The biblical conundrum

[Apathy]

I am an Atheist, I do not believe in God, but I do not oppose the belief in God.

congratulations?

I have many Theist friends, their belief in God is no threat to my Atheism nor is my Atheism a threat to their Theism.

I have theist friends too... However they don't view every criticism of their faith as a personal insult.

We do not feel threatened by our differing beliefs on the subject of religious faith, each of us recognize that faith is something an individual either has or doesn't have, it cannot be forced onto, or out of, anyone.

Threatened? Well that really depends on the belief of the person. If you are anything like my parents who believe I'm not a real american and I am deserving of eternal torment than damn straight I have a couple things to say about that.

I know they aren't interested in forcing me to adhere to their religion and they know I'm not interested in attacking or destroying their belief in God, as a result we get along very well.

Attacking destroying? LOL I think you are over-dramatising it a bit, I merely asked for evidence for their claims.

You sir, are an Anti-Theist; one who opposes the belief in God.

Correction im not an apatheist and that pisses you off.

More specifically, you seem to have a special hatred for the Christian God and the Christian religion.

The christian god is a bit of a dick and certain sects in Christianity are filled with hatemongering assholes.

You are the one who appears insecure in his beliefs, you are the one who appears to be threatened by the existence of the Christian faith, you are the one who acts as though Christianity itself is a personal slight against your sensibilities.

Well it is kind of in my secular government, it has gotten parents to disown children, they harass homosexuals, christianity was the driving force with slavery&imperialism, denies children of medical care in favour of faith healing, attempts to gut education in favour of pseudoscience, kills the natural curiosity of man..... The ideology has been destructive to society and has a few things to answer for.

That is why you unleash such bigoted tirades against Christians and their religion

There are no sacred cows and an attack in their doctrine is not a personal attack.

while stating about Muslims and Islam, "...as long as you do not infringe upon the rights of others while practicing it you have earned my indifference." Why do you not feel the same way about Christianity?

They cant grasp that first bit but if they could the offer is open. Also I would be applying the same standard of evidence to islam...

If not for your seething hatred of Christianity, and your insatiable desire to harangue Christians, it seems you would not have much to discuss on these boards.

Well that seems to be the real issue here isn't it.. Im talking about it, anyone who disagrees with christian doctrine and what it has done is a hateful bigot. You are a hypocrite you cannot tolerate any atheist that is not also an apatheist. Who is the bigot here?

It is truly a shame that Anti-Theist bigotry and Christian hatred are the impetus for the overwhelming majority of your posts.

Speaking about the social impact of religion is not bigotry...

 

[GenSeneca]

If you are anything like my parents who believe I'm not a real american and I am deserving of eternal torment than damn straight I have a couple things to say about that.

Why would anyone's irrational beliefs about the fate of your immortal soul, or their illogical conflation of religious beliefs and national identity, be of any concern to you? The most logical reasons would be due to either some level of spiritual insecurity, emotional immaturity, or a combination of both.

They cant grasp that first bit but if they could the offer is open.

You appear to be claiming that Christians are incapable of practicing their religion without violating the rights of others. If that's the case, then the burden of proof is on you to substantiate such claims. As an Atheist, I cannot take your assertion for the existence of something, that I've seen no evidence of, on faith.

You are a hypocrite you cannot tolerate any atheist that is not also an apatheist.

Atheists are indifferent to religious beliefs - they simply have none - while Theists support religious beliefs. It is only Anti-Theists who oppose religious beliefs.

Who is the bigot here?

Bigotry: stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own.​

​

Only one of us has shown himself to be completely intolerant of Christians and Christianity.

 

[Dr.Who]

Until you demonstrate something supernatural I will continue to use my heart to pump blood.

The creation of the universe was supernatural.

 

[Dr.Who]

for god so loved the world he sacrificed himself unto himself to appease himself so he wouldn't have to send the people he created himself into a torture furnace he also created himself for committing imaginary crimes the he himself also created.

Does it make sense?

Remove the spin and it does.

God is just so a punishment was needed when the people he created did wrong. Ignoring wrongdoing would not he the act of a just God. God is compassionate so he provided the sacrifice himself. Allowing people no means of forgiveness would not be the act of a compassionate God.

 

[Dr.Who]

Refutations?
"I dont find the objections convincing and this is why..."


Except you didn't even bother to specify the unit of measure you were using... It is not my fault if you do not say what you mean.

Someone else will have to provide them. I have paid my dues researching and composing many posts here but at this time in my life personal issues require more of my time and I just cant afford more than a few minutes at a time here.

I would no fault you for not being satisified with that but it is all I can offer. Additionally I cannot afford the time to corect all my numerous typos and other errors and only hope that people will bear with me for a time

 

[Apathy]

Why would anyone's irrational beliefs about the fate of your immortal soul, or their illogical conflation of religious beliefs and national identity, be of any concern to you? The most logical reasons would be due to either some level of spiritual insecurity, emotional immaturity, or a combination of both.

The fact that they believe I am deserving of eternal torture is illogical and reprehensible. It drives a wedge into my private life and has caused disruption within my family.

They want me deported and removed from my profession... Effect me enough for your tastes?

Not that any of this is any of your damn business.

You appear to be claiming that Christians are incapable of practicing their religion without violating the rights of others. If that's the case, then the burden of proof is on you to substantiate such claims. As an Atheist, I cannot take your assertion for the existence of something, that I've seen no evidence of, on faith.

Incapable? I never said that, you are putting words into my mouth Gen. I was conveying that they are infringing on the rights of other presently, as I pointed out prior the olive branch extends to them if they are not involved with the actions previously mentioned. If christian churches to move from the 'I hate faggots' to a more humanistic message then the olive branch is there if they want it.

Atheists are indifferent to religious beliefs - they simply have none - while Theists support religious beliefs. It is only Anti-Theists who oppose religious beliefs.

You are simply wrong by definition... Atheism is a lack of belief in deities it means nothing more.
A-not/without THEISM- religion
It is not a requirement to be an apatheist or anything else and to label others as hateful merely because they recognise the influence religion doctrine has on the lives of others is rather intolerant.

Bigotry: stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one'sown.​

​

Only one of us has shown himself to be completely intolerant of Christians and Christianity.

Are you pulling definitions out of the air now? Their belief is perfectly fair game... Would you be this upset if I were criticising their monetary policy? Of course not religion has gotten this status of being of limits for criticism and wrongfully so. Their beliefs do not exist in a vacuum they are ever present in public policy and social interaction. When you inject your belief into public discourse it is open for discussion.

Bigotry:

One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.​

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/bigot

Is it safe to assume you concede that you concede everything you left out of my original post? Or are you just dishonestly editing?

 

[Apathy]

Someone else will have to provide them. I have paid my dues researching and composing many posts here but at this time in my life personal issues require more of my time and I just cant afford more than a few minutes at a time here.

I would no fault you for not being satisified with that but it is all I can offer. Additionally I cannot afford the time to corect all my numerous typos and other errors and only hope that people will bear with me for a time

Well if you are too lazy to back up what you say why should I take anything you say seriously? This is a forum where you discuss and support claims; plastering your beliefs on the forums w/o addressing criticism counterclaims is spam IMO.

 

[Apathy]

Remove the spin and it does.

1)God is just so a punishment was needed when the people he created did wrong. 2)Ignoring wrongdoing would not he the act of a just God. 3)God is compassionate so he provided the sacrifice himself. 4)Allowing people no means of forgiveness would not be the act of a compassionate God.

1)However they ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. They had know knowledge of right and wrong before they ate of the tree. Punishment for arbitrary crimes is arbitrary punishment. Also not indicative of a just god.

2) Except they didn't really do wrong.

3) God is compassionate so he needs to perform a human sacrifice?

4) God doesn't work in forgiveness he works in blood debts.

 

[Apathy]

The creation of the universe was supernatural.

I said demonstrate not assert.

 

[GenSeneca]

The fact that they believe I am deserving of eternal torture is illogical and reprehensible.

The fact that it bothers you at all is illogical and your response is emotional rather than rational.

It drives a wedge into my private life and has caused disruption within my family.

Considering how intolerant and outright hostile you are towards Christians and Christianity, it comes as no surprise that your Christian parents and/or relatives would have a difficult time getting along with you.

They want me deported and removed from my profession... Effect me enough for your tastes?

Unless they have the power to deport you and/or have you removed from your profession, it is, again, an illogical emotional response to be upset by such things.

Not that any of this is any of your damn business.

No, it really isn't... But it does help me to understand where your visceral hatred of Christians and Christianity comes from.

I was conveying that they are infringing on the rights of other presently...

Who, specifically, or are all of them violating the rights of others?

Are there any Christians you believe are NOT presently violating the rights of others?

What is your best example of how Christians are presently violating the rights of others?

If christian churches to move from the 'I hate faggots' to a more humanistic message then the olive branch is there if they want it.

I hope that is not your best example... What I do find interesting is that you basically state here that their views should conform to your "humanistic" views before you would even consider them tolerable enough to extend the "olive branch". How very "tolerant" of you.

You are simply wrong by definition... Atheism is a lack of belief in deities it means nothing more. A-not/without THEISM- religion

Since you recognize that Atheism is 'a lack of belief in deities and nothing more', does that mean you will stop incorrectly referring to yourself as an Atheist and begin referring to yourself as an Anti-Theist? Anti - opposed to | Theism - religion

After all, since Atheism is 'a lack of belief in deities and nothing more', then, by definition, Atheists neither Support, nor Oppose, religion.

It is not a requirement to be an apatheist or anything else and to label others as hateful merely because they recognise the influence religion doctrine has on the lives of others is rather intolerant.

Let's pretend for a moment that you are right, that Christians are intolerant... So what if they are? Being intolerant of others and actually violating the rights of others are two very different things. You seem to be incapable of discerning them from one another.

Are you pulling definitions out of the air now?

Dictionary.com

Their belief is perfectly fair game...

On what grounds and in what context?

Would you be this upset if I were criticising their monetary policy?

I am not aware of a "Christian" monetary policy.

Of course not religion has gotten this status of being of limits for criticism and wrongfully so.

If you're specifically talking about Islam, then I would agree with that statement. However, Christianity is attacked on a daily basis, in this country and around the world, if Christianity is supposed to be "off limits" to such scrutiny, billions of people didn't get the memo.

Their beliefs do not exist in a vacuum they are ever present in public policy and social interaction. When you inject your belief into public discourse it is open for discussion.

Who is claiming otherwise?

Bigotry:

One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.​

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/bigot

Everyone who considers our friend Apathy here to be TOLERANT of Christians and Christianity, raise your hand... *crickets*

Is it safe to assume you concede that you concede everything you left out of my original post? Or are you just dishonestly editing?

Oh, gee... Let me see what type of terribly important and profound statements I didn't bother replying to....

The christian god is a bit of a dick and certain sects in Christianity are filled with hatemongering assholes.

Is this supposed to demonstrate your "tolerance" for Christianity and Christians?

How about this statement...

Well it is kind of in my secular government, it has gotten parents to disown children, they harass homosexuals, christianity was the driving force with slavery&imperialism, denies children of medical care in favour of faith healing, attempts to gut education in favour of pseudoscience, kills the natural curiosity of man..... The ideology has been destructive to society and has a few things to answer for.

I guess you expect me to accept your fallacious and bigoted Christian bashing rants like that one as proof that you are, indeed, tolerant of Christianity.

I'm not here to defend Christianity, so expecting me to do so is an exercise in futility. All I wanted to point out was the fact that you are NOT an Atheist, as you claim, but that you ARE, in fact, an Anti-Theist and further point out that Anti-Theism is fueled by bigotry. Since you claim to hold a Humanist world view, I would like to point out one of it's foundational principles according to the Council for Secular Humanism:

A conviction that with reason, an open marketplace of ideas, good will, and tolerance, progress can be made in building a better world for ourselves and our children.​

​

If you really consider yourself a Secular Humanist, then someone should have pointed it out to you by now - you're doing it wrong.

 

[Moby76065]

Religion is a personal thing and my relationship with God is between him and I.
I love the way the some start threads about the bible. Often there are only two choices and each is wrong.
Why do they care? Why do they do this? To start an argument? To look supierior?
One thing is for sure, when you die one of two things will happen. Something or nothing.
90% of the world believes something will happen. 10% believe their just worm dirt.
If their right, I just lived by a set of values and beliefs I feel made me a decent person.
It their wrong however.....their screwed!!! But for now, they sure feel smarter.

 

[Apathy]

The fact that it bothers you at all is illogical and your response is emotional rather than rational.

Certainly it is an emotional response but that does not mean it is not also rational. What does that say of of community cohesion when it is not only acceptable to tell someone they are deserving of eternal torment but it is an act of love. Sure in a philosophical and scientific setting emotional observations have no place however from a sociological stand point these observations indicate a real disruption in a community.

Considering how intolerant and outright hostile you are towards Christians and Christianity, it comes as no surprise that your Christian parents and/or relatives would have a difficult time getting along with you.

Im out right hostile to certain aspects of christianity within certain contexts in varying ways... Conflicts between myself and religious individual have 99/100 stemmed from a political statement informed by their faith.

The latest of which is about homophobia within society which has drawn the attention of all those within my little friend circle. (Most believe in a deity BTW) But certainly you will not deny that anti-lbgt sentiment is largely religiously informed. So then would in not be unreasonable to bring this to light.

Unless they have the power to deport you and/or have you removed from your profession, it is, again, an illogical emotional response to be upset by such things.

Given the nature of my profession they could in fact have me removed. See previous comment for emotional aspect.

No, it really isn't... But it does help me to understand where your visceral hatred of Christians and Christianity comes from.

Demonstrate that I hate christians Gen, you have obnoxiously asserted this several times and it is about time you have backed this up.

Who, specifically, or are all of them violating the rights of others?

Specifically?

And every sheep in his pew nodding to concentration camps.

I hope that is not your best example... What I do find interesting is that you basically state here that their views should conform to your "humanistic" views before you would even consider them tolerable enough to extend the "olive branch". How very "tolerant" of you.

Human rights and happiness is not something I will compromise on.

Since you recognize that Atheism is 'a lack of belief in deities and nothing more', does that mean you will stop incorrectly referring to yourself as an Atheist and begin referring to yourself as an Anti-Theist? Anti - opposed to | Theism - religion

Why? I lack a belief in deities as the definition suggests.. Anti-theist is a bit inaccurate as I do not oppose religion per se I oppose the societal impact of certain aspects of particular religions.

After all, since Atheism is 'a lack of belief in deities and nothing more', then, by definition, Atheists neither Support, nor Oppose, religion.

What you are describing is an apatheist a particular kind of atheist, not the only kind.

Let's pretend for a moment that you are right, that Christians are intolerant... So what if they are? Being intolerant of others and actually violating the rights of others are two very different things.
You seem to be incapable of discerning them from one another.

Belief begats action and giving the political power of the religious fundamentalists this is an issue.

On what grounds and in what context?

On the ground that it negatively effects others... It is said that Franklin stated "You right to throw a punch end where my nose begins." Religious belief should have a similar limitation.

I am not aware of a "Christian" monetary policy.

I think you missed the point... If I were to criticise someone's monetary policy I would not even come close to being labeled as a bigot. However if I criticise one's religious beliefs (that have far greater implications then any monetary policy) it is somehow bigoted. Why does religion have this protected status that other beliefs do not have?

If you're specifically talking about Islam, then I would agree with that statement. However, Christianity is attacked on a daily basis, in this country and around the world, if Christianity is supposed to be "off limits" to such scrutiny, billions of people didn't get the memo.

If Christianity is not off limits in your books then WTF are you doing bitching at me?

P.S. 2 different standards for 2 different faiths? Presumably if I were criticising islam impact on a society half a world away you would not label me as hateful, but if I look in our own backyard prepare for war.

Who is claiming otherwise?

My mistake it must be someone else who called me a bigot for criticising what someone posted on a public forum. My apologies.

Everyone who considers our friend Apathy here to be TOLERANT of Christians and Christianity, raise your hand... *crickets*

Reality isn't contingent on a vote.

Oh, gee... Let me see what type of terribly important and profound statements I didn't bother replying to....

Profound/Stating the obvious... no real difference there.

Is this supposed to demonstrate your "tolerance" for Christianity?

No it is why christianity is subject to criticism.

I guess you expect me to accept your fallacious and bigoted Christian bashing rants like that one as proof that you are, indeed, tolerant of Christianity.

What is fallacious about that string of facts?

I'm not here to defend Christianity, so expecting me to do so is an exercise in futility. All I wanted to point out was the fact that you are NOT an Atheist, as you claim, but that you ARE, in fact, an Anti-Theist

Again, definition fail see prior statement on this matter.

Since you claim to hold a Humanist world view, I would like to point out one of it's foundational principles according to the Council for Secular Humanism:

A conviction that with reason, an open marketplace of ideas, good will, and tolerance, progress can be made in building a better world for ourselves and our children.​

​

I agree you should be tolerant of people and you have yet to point to where I have been intolerant. However I would like to draw your attention to the open market place of ideas. (Ill assume you know what that is, if not let me know or look it up.) The free market place of ideas requires that there are no sacred cows, that ideas be evaluated by merit and truth value, including... (you guessed it) Christianity!

If you really consider yourself a Secular Humanist, then someone should have pointed it out to you by now - you're doing it wrong.

Words, you are doing those wrong.

 

[Apathy]

Religion is a personal thing and my relationship with God is between him and I.

This is a public forum... Does god know you kiss and tell

I love the way the some start threads about the bible. Often there are only two choices and each is wrong.

Not a fan of the false dichotomy myself.

Why do they care? Why do they do this? To start an argument? To look supierior?

Beliefs do not exist in a vacuum they influence others greatly.

One thing is for sure, when you die one of two things will happen. Something or nothing.

Werent you just complaining about the false dichotomy?

90% of the world believes something will happen. 10% believe their just worm dirt.

Curious. Where did you get these statistics? False-Dichotomies-R-US polling station?

If their right, I just lived by a set of values and beliefs I feel made me a decent person.

It their wrong however.....their screwed!!! But for now, they sure feel smarter.

I would advise against using pascal's wager in the future... There are thousands of mutually exclusive faiths so to play it this way is like playing Russian roulette w/ a loaded shotgun sure it might misfire but your odds aren't good.

I would also like to point the excitement portrayed by yourself at the prospect of the eternal torment of others... Just interesting...

 

[GenSeneca]

Specifically?

Of the 5 videos, only two of them featured examples of people (children) actually having their rights violated at the hands of "Christians" (their parents). As I said, you have trouble differentiating between intolerant speech and actions that actually violate rights. At any rate... This is your proof that Christians "are infringing on the rights of other presently..."? I could post 4 recent examples of "Atheists" actually violating the rights of people... Does that mean Atheists are twice as dangerous?

The spotlight fallacy and stereotyping are two of the logical fallacies you've just employed to "make your case" against Christians... Can you make a case against some appreciable number of Christians without resorting to fallacy?

On the ground that it negatively effects others... It is said that Franklin stated "You right to throw a punch end where my nose begins." Religious belief should have a similar limitation.

They already do. In the examples you gave, the people who actually violated the rights of others were held accountable for their actions.

Should we ban all persons of faith from holding public office?

Exactly what "limitation"s do you believe would be adequate to eliminate the threat you feel from Christians?

I agree you should be tolerant of people...

Everyone but Christians, right?

If I were to criticise someone's monetary policy I would not even come close to being labeled as a bigot.

At what point in a discussion on monetary policy would you get around to calling your opponent a "dick" or refer to people who agree with him as a bunch of "hatemongering assholes"?

...you have yet to point to where I have been intolerant.

See above.

 

[Apathy]

Of the 5 videos, only two of them featured examples of people (children) actually having their rights violated at the hands of "Christians" (their parents). As I said, you have trouble differentiating between intolerant speech and actions that actually violate rights. At any rate... This is your proof that Christians "are infringing on the rights of other presently..."? I could post 4 recent examples of "Atheists" actually violating the rights of people... Does that mean Atheists are twice as dangerous?

The spotlight fallacy and stereotyping are two of the logical fallacies you've just employed to "make your case" against Christians... Can you make a case against some appreciable number of Christians without resorting to fallacy?

You asked for example hence asking for the "spotlight".... If you are going to be this blatant in your dishonesty you can f--k off. If you want a trend ask for a trend if you want an example ask for an example...

48% of america believe homosexuality is a moral wrong...
http://www.gallup.com/poll/108115/americans-evenly-divided-morality-homosexuality.aspx

And to ignore the consequences of this figure would be an inane practice in denying reality but I will gladly point it out if it falls deaf on you.

They already do. In the examples you gave, the people who actually violated the rights of others were held accountable for their actions.

They certainly were punished but the causal agent of the action is still out there, a fundamentalist interpretation of biblical law.

Belief begats action Gen... How many homosexual individuals have been harassed into suicide from speech exactly like that? They fill their children's head w/ this poison and then they bring it into the school. How many children must slit their wrists before it becomes an issue I am allowed to address?

Should we ban all persons of faith from holding public office?

no

Everyone but Christians, right?

Again you have not drawn the line from speaking out against an archaic version of christianity as it negatively influences society to hating christians.

At what point in a discussion on monetary policy would you get around to calling your opponent a "dick" or refer to people who agree with him as a bunch of "hatemongering assholes"?

Can monetary policy be used to justify hateful beliefs, speech, and action? If it can you can be assured I will call them out on it.

Also where may I see the context of these words? If you are going to critique what I say cite the whole post dont pick out a couple words, which you can manipulate.