What is with all the threads attacking atheism/atheists lately?

Re Awake_and_aware

You wrote:

["You don't just use unfalsifiable hypothesis and say "well you can't prove me wrong" - It's retarding science and cognitive thinknig."]

Even disregarding science and cognitive thinking, your argument still holds. Said for the umpteenth time on this thread, this burden-of-proof 'prove yourself/disprove me' is so loosely based from theistic side, that it's a joke. Like the theistic doctrinal claims themselves, the 'reasoning' procedure of theists are practically always worthless.

It's just another level of 'faith'.

reply to post by awake_and_aware


of interest

Originally posted by bogomil

But if it's any consolation, I would warmly recommend your direction as very valuable, though with some patience.

Yes much patience is required. I've been at it for years. I am also beginning to think that, in addition to patience, a degree of "sympathetic empiricism" might be required.

"By “sympathetic empiricism,” on the other hand, I am referring to an intermediate position that incorporates the best of both emic and etic approaches. In the field of Western esotericism, as in that of religious studies more generally, it is important to balance on the one hand the virtues of scholarship that strives to achieve a standard of objectivity, and on the other hand the virtues of an approach that seeks to sympathetically understand one’s subject, to understand it from the inside out, so to speak.

Anthopologists have long understood the importance of balancing etic and emic approaches, of on the one hand entering into a culture in order to understand it while on the other hand retaining the status of observer and analyst. If the vice of a too emic position is that of becoming an apologist, the vice of a too etic position is if anything greater: a failure to understand and accurately convey what one is studying. If the vice of the extreme emic approach is too great a sympathy, that of the extreme etic approach is ignorance of and hostility to one’s subject, even if under the guise of a studied neutrality."

What is Esoteric? Methods in the Study of Western Esotericism

If its required then there may be no way for an atheist to personally replicate my direction, even with patience.

reply to post by bogomil


It's aggravating, it seems so obviously a disregard for the pursuit of truth. I don't debate on here for self-indulgence, I just try to preach a little cognitive/critical thinking. I believe you want the same things, and your rebuttals and arguments are much more elequent and consise than mine.

Btw, do you like my new avatar, or did you prefer the old one? I appreciate your critique!

Originally posted by The Djin
reply to post by Rustami

 

sorry I assumed you knew what a Gideon NT (New Testament) was, yes that invisible Jesus mentioned in there, just like what Paul heard (in Acts9, John5) when he first believed that only said he was Jesus from invisibilty of whom he called Lord as I did of which no one can say or confess by their own natural power

OK, fair enough a voice in your heads says it's jesus the one in the Gideon NT and you choose to believe it,

So, what if the voice said it was Allah would you have believed it with equal conviction?

no voice in head is something else addressed in the scriptures, I am talking an audible voice like what Paul heard as in an invisible man that was obviously raised from the dead as they and many declare

And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven: And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?
And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do.
And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.-Acts9

That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him. Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.
Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.-John5

Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners—of whom I am the worst.. Now to the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory for ever and ever.-1Tim1

Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.-1Cor12

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
Did the Christians on this site have a secret meeting at a Church and agree to start attacking atheists and atheism? Seriously, the majority of active threads on the topic in the last 5 months were started by Christian theists attacking atheists, and the threads by atheists only seemed to have popped up in response.

Is there a more cogent conspiracy to suppress non-believers? I mean, the conspiracy is there. In fact, the stated goal of almost every religion is to convert, thus suppressing skepticism.

After thinking more, I do have an answer. It feels bad having your heartfelt belief attacked does it not?

reply to post by The Djin


LOL! Deepak Chopra... I can't stand that idiot. His claims are so ridiculous. This video might also be of interest to you and other skeptics.



Penn makes his point very well. One of my favorite shows, by the way.

reply to post by Condemned0625


That show is about as good as mythbusters....it's horrible.

The conclusions they reach are usually so nonsensical.

I couldn't possibly be bothered to watch either show of my own free will.



That's just me, though.

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
reply to post by bogomil

 

It's aggravating, it seems so obviously a disregard for the pursuit of truth. I don't debate on here for self-indulgence, I just try to preach a little cognitive/critical thinking. I believe you want the same things, and your rebuttals and arguments are much more elequent and consise than mine.

Btw, do you like my new avatar, or did you prefer the old one? I appreciate your critique!

edit on 2/2/11 by awake_and_aware because: (no reason given)

Do not let it frustrate you my friend. The disconnect that is prevalent is that science is trying to explain whats outside the mind, philosophy tries to explain what is inside the mind, and religion tries to find rules where by the two perspectives can co-exist. It is quite amusing to look at the world religiously, scientifically, and philosophically.

Good luck on your search.

With Love,

Your Brother

i havent seen any threads attacking athiest, but i think it would be wrong to attack someone just because they dont believe in god. this is where religion #s up and get corrupted and makes people not want to follow religion, when people who follow a religion start to attack others just because they dont follow the same way. what the #, everyone has the right to believe in what they want, don't just whipe out people just cause they dont believe. people who follow religion and think violence is the answer arent true people of their own religion. religion is good but it cud be used for the wrong reasons, and the people who use them the wrong way are fake and have had their true soul taken over by an evil force.

reply to post by Condemned0625


I'm not such a fan of Pen & Teller, their "debunking" consists of a lot of ridicule and ad hominems where they lack reason and evidence.

Although... they do cast light on other ignoramuses.

Check this one out friend.



Believe me, you'll enjoy this. 0:58 onwards

Re Rustami

You wrote:

["sorry must have had a close name and I assumed you knew what a Gideon NT (New Testament) was, yes that invisible Jesus mentioned in there, just like what Paul heard (in Acts9, John5) when he first believed that only said he was Jesus from invisibilty of whom he called Lord as I did of which no one can say or confess by their own natural power"]

Personally I consider Paulus as one of the greatest scammers in historical time.

Then this circle-argumentation claim of using specific names on/about Jesus as a 'proof'. Your formal reasoning is void, and your specific use of it 'majic'.

You see, ......I, Bogomil the enlightened, but somewhat confused at times,....am in reality the first cousin of the spaghetti monster, send here to chasten all who are egg-noodle enthusiasts.

I can prove this: Only true believers in the spaghetti monster can say his name, without being struck with lightening. As many actually HAVE said the real name of the spaghetti monster, without being struck by lightening, this proves two things. !/ That the spaghetti monster exists, and 2/ That spaghetti monsterism is numerically superior to christianity, when it comes to the amount of 'true' believers in the 'true' spaghetti faith.

My logic is as impeccable as yours. Now we can switch to competing on intrinsic holiness.

reply to post by awake_and_aware


No, they do provide evidence to support their statements. The show is also intended to be funny. I don't like watching boring shows that have no sense of humor when debunking religious texts. The link you provided doesn't work.

reply to post by Rustami

no voice in head is something else addressed in the scriptures, I am talking an audible voice like what Paul heard as in an invisible man that was obviously raised from the dead as they and many declare

If the voice in your head told you to kill me, would you do it ?

Yes or no

reply to post by Condemned0625


Pen & Teller, while might be entertaining, are not in pursuit of the truth and i, personally can't sit through one of their shows. Their arguments do consist of some evidence but they also promote faulty logic and indulge in quite a lot of ridicule (even though i guess it's deserved)

I'm glad they highlight idiots and disinformations though.

I fixed the link for you

Originally posted by tiger5
On two occaisions in the last six months I have had to remind certain atheists that the Paranormal board is specifically for non-atheistic discussion.

Excuse me?!?!

You see total misconception again.

Atheist = do not believe in a deity. That is all it means.

There is nothing in that dictionary definition that states an Atheist - - - doesn't have other beliefs or interests.

reply to post by unityemissions

The conclusions they reach are usually so nonsensical.

A bit like Sunday at church

reply to post by Annee


Totally, a fundamental misconception.

Atheism is the simple lack of belief of a deity. Why can't atheists pursue an investigation into the unknown?

reply to post by The Djin


Thanks for that video

reply to post by madnessinmysoul


Quit trying to instigate crap, and quit trying to play the victim. You're an atheist. Great. Very proud of you.

Of course, people who believe in nothing are as ignorant as the people who believe the Earth was created in 7 earth-days and is only 10,000 years old because that's what the bible says.

Grow up.

Realize that there can never be any provable facts about the anything. NOTHING can be proved or disproved.

The only truth you can accept is that you don't know anything.