please...
            Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by seer View Post
              Nonsense, again it is not about semantics for all the reasons I gave in this thread. Remember I started off speaking of "militate atheists" not necessarily all atheists.
              So why did you try to relabel me as an agnostic? If that is not sematic wrangling, I do not know what is.
              More nonsense, I don't go around suggesting that atheist should be charge with child abuse for teaching their kids atheism - as both Dawkins, and I believe Dennett, do when it comes to religion, or that teaching your child your faith is "permanently more harmful than sexual abuse." I don't call for public mocking and marginalizing of people with no faith.
              So let me see if I have your position straight.

              You do not object to belittling other people, and presumably you do not object to saying your opponents should be charged with child abuse, but you do object to doing both? Is that right? It was the belittling you originally objected to, right, not the child abuse thing?

              Can you give an instance of when Dawkins or Dennett called for a public mocking of people of faith. I missed that, though I admit I do not follow either of them.
              And Dawkins is clueless since he can not, on any level, prove his claim.
              Nor can you. Does that make you clueless?
              And Dawkins and his ilk are not fanatics? Oh please...
              When they start flying planes into buildings or burning people at the stake then you can call them fanatics. As far as I know, all they do is talk and write, activities protected by freedom of speech. I do not call such activity fanatical. It tells me something that you do. Perhaps you need to get a sense of proportion.
              My Blog: http://oncreationism.blogspot.co.uk/

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by seer View Post
                Actually Norm, I don't think you are at all happy with people of faith. I would in fact put you in the militant atheist/agnostic camp. One of the destroyers of hope...
                Actually, I am a man of faith; faith in science, faith in Rabbi Solomon to bring the GOOD wine to the Minyan (instead of that awful Kosher stuff), faith in a good salmon recipe, faith in the local weather prognosticator (80%!), faith in the happiness of family, faith in record book sales, ...

                I'm not militant at all. I don't mind a bit that you worship invisible things - so long as you don't chop my head off.

                NORM
                When the missionaries came to Africa they had the Bible and we had the land. They said 'Let us pray.' We closed our eyes. When we opened them we had the Bible and they had the land. - Bishop Desmond Tutu

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by The Pixie View Post
                  It is an interesting argument: We should all pretend God exists, because they we have false hope to help us cope with the bad times.

                  I am more used to arguing about whether or not god exists, rather than whether we should pretend he exists. I will have to think about this one.
                  When I pretended that I knew G-d existed, I thought it was hope. But, it was a false hope, because all we really know for sure is that we die some day. I've seen it for myself.

                  Now I have come to grips with the fact of death. The greatest comfort is that once I take that last breath, I will no longer be concerned with it. If by some great surprise, there actually is a G-d; it will indeed be a pleasant awakening. Given all the beauty in the world, a creator couldn't possibly be as mean as the theists make him out to be. Roasting humans alive for all of eternity like ants on a sidewalk: how absurd!

                  NORM
                  When the missionaries came to Africa they had the Bible and we had the land. They said 'Let us pray.' We closed our eyes. When we opened them we had the Bible and they had the land. - Bishop Desmond Tutu

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by The Pixie View Post
                    So why did you try to relabel me as an agnostic? If that is not sematic wrangling, I do not know what is.
                    I said Pixie if I followed your reasoning, in the post in question, you certainly sounded more agnostic. But on further review I do not think you were honest at all. You are as bias as they come.

                    So let me see if I have your position straight.

                    You do not object to belittling other people, and presumably you do not object to saying your opponents should be charged with child abuse, but you do object to doing both? Is that right? It was the belittling you originally objected to, right, not the child abuse thing?
                    Listen, if I call you an idiot or you call me a fool in the heat of a debate - that is one thing. That back and forth has little effect - but we are speaking of men that have a big megaphone - who influence tens of thousands, and attempt to change laws. And the child abuse thing is part and parcel of attempting to marginalizing people of faith, to remove their opinion from the public square.

                    Can you give an instance of when Dawkins or Dennett called for a public mocking of people of faith. I missed that, though I admit I do not follow either of them.
                    You can start here with Dawkins, and his thousands of sycophants.

                    https://answers.yahoo.com/question/i...4035818AACpg4K


                    When they start flying planes into buildings or burning people at the stake then you can call them fanatics. As far as I know, all they do is talk and write, activities protected by freedom of speech. I do not call such activity fanatical. It tells me something that you do. Perhaps you need to get a sense of proportion.
                    You don't have to fly planes into buildings to be fanatical. So stop the nonsense.
                    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by NormATive View Post
                      I'm not militant at all. I don't mind a bit that you worship invisible things - so long as you don't chop my head off.

                      NORM
                      Your on going rants belie this claim.
                      Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by NormATive View Post
                        Given all the beauty in the world, a creator couldn't possibly be as mean as the theists make him out to be. Roasting humans alive for all of eternity like ants on a sidewalk: how absurd!
                        Possibly you will think differently after reading this book http://www.amazon.com/What-In-Hell-G.../dp/B005FFNZU2
                        The greater number of laws . . . , the more thieves . . . there will be. ---- Lao-Tzu

                        [T]he truth I’m after and the truth never harmed anyone. What harms us is to persist in self-deceit and ignorance -— Marcus Aurelius, Meditations

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Truthseeker View Post
                          Possibly you will think differently after reading this book http://www.amazon.com/What-In-Hell-G.../dp/B005FFNZU2
                          If believing that those who don't share your mythology will suffer in Hell (whichever of the myriad ways in which Christians define it) while you enjoy eternal bliss helps you cope with death, then more power to you. But, J.P. Holding? Really? That's who you bring out to defend belief in Hell?

                          NORM
                          When the missionaries came to Africa they had the Bible and we had the land. They said 'Let us pray.' We closed our eyes. When we opened them we had the Bible and they had the land. - Bishop Desmond Tutu

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by seer View Post
                            Your on going rants belie this claim.
                            Rants? LOL!

                            This from someone who has no less than 35 threads started bashing gays, liberals, feminists, climatologists, scientists, evolutionists, atheists, agnostics, and just about anyone else who doesn't view the world through 11th Century, patriarchal goggles.

                            NORM
                            When the missionaries came to Africa they had the Bible and we had the land. They said 'Let us pray.' We closed our eyes. When we opened them we had the Bible and they had the land. - Bishop Desmond Tutu

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by NormATive View Post
                              If believing that those who don't share your mythology will suffer in Hell (whichever of the myriad ways in which Christians define it) while you enjoy eternal bliss helps you cope with death, then more power to you. But, J.P. Holding? Really? That's who you bring out to defend belief in Hell?

                              NORM
                              A reason I suggested the book was that you set up a strawman, at least as Holding would view your posts. The strawman: "Roasting humans alive . . ."
                              The greater number of laws . . . , the more thieves . . . there will be. ---- Lao-Tzu

                              [T]he truth I’m after and the truth never harmed anyone. What harms us is to persist in self-deceit and ignorance -— Marcus Aurelius, Meditations

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Truthseeker View Post
                                A reason I suggested the book was that you set up a strawman, at least as Holding would view your posts. The strawman: "Roasting humans alive . . ."
                                Yeah, I'm familiar with J.P. Holding's arguments. I was part of the original thread on the subject back on the old T-Web forum. I can't believe anyone would actually PAY to read that over-rated meme. Judging by the fact that it looks like only two people bought the book since 2011, no one DOES wish to pay to read it.

                                The fact that the Bible could be interpreted to not imply human immolation doesn't negate the fact that countless pew muffins still believe it. It was taught from the pulpit of the Baptist church I attended as a child.

                                Thus; not a straw-man argument.

                                NORM
                                When the missionaries came to Africa they had the Bible and we had the land. They said 'Let us pray.' We closed our eyes. When we opened them we had the Bible and they had the land. - Bishop Desmond Tutu

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by whag, 03-27-2024, 03:01 PM
                                39 responses
                                186 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
                                21 responses
                                132 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
                                80 responses
                                428 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
                                45 responses
                                305 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by rogue06, 12-26-2023, 11:05 AM
                                406 responses
                                2,517 views
                                2 likes
                                Last Post tabibito  
                                Working...
                                X