athiests! why christianity?

The only atheists appear to 'pick' on Christianity is because adherents to other religions don't keep starting threads moaning about being picked on by atheists

Gday,

Originally posted by daggyz
Atheism is a religion. Ironic aye!

No it's not.
This is just a silly claim endlessly repeated by theists.
But completelt untrue.

Originally posted by daggyz
An Atheist would have to believe in evolution

Oh dear.
Another ignorant person who thinks atheism = evolution.
Completely wrong.
Again.

Originally posted by daggyz
which requires more faith than all the people from all the religions in existence who belive in a creator God. Ironic aye!

Completely wrong, aye !
Evolution is supported by a vast body of evidence.
MILLIONS of observations support evolution.
NOT ONE disagrees with evolution.

Originally posted by daggyz
Atheists try to disprove Christianity because admission Christ is real requires something they are not prepared to give.

People try to disprove Jesus because he didn't exist.

Originally posted by daggyz
Take ear wax for example. For it to develop in humans, there would have to have been a point where infections and dust blockage caused widespread deafness. Now according to evolution, the conclusion is we would all have been deaf by now.

Haha - what a joke.
Sadly, you have NO IDEA what evolution says.
Wrong again.

Originally posted by daggyz
Another example is fish walking on land. How does a fish with undeveloped fins even manage to move without proper bone structure. Evolution can't develop a fishes fins to have more bones if the stupid fish is always stranded on land and dies becuase it can't move. If it dies it can't reproduce and the theory of evolution dies right about there.

We can OBSERVE such walking fish TODAY.
Not that you'd ever check the facts.
Wrong again!

Originally posted by daggyz
I worked all this stuff out in class as an eight year old when the teacher tried to justify evolution but couldn't come up with anything more than a picture of something that looked similar and therefore it was magically related because she was taught that and hadn't thought about how it could possibilty be.

Hahahaha.
Your teacher knew NOTHING about what evolution actually says.

Originally posted by daggyz
Thats when I started believeing in God because there has to be something more intelligent than man (and evolution proves it)

So, you stuck with a fantasy you believed at age 8.

That explains how you are so incredibly wrong, and totally ignorant of the facts.


K.


[edit on 14-5-2010 by Kapyong]

Originally posted by Doujutsu
Athiests might pick on Christianity alot more than other religions.

So many of you cannot even SPELL it !

Incredible.

What do you think this says about your ability to read and check facts?

You see the word atheist used over and over - but you still get it WRONG!


K.

reply to post by Kapyong


Actually the Spelling is debatable, being as it is an English word, using basic English you can determine that it should be Spelled Athiest, being as I ALWAYS comes before E unless it is preceded by a C. Which we all learn in 1st grade. English majors feel free to chime in. Either way your argument is so non-existent that you have to pick on some ones Spelling ability to make your self feel better? Seriously? This is the exact reason why 1/3 of the posts on here are people asking for the religious arguments to end because they always end in name calling.

Originally posted by UnlawfullPriest

Actually the Spelling is debatable, being as it is an English word, using basic English you can determine that it should be Spelled Athiest, being as I ALWAYS comes before E unless it is preceded by a C.

Historically, the word is actually half-Greek.
Roughly speaking, it is constructed from THEOS ("God"), preceded by A ("not") and IST (the common English suffix dscribing someone who holds a belief, like "communist", "socialist").
Hence, "atheist".

Originally posted by Doujutsu
Athiests might pick on Christianity alot more than other religions.

But if you ask them which religion would they chose if they had to pick one.Majority of them would say Christianity.

It's a sorta love-hate relationship!

I might be wrong...and there's no study to confirm either...but I'm pretty sure Buddhism would get mentioned before Christianity. Mostly because they're not praying to a deity.

Gday,

Originally posted by UnlawfullPriest
reply to post by Kapyong

 

Actually the Spelling is debatable, being as it is an English word, using basic English you can determine that it should be Spelled Athiest, being as I ALWAYS comes before E unless it is preceded by a C. Which we all learn in 1st grade. English majors feel free to chime in.

Wow.

You ACTUALLY believe it's spelled 'athiest' ?
Incredible.

It comes from the root word for GOD, like 'theist' does.

Originally posted by UnlawfullPriest
Either way your argument is so non-existent that you have to pick on some ones Spelling ability to make your self feel better? Seriously? This is the exact reason why 1/3 of the posts on here are people asking for the religious arguments to end because they always end in name calling.

If you can't even get a simple word correct, then it casts doubt on your ability to get anything right.


K.

Originally posted by the illuminator
I just have one question.
why do athiest's seem to always try and disproof christianity?

what about all the other religions?

why pick on the christians?

Probably because a large number of atheists are former Christians? You have to know something well before you can criticize it.

-rrr

Many posts ago, I stated a real reason. It is based on "media attention", here is my challenge: Start a thread labeled "Krishna is a myth" and see how many respond. Start a thread labeled "Jesus Christ is a myth" and then see how many respond. Now truthfully answer this question: Which would sell more copies, a book titled "Krishna, the Myth" or a book titled "Jesus, the Myth". Look at this thread as an example, where are the posts which address the original question (few and far). In short it is "fun" for the atheists to bash Christianity, if you write books, you sell more books. If you post on a forum board with a Christianity bash thread, you get more replies.

K

This is just a silly claim endlessly repeated by theists.

It's an obvious truth repeated as necessary by people who speak English.

People try to disprove Jesus because he didn't exist.

As long as we're in agreement that you haven't yet succeeded in disproving Jesus' historicity, but only still trying, and that you believe in religious propositions you can't prove, then you and I have no quarrel.

That was easy.

XYZ

I might be wrong...and there's no study to confirm either...but I'm pretty sure Buddhism would get mentioned before Christianity. Mostly because they're not praying to a deity.

But then many atheists say that Buddhism is not a religion at all.

It would be convenient if there weren't such an obvious counterexample to the self-serving bogosity that "all religions believe in god(s)." Actually, there are several that don't, but it would be unreasonable to expect Christian-bashers to know more than one non-Abrahamic religion.

Don't ask me why, but it is very, very important to many atheists to insist that atheism isn't a religion. Hey, I dig it. It's just the firm belief in unproven and unevidenced metaphysical, spiritual, and religious propositons.

Who could confuse that with a religion? I mean, it's not like atheists buy billboards on buses promoting atheist recruiting slogans. Only religions do stuff like that.

j

Many posts ago, I stated a real reason. It is based on "media attention", here is my challenge: Start a thread labeled "Krishna is a myth" and see how many respond. Start a thread labeled "Jesus Christ is a myth" and then see how many respond. Now truthfully answer this question: Which would sell more copies, a book titled "Krishna, the Myth" or a book titled "Jesus, the Myth". Look at this thread as an example, where are the posts which address the original question (few and far). In short it is "fun" for the atheists to bash Christianity, if you write books, you sell more books. If you post on a forum board with a Christianity
bash thread, you get more replies.

It is sort of funny to picture Christopher Hitchens on a book tour, flogging Krishna, the Myth, or running his column in Vanity Fair with something entitled "Buddha? In your dreams."

It doesn't explain the amateurs, but there's no mystery why the pros spit on Jesus: that's where the do-re-mi is.

Good call.

reply to post by eight bits

It is sort of funny to picture Christopher Hitchens on a book tour, flogging Krishna, the Myth, or running his column in Vanity Fair with something entitled "Buddha? In your dreams." It doesn't explain the amateurs, but there's no mystery why the pros spit on Jesus: that's where the do-re-mi is.

Well in a way it does explain the amateurs. People like Doherty, Archya S, etc. make money selling books bashing Christianity. Most even operate web sites (thereby shilling their books). Mr. Joe Atheist can go to the appropriate web site and get some material. Since the pro's don't see much do-re-mi in selling Krishna bashing books, most of the material on their web sites (copied from their books) is for bashing Christianity. That leaves Joe Atheist with no quick easy source material (he might have to come up with his own ideas). You and I are aware of a "Jesus myther" who has posted on this board. All of his material comes from Doherty. Now when it comes to Satan, he seems to be unable to respond. Well my opinion is that since Earl never wrote a book "Satan is a Myth", he has no ready material to respond. To sum it up, the amateurs follow the lead of the pro's.

reply to post by jagdflieger


Speaking of Satan. There is another reason right there that people think Christianity is such a victim. There are many non-religious threads with a post by someone claiming "Satan is indeed real." They are always talking about that Christian Satan. I never see anyone just interject with a warning about Djinns for no reason. I guess the question should really be, why are Christians the only ones that cannot seem to shut the hell up about their god and their book of lies? Why do they need to mention it no matter how little it applies to anything else being said? Answer that and you will have the answer to this OP.

reply to post by K J Gunderson

Speaking of Satan. There is another reason right there that people think Christianity is such a victim. There are many non-religious threads with a post by someone claiming "Satan is indeed real." They are always talking about that Christian Satan. I never see anyone just interject with a warning about Djinns for no reason. I guess the question should really be, why are Christians the only ones that cannot seem to shut the hell up about their god and their book of lies? Why do they need to mention it no matter how little it applies to anything else being said? Answer that and you will have the answer to this OP.

Would you please point out the "non-religious threads with a post by someone claiming 'Satan is indeed real.'" Just list 4 or 5 for a good start. Also provide some quotes showing "why are Christians the only ones that cannot seem to shut the hell up about their god and their book of lies" where it is not appropriate to the thread.

reply to post by eight bits


I really don't get the point you're trying to make. Yeah, there's many religions that don't focus on a God(s). But what does that have to do with anything?

I agree that people who say "God doesn't exist" are just as misguided as people who say "God exists"...neither of them have any proof about the existence or non-existence of God. I'm an agnostic, I'm not saying God doesn't exist, but I AM saying so far there's no evidence that proves his existence. So for now, in the absence of any evidence, I am assuming there is no God until I'm proven otherwise.

Let's put it another way. If I were to tell you salt is the new best fuel, you'd call me crazy. Why? Because we have NO proof that salt could function as the new best fuel. It's only logical you don't believe it in the absence of any proof to the contrary.

I think it's hilarious that when it comes to religion, people don't need proof...or accept things as "proof" that aren't even close to it.

Still waiting for that proof

[edit on 14-5-2010 by MrXYZ]

Originally posted by jagdflieger

Would you please point out the "non-religious threads with a post by someone claiming 'Satan is indeed real.'" Just list 4 or 5 for a good start.

No. Call me a liar and dismiss me then.

Also provide some quotes showing "why are Christians the only ones that cannot seem to shut the hell up about their god and their book of lies" where it is not appropriate to the thread.

That one is easy but quotes will not be needed. Look around ATS. It will not take you long to find someone mentioning the Christian god in a non-religious thread. If you like, I will start flagging them all as I come across them and save them for you.

Likewise, you can look around and find all the non-religious threads where people butt in with nonsense about any other religion and save them for me. How about in a week, we compare?

reply to post by K J Gunderson

No. Call me a liar and dismiss me then.

Where did I call you a liar? I politely asked you to point out some posts that you have noticed to illustrate your assertion (which is usually good manners and scholarship to do).

That one is easy but quotes will not be needed. Look around ATS. It will not take you long to find someone mentioning the Christian god in a non-religious thread. If you like, I will start flagging them all as I come across them and save them for you. Likewise, you can look around and find all the non-religious threads where people butt in with nonsense about any other religion and save them for me. How about in a week, we compare?

Another "you do the leg work" response. You made the assertion, you provide some proof. Now I am supposed to spend hours and hours on ATS browsing threads to support YOUR claims. It is the height of bad manners to ask someone else to do research to support your assertions. Do your own study and provide a link or two. After all, it was YOUR assertion, not mine. I only do research to back up and support MY statements. I am not going to do your home work.

reply to post by Kapyong


I never said I believed the spelling to be either way. I Actually know the correct spelling to be Atheist, beyond the fact that I simply know how it's commonly spelled I used Google Chrome which has a built in spell check. Soo Again your argument is what, bad spelling is a sign of simple ignorance on a religious topic, or is it simply ignorance in general? In that respect Jesus was most likely, almost assuredly Illiterate. Is that relevant to his being the son of God? No but at least thats an argument, why post something totally irrelevant to the thread, is it simply to attack those you feel to be less intelligent, or less well informed then your self?
Basically, I'm asking for a relevant statement, because well you obviously feel you are intelligent, so instead of beating on some ones spelling demonstrate it, make an argument. Now that Literacy has been put into the religious argument, is the ability to spell an indication of religious and spiritual intellect?

reply to post by UnlawfullPriest

In that respect Jesus was most likely, almost assuredly Illiterate. Is that relevant to his being the son of God?

Maybe off topic, but the Gospels indicate that Jesus was literate:

(Luk 4:16) And He came to Nazareth where He was brought up. And as was His custom, He went in on the day of the sabbaths, into the synagogue, and He stood up to read.
(Luk 4:17) And the scroll of Isaiah the prophet was handed to Him. And unrolling the book, He found the place where it was written:
(Luk 4:18) "The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me. Because of this He anointed Me to proclaim the gospel to the poor; He has sent Me" to heal the brokenhearted, "to proclaim remission to captives, and to the blind to see again," to send away the ones being crushed, in remission,
(Luk 4:19) "to preach an acceptable year of the Lord." Isa. 61:1, 2
(Luk 4:20) And rolling up the scroll, returning it to the attendant, He sat down. And the eyes of all in the synagogue were fixed on Him.
(Luk 4:21) And He began to say to them, Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your ears.

Ok so I will now make a relevant post in this thread. Religion is something is intangible, requiring no actually proof to be believed. This is the basis of religion FAITH, so it really doesn't matter whether Jesus was real or simply an altered version of the story of Horus. The tenants are still good and correct. The nit picky parts of religion, which are man made, are what starts wars. homosexuality, belief in being "chosen, so on. our logical minds try and rationalize the truth in it but out spirit/soul/whatever simply find peace in the reassurance of rules and an understanding of an afterlife.
With most ancient religions emphasis was put on fearing the afterlife, or that is war torturous. So as the human mind expanded so did the fear of being ignorant of what comes "after".
I spent a large amount of my life being Wiccan, actually advanced to the title of high priest, hence my handle, but have since decided that all man made religions are flawed, and I have formed my own belief system from various Judeo-Christian, Pagan, Buddhist, and Native American religious philosophies. As I see it if I have to have flaws in my religion I might as well have flaws I can tolerate.
I may be drastically wrong in my beliefs, which I am remarkably comfortable with BTW, however is that really relevant if they still lead me to live a good and honest life? With that thought if upon meeting once maker would not every soul ask/beg/grovel for forgiveness at their flaws? So does anyone really go to hell, or simply those people who were never helped to live good life and consumed by evil go to hell? If a Child is taught by his parents that rape and molestation are normal, and through out his life truly believes this does he go to hell, or does he get a pass because he never had a chance? These are the problems I have with the Bible, it tries to simplify everything into 10 rules, which with all the possible happening in this world is ridiculous. I understand people like their rules to be strict and unyielding, so as to not cause doubt, but, for me they simply cause more doubt.
I might ad this Flaw is because of mans need for things to be simple.

[edit on 14-5-2010 by UnlawfullPriest]

reply to post by jagdflieger


So Jesus must have been a child of great privilege being as event royalty relied on Scribes to write for them. A carpenters son would have not the need, nor the means to acquire the skill. I'm not saying that he was or wasn't I'm saying that the story of Jesus, held with in the time he lived in do not support each other. Perhaps Jesus being a Carpenter's son is what is embellished, or perhaps, as they saw him, he appeared to be literate, BUT in fact was simply relaying the word of God. It doesn't make a claim that he ever claimed to be literate.
You missed the point entirely. Whether you can read or not has nothing to do with GOD or Jesus. No where in the Bible, nor any other religious book I've ever studied, does it say that they ignorant or misinformed are unable to have a relationship with any Deity. So basically your "judging " this person. Which in fact it does speak against in the Bible. So Focus on this has again nothing to do with religion and everything to do with your opinion. Correct?