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

reply to post by adjensen

Meh. That guy's an obvious idiot, and I'm sure that once he has to move out of his parent's basement, he'll probably rejoin civilized society.

Well well, the user who called me a bigot the other day. Seems you are quick to pass judgement adjensen. Again if only you'd act like Jesus instead of trying to defend religious dogma.

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
reply to post by adjensen

 

Meh. That guy's an obvious idiot, and I'm sure that once he has to move out of his parent's basement, he'll probably rejoin civilized society.

Well well, the user who called me a bigot the other day. Seems you are quick to pass judgement adjensen. Again if only you'd act like Jesus instead of trying to defend religious dogma.

Well, I see that you've failed to invest in that dictionary that I recommended.

As I told you in that thread, the intolerance of others' beliefs is bigotry. I'm not faulting this guy's beliefs, I'm faulting his actions and behaviours -- he is intentionally offensive, and I take offense at that (not really, I would have to respect him to take offense, but you get the point.)

State your beliefs -- "I am an atheist", and I will support your right to that belief to the very end.

Act like an uncultured cretin -- "Hey, ******, give me some ******* ketchup", and I will denounce your vulgar behaviour, without the slightest sense of guilt.

reply to post by adjensen

State your beliefs -- "I am an atheist", and I will support your right to that belief to the very end.

That's very kind of you.

I have already expressed such a belief, and i'm here to share my thoughts and opinions, as are you.

Disagreement with concepts, ideas, or ethical or moral philosophy is not bigotry. Each religion has their own ideology, i have a right to disagree without being slandered with lies.

I'm sure we'll meet again on here

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
[Well well, the user who called me a bigot the other day. Seems you are quick to pass judgement adjensen. Again if only you'd act like Jesus instead of trying to defend religious dogma.

Well "acting like Jesus" would involve acting like a bigot and a genocidal religious schitzophrenic (he heard voices from his god, he had a Messianic complex and cursed his enemies and non believers with death and hell). Since the Jesus of the Gospels promoted strict adherence to the letter of the law (the Mosaic Law) and the prophets, the consequences of this would be genocidal in the modern world, and if he ever returns again, it would be in the interest of humankind to confine him in a psychiatric institution for the criminally insane.

One can of course "cherry pick" and "quote mine" the Gospels for rather harmless ethical statements which were common to philosophers of that era, such as the "Golden Rule (do unto others...etc)," but the Jesus of the Gospels is clearly the "definition" of a bigot; thus if the "Trolls for Jesus" refer to you as a bigot, I would suggest that you take it as a compliment, since they are essentially stating that you have little in common with them.

Lux

reply to post by Lucifer777


Very interesting and eloquent post, Luci, but men will always find something to fight for, and they will always have their gods.

Originally posted by Lucifer777
Well "acting like Jesus" would involve acting like a bigot and a genocidal religious schitzophrenic (he heard voices from his god, he had a Messianic complex and cursed his enemies and non believers with death and hell).

lol, that's a good one. The Messiah inherently has a Messianic complex, Ace. Someone who thinks that he's God isn't wrong about that assumption if he is God. Christians believe that, you don't. Whoop-dee-doo.

if he ever returns again, it would be in the interest of humankind to confine him in a psychiatric institution for the criminally insane.

That is, without a doubt, one of the most clueless things about religion that I've seen posted here, congratulations for setting the bar to a new low. It even trumps the guy who said that he would welcome the rapture, because it would rid him of all those annoying Christians. The fact that it would mean that the Christians were right, and he was screwed, completely escaped him, just as the absurdity of judging and imprisoning the creator of reality has apparently escaped you.

One can of course "cherry pick" and "quote mine" the Gospels

The only thing more ironic than an atheist who relies on a book that they don't believe in to make an argument is one who accuses others of "cherry picking" the text, because, regardless of whether someone else is doing it or not, an atheist who uses scripture does nothing BUT selectively quote the text.

Originally posted by adjensen

lol, that's a good one. The Messiah inherently has a Messianic complex, Ace. Someone who thinks that he's God isn't wrong about that assumption if he is God. Christians believe that, you don't. Whoop-dee-doo.

The Jesus of the Gospels, whether fictional or not, is clearly depicted as a religoius charlatan; his religion has been long ago disproven and Christians clearly do not have the alleged miraculous powers he promised them, unless you can demostrate that you can miraculously cure leprosy, blindness, various forms of sickness, move mountains into the sea, drink deadly poison etc. Numerous inmates of psychiatric institutions also claim to have such powers and to hear voices from God, but their claims cannot be substantiated, just as it is with the Christians.

i
That is, without a doubt, one of the most clueless things about religion that I've seen posted here, congratulations for setting the bar to a new low. It even trumps the guy who said that he would welcome the rapture, because it would rid him of all those annoying Christians. The fact that it would mean that the Christians were right, and he was screwed, completely escaped him, just as the absurdity of judging and imprisoning the creator of reality has apparently escaped you.

I was not referring to the Creator (assuming that She exists at all), but to the religious charlatan Jesus who is expected to return as a genocidal theocratic monarchist (i.e., a global dictator).

The only thing more ironic than an atheist who relies on a book that they don't believe in to make an argument is one who accuses others of "cherry picking" the text, because, regardless of whether someone else is doing it or not, an atheist who uses scripture does nothing BUT selectively quote the text.

One could "cherry pick" and "quote mine" Hitler's Mein Kampf for perfectly innocent comments, however that is not how we judge others; similarly if a person is accused in court of incitement to gencoide, if they cite all their lifetime of writings which were perfectly innocent, this is irrelevant to the charge of inciting genocide, even of they only did this on a single occastion; similarly with the Bible, one can "cherry pick" it and "quote mine" it for perfectly innocent texts, but that is not how we reach the conclusion that the Biblical deity is, as Dawkins argues is "arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully"

Unfortunately the danger of religious fanaticism is not merely the acceptance of a psychotic, sadistic deity; it is that religious fanatics define this psychotic, sadistic deity as their definition of "goodness;" thus it is entirely a consequence of this that the religious fanatics themselves become "petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freaks; vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleansers; misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic and capriciously malevolent bullies;" and human history provides ample evidence of this.

Lux

_________________

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
reply to post by Lucifer777

 

Very interesting and eloquent post, Luci, but men will always find something to fight for, and they will always have their gods.

Irrespective of the philosophical question of the Creator's existence or Her non existence, since this God does not lend Herself to empirical observation, the religious fanatics can define Her in any way they choose and such ramblings cannot be proven nor disproven.

The definitions of the gods are always anthropomorphic projections of human consciousness. If I were to define God I might define Her as a militant black lesbian Communist, but that would only be my anthropomorphic projection; similarly the religious fanatics could define their deity in a myriad of different ways, but they generally choose the sadistic and psychopathic gods of the Koran and he Bible; they could just as easily define their own deity in less genocidal and sadistic ways; I think that those who stick to their Biblical and Islamic definitions in the face of overwhelming criticism are probably anyway just sadistic and psychotic themselves.

Lux

Originally posted by Lucifer777

Originally posted by adjensen

lol, that's a good one. The Messiah inherently has a Messianic complex, Ace. Someone who thinks that he's God isn't wrong about that assumption if he is God. Christians believe that, you don't. Whoop-dee-doo.

The Jesus of the Gospels, whether fictional or not, is clearly depicted as a religoius charlatan;

Hmmm. A book you don't believe openly represents its central character as a fraud? So, when they say "Jesus healed a leper", he didn't really heal a leper? Then why say anything about it at all? He cannot be "depicted" as a religious charlatan, rather he is depicted as the Jewish Messiah.

But now, 2000 years later, you consider him to be a charlatan. Fair enough. Since you guys are so keen on "evidence", what evidence do you have that your judgement is the correct one, rather than the judgement of the people who either knew him, or knew those who did?

his religion has been long ago disproven

Christianity has been disproven? Care to share the details? I guess that I must have missed the memo.

I was not referring to the Creator (assuming that She exists at all), but to the religious charlatan Jesus who is expected to return as a genocidal theocratic monarchist (i.e., a global dictator).

Oh course you were referring to a divine Jesus -- how can he "come back" if he's not who he's portrayed as being?

And, once again, if he comes back as a "genocidal theocratic monarchist", you're hosed anyway, so what's your point? It was dumb to say it once, it's no brighter to repeat it.

Unfortunately the danger of religious fanaticism is not merely the acceptance of a psychotic, sadistic deity; it is that religious fanatics define this psychotic, sadistic deity as their definition of "goodness;" thus it is entirely a consequence of this that the religious fanatics themselves become "petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freaks; vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleansers; misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic and capriciously malevolent bullies;" and human history provides ample evidence of this.

Okay, so you're another fundamentalist who doesn't like God. Good for you. If God's real, you can sort it out with him.

But I'm a Christian who does like God, and is not petty, unjust, unforgiving... etc, etc, etc. If need be, I evaluate people based on their words and their actions, not on their beliefs, or on my skewed perceptions of what their beliefs ought to be. Most Christians that I know are pretty much the same way.

If your point is that extremism is the problem, not Christianity, I wouldn't disagree, but if that's what you're trying to say, you've a pretty lousy way of doing so.

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by Lucifer777
his religion has been long ago disproven

Christianity has been disproven? Care to share the details? I guess that I must have missed the memo.

You know very well that Christianity can be disproven and that it has long since been disproven and that you can disprove it to yourself; I suspect that you are merely just in denial of that fact.

Anyway...just to humour you and to give you the opportunity to prove your faith and myself the opportunity to disprove it.....

I tell you the truth, anyone who has faith in me will do what I have been doing. He will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father. Joh 14.12

Let me make it as easy for you as possible; rather than doing anything "greater" than Jesus, just try to do some of the "same" things that the Gospel authors alleged he could do.

Here are my suggestions.

1: Raise the dead.
2: Miraculously cure leprosy, blindness, make the lame walk and cure all manner of illness by the "laying on of hands."
3: Prove that you can cure serious mental illnesses and physical ailments by the "castng out of demons (i.e., exorcism)"

If you can do this, don't forget to apply to the James Randi Foundation and collect his million dollar reward for proof of a miracle or even of "any" psychic powers. So far not a single Christian (or indeed anyone) has collected this reward, but you might be the first person in history to do so.

If you cannot perform these miracles, I am sure that you will understand if I continue to refer to yourself and your dead god as religious charlatans who prey on the sick, the disabled and the vulnerable.

So far the only way that Christian charlatans have been able to actually do any of such things is by fakery.

but even if you say to this mountain, `Be taken up and cast into the sea,' it will happen. "And all things you ask in prayer, believing, you will receive." (Matthew 21)

And see if you can miraculously throw a few mountains into the sea. Let me know in advance which mountains you are going to throw into the sea before it happens.

6) And whatever you ask in my name, I will do, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If you ask anything of me in my name, I will do it. (John 14)

Dear Jesus

I would also like you to give "Adjensen" the power to cure all lepors and blind people in the world, and the power to miraculously cast mountains into the sea, and I would like you to do this immediately; and while you are at it, I would like you to immediately remove all Christians and religious fanatics from the earth; I pray all this in Jesus name.

Regards

Your eternal enemy.

Lucifer

And, once again, if he comes back as a "genocidal theocratic monarchist", you're hosed anyway, so what's your point? It was dumb to say it once, it's no brighter to repeat it.

"In fact, if Christ himself stood in my way, I, like Nietzsche, would not hesitate to squish him like a worm"”
Ernesto 'Che' Guevara

If your "king of kngs (i.e., a global dictator)" ever returns, he won't even have to worry about the millions of Communists, such as myself; he will have enough trouble with the American Republicans (The ideological anti-monarchists, not the Republican political party) and a population which has more guns than there are people. And then there are the Chinese, the Russians, the Israelis who are all armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons...etc., etc.

Lux

Originally posted by Lucifer777

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by Lucifer777
his religion has been long ago disproven

Christianity has been disproven? Care to share the details? I guess that I must have missed the memo.

You know very well that Christianity can be disproven and that it has long since been disproven and that you can disprove it to yourself; I suspect that you are merely just in denial of that fact.

Anyway...just to humour you and to give you the opportunity to prove your faith and myself the opportunity to disprove it.....

I tell you the truth, anyone who has faith in me will do what I have been doing. He will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father. Joh 14.12

Let me make it as easy for you as possible; rather than doing anything "greater" than Jesus, just try to do some of the "same" things that the Gospel authors alleged he could do.

Nice hyperbole.

I'm not a big fan of quoting scriptures, it's generally sufficient to show the logical fallacies of shallow arguments such as yours -- the infantile rage towards anyone who disagrees fails to make a point, all the while missing the fact that they've lost the argument before they even started, because their point of contention is based on that which they're arguing against.

However, for your benefit, I'll cite a passage from Luke.

The devil led him to Jerusalem and had him stand on the highest point of the temple. “If you are the Son of God,” he said, “throw yourself down from here. For it is written:

“‘He will command his angels concerning you
to guard you carefully;
they will lift you up in their hands,
so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.’”
Jesus answered, “It says: ‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.’”

When the devil had finished all this tempting, he left him until an opportune time.

- Luke 4:9-13

Neither God, nor I, exist to perform parlour tricks for your benefit. I don't really care whether you believe in God or not, and it's certainly not my duty to meet your expectations.

You're new here to ATS, welcome. I would suggest that, if you plan on actually contributing to the dialogue here, you stop using websites like "evilbible.com" as your source of knowledge. Though you will never convince any theist to abandon their beliefs, you will be more successful in your debates if you understand concepts of philosophy and theology, and can formulate your own argument, rather than simply reciting what has been tried (and refuted) many times before.

Though I'm an orthodox Christian, most of the people on my ATS "friends" list are atheists and agnostics, like MadnessInMySoul, because I genuinely appreciate the way that they make me think and defend my beliefs (not simply on matters of religion, though that's the focus, of course.) I am here to improve myself, and to better understand not only others and their beliefs, but through that, my own. I hope that I similarly present a reasonable counter to their claims, which helps them bring what they think into focus.

You seem like a bright person -- I sincerely hope that you move beyond simplistic dismissals of people you disagree with, which holds so many immature ATS users back, and make intelligent and thought out posts that reflect what you believe and have a reasoned basis for. In the end, you may learn that, whether theist, deist, agnostic and atheist, we all share some qualities in common and can learn from each other to, hopefully, make the world a somewhat better place.

Originally posted by adjensen

Nice hyperbole.

I'm not a big fan of quoting scriptures, it's generally sufficient to show the logical fallacies of shallow arguments such as yours --

I doubt if you even understand the meaning of "hyperbole;" hyperbole is the use of "exaggeration" as a rhetorical device; my responses to the exaggerated claims of the charltan and religious fanatic Jesus are entirely appropriate; he is after all the central deity of the Christian religion, and yet every single Christian in the world knows that his stated claims are entirely bougus and fraudulent, and that is no exaggeration.

I further doubt if you really understand what a "logical fallacy" is. You have claimed that Christanity cannot be disproven. I have just disproven the claims of your charlatan dead god Jesus, and if your were intellectually honest enough, you would concede that, however that may be too much to expect of you. My arguments were entirely logical.

the infantile rage towards anyone who disagrees fails to make a point, all the while missing the fact that they've lost the argument before they even started, because their point of contention is based on that which they're arguing against.

That is just inane (irrelevant, stupid) rambling.

However, for your benefit, I'll cite a passage from Luke.

The devil led him to Jerusalem and had him stand on the highest point of the temple. “If you are the Son of God,” he said, “throw yourself down from here. For it is written:

“‘He will command his angels concerning you
to guard you carefully;
they will lift you up in their hands,
so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.’”
Jesus answered, “It says: ‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.’”

When the devil had finished all this tempting, he left him until an opportune time.

- Luke 4:9-13

Neither God, nor I, exist to perform parlour tricks for your benefit. I don't really care whether you believe in God or not, and it's certainly not my duty to meet your expectations.

Perhaps you consider claiming to cure leprosy, blindess and other illnesses to be "parlour" tricks; well that is the position I take, that the miracle and healing powers which the Jesus of the Gospels allegedly claimed his followers would have are generally cheap parlour tricks by professional religious charlatans of the Jesus business, and they are simply following in the tradition of their master charlatan.

You're new here to ATS, welcome.

I may be new to ATS but I have been debating on the Internet since around 1994. I am usually always subsrcribed to around 500 or so discussion forums, but I tend to stick around on the same forum for a while. I really don't have much tolerance for religious charlatans such as yourself; I consider those of your ilk to be untermensch (morally and intellectually subhuman) and corrupters of humankind.

You have disputed the fact that Christianity can be disproven, and I have explained to you the fact that it can be disproven; the edicts of Jesus can be disproven in much the same way as L. Ron. Hubbard's claim that Scientology can cure cancer and radiation burns; Christianity can no more miraculously cure leprosy, blindess or raise the dead than the Scientologists can, and neither can you.

With regards to your phrase "Neither God, nor I," you are obviously arrogant enough to believe that a religious charlatan such as yourelf, somehow represents "God;" I do not share your deluded opinion of yourself; you merely represent yourself; the god you refer to is simply a savage and sadistic anthromorphic definition of an ancient tribal deity.



If you do not like to hear passages selected from sites such as www.evilbible.com..., then you are welcome to make arguments in defence of such passages but contradiction and sophistry (inane ramblngs) do not constitute intelligent argument. If the universe has a Creator, I very much doubt that She would have anything to do with "Trolls for Jesus" such as yourself, unless She is very stupid, morally evil or both.

Though I'm an orthodox Christian, most of the people on my ATS "friends" list are atheists and agnostics, like MadnessInMySoul, because I genuinely appreciate the way that they make me think and defend my beliefs (not simply on matters of religion, though that's the focus, of course.) I am here to improve myself, and to better understand not only others and their beliefs, but through that, my own. I hope that I similarly present a reasonable counter to their claims, which helps them bring what they think into focus.

As far as I am concerned you are a religious charlatan, like so many others on the Internet; you are unfortunately a common breed suffering from a very common case of religious psychosis, delusions of granduer and verbal diarrhea. I have very little toleration for those who seek to hypnotise and indoctrinate others with their versions of organised religion.

I have given you the opportunity to "reasonably counter" the claim that Christianity has long ago been disproven and that what remains are simply religious charlatans such as yourself who prey on the weak, the sick and the mentally vulnerable, and you have chosen not to do so and to instead respond with inane ramblings, abuse and contradiction.

You seem like a bright person -- I sincerely hope that you move beyond simplistic dismissals of people you disagree with,

I am obviously a much brighter person than you are and I tend to use my intelligence to defend others against the ramblings of religious charlatans. Direct your "Trolling for Jesus" on some more vulnerable potential victims; you will receive not an iota of sympathy from me. I do not "love" my ideological and religious enemies; on the contrary, I despise them.

Lux

"The criticism of religion is the premise of all criticism." Marx

Originally posted by Lucifer777
You have claimed that Christanity cannot be disproven. I have just disproven the claims of your charlatan dead god Jesus, and if your were intellectually honest enough, you would concede that

No, Ace, I didn't say that it couldn't. Just said that I wasn't aware that it had been.

You honestly believe that anything you've said "proves" anything? I take back my earlier "you seem like a bright person", then.

I am obviously a much brighter person than you are and I tend to use my intelligence to defend others against the ramblings of religious charlatans. Direct your "Trolling for Jesus" on some more vulnerable potential victims; you will receive not an iota of sympathy from me. I do not "love" my ideological and religious enemies; on the contrary, I despise them.

Yes, Ace, you are obviously a much brighter person than I am. Thank you for demonstrating, so adroitly, the earlier point (which was not mine) about the invalidly assumed arrogance of some of the more vacuous members of society. You've demonstrated no intelligence, no courtesy, and absolutely no originality. To put it bluntly, you're a broken record that we've all heard before, and we're all a bit tired of hearing.

Absolute failure. Throw it on the pyre, and colour me disappointed, because I honestly thought you capable of something more.

Originally posted by Blue_Jay33
reply to post by Student X

 

In regards to Madness posts

You lost all credibility with me long ago. Your opinions are worthless to me.

Amen to that, some people are so adamantly defiantly stubborn with a supposed super intellect, every post reeks of pure arrogance. The bold assertion of you are wrong, I am right mantra of the radical hardcore aggressive atheist will be met on the field of intellectual battle. That is why this thread is so long, we could just ignore these guys, but we need to expose the arrogance. Atheistic arrogance breeds more arrogance which can lead to obnoxious behavior and eventually insanity. I give you "TheAmazingatheist" as just one example.

edit on 9-2-2011 by Blue_Jay33 because: (no reason given)

So basically your line of argument here is: Smart people are stubborn, and arrogant, which leads to obnoxious behavior, which somehow leads to insanity?
Am I getting this? You couldn't possibly mean what I think you mean, right? I had no idea that arrogant intelligence led to mental disease. Your supporting case of one jerk on youtube is less than convincing.
I'm just floored, if you are the intellectual warrior I am to meet on this field of intellectual battle some far flung future day, well then I feel a flawless victory coming.

The really funny part about your post is; You first insult intelligent people for being intelligent. Then, without constructing a single sentence, you challenge those same people to a battle of intellect.

reply to post by Student X

Originally posted by Student X

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul

Thankfully, your experience doesn't amount to a hill of beans in categorizing a group of people.

Yes it does.

Says those who endorse the ideas of stereotypes. There are 500-750+ million atheists in the world! You wouldn't have a statistically significantly sample to work from even if everyone you've met in your whole life happened to be an atheist.

Maybe my experience with many atheists and skeptics over the years doesn't matter to YOU, but thankfully your self-serving opinion about my experience doesn't amount to a hill of beans to me.

Hey look, you're throwing out random insults. I'm making a legitimate point about sample

You lost all credibility with me long ago. Your opinions are worthless to me.

And you're a poo-poo head too! Seriously, if this is all you can work up in response to a legitimate objection about sample bias and other personal biases working their way into things, then you're not really one to judge another person's opinions.

I don't care about opinions, you should have noticed that by now. I care about facts, I care about reality, and I don't care about your pseudoscientific BS which makes so many claims about intercession into reality without ever backing them up. Now, none of that has anything to do with being an atheist, it has to do with the practice of critical thinking, as your claims about things like 'psi' and other such nonsense are nothing more than drops of water into the ocean of ignorance.

Yes, you're still not apologizing because you can't get over bias. Makes sense.

I don't owe you an apology, because I wasn't referring to any particular atheist or skeptic. If I had used your name then I might be apologizing.

You used a quote from adjensen, attributed it to me, then said that the misattribution didn't matter because it's something that applies to atheists as a whole without providing anything more than a biased personal opinion of things.

You did use my name. You used it right here. You were called on it. And you didn't even apologize for making a simple mistake. I'm not even asking you to apologize to me, I'm asking you to apologize to the board as a whole for making a mistake.

Don't you have the testicular fortitude to do that?

If I had said something like, "With madnessinmysoul and atheists like him it seems that "God" and such usually boils down to a rejection of evidence that others might find conclusive in favor of a "I'll believe it when I see it."

Of course you didn't, but you still mistakenly used a quote attributed to me...which was from someone else. Unfortunately, you didn't bother to even provide a simple 'my bad'. Board etiquette.

But I didn't say that. I referred to atheism as an alignment of thought...I used plural, broad terms which you are taking personally so that you can try to score some rhetoric points.

Hey look, more personal attacks. I'm taking things personally because you used a quote from another person that was misattributed to me.

You made a mistake. Get over it, admit it, and apologize.

It doesn't matter who said it because in my experience many atheists say the same sort of thing about God in particular and the paranormal in general.

And yet that is a statement that holds no sort of weight because it is backed by nothing more than personal testimony. Hell, it could be a lie for all we know.

Thats one of my problems with atheism as a category of thought.

"I don't believe in any deity" is not a category of thought.

In fact, I'm beginning to feel like maybe you owe me an apology for continuing to misunderstand that.

Hey look, you're ignorant and illogical.

Something that is observable, testable, and repeatable. It's basically the same standard I have for any phenomenon in the world. Now, I might not accept the claims of a specific deity with that evidence, but it's a step. Proving a specific deity would be slightly different. Proving a specific religious interpretation of that deity would be even more difficult.

Your self-serving standard amounts to little more than a psychological defense mechanism against the sort of religious experience that would evaporate your atheism.

Wow, more accusations. You're really not good with this whole 'rational discourse' thing, are you? I mean, I was going to tally up the ad hominem attacks in this post, but I decided not to bother because of their sheer volume.

Hell, you're not just attacking me, you're assuming a lot about me. Since you don't seem to know much about me, you don't seem to understand the period of my life when I was a practicing, meditating Theravada Buddhist, the period in my life where I would have considered myself a Christian mystic (had I understood the term at the time), the period in my life when I spent hours a day trying to connect with some sort of spiritual presence in the universe through religion, meditation, prayer, ritual, etc.

Of course, I'm not surprised. Now, what's wrong with the scientific method as a basis for all reality claims? I mean, it's obviously mostly useless when we're talking about philosophy or any form of art...but what's so wrong about it?

How is it self-serving? How is it a psychological defense mechanism?

Its like a scientism mantra. It lands you smack-dab in the middle of the very same sheep-goat catch-22.

You know, claiming things doesn't prove them. How is it 'scientism'? How is it a catch-22?

Which means your answer boils down to the very same sort, even though you try to obscure it with your defensive word-play.

You do realize that grammatically this sentence actually doesn't make any sense, right? What exactly do you mean by it?

reply to post by adjensen


I decry that sort of behavior! I've actually posted about TheAmazingAtheist before and how I don't like him. Hell, other atheistic YouTube users decry that sort of behavior. RationalWiki has the guy in their 'jerks' category of YouTube users.

Just a Reminder....

Please stay on topic and discuss the topic and not each other.
The off topic remarks derail the thread.
If you have personal remarks to make, please use the u2u messaging system.

Further off topic remarks and personal attacks will be removed and/or warned.

reply to post by adjensen


No, we're not as special as you think. I could go on and on about the government's extraterrestrial cover-up and how we've been visited in the ancient past by extraterrestrial beings that were thought to be gods, but even with the preponderance of evidence, not everyone believes it. I couldn't possibly show all of the documents, videos, photographs, interviews and ancient illustrations to anyone because that would take months. I've obtained so much data that I'm not even willing to spend my time sharing it all since it would take such a long time. Anyways, of course extraterrestrial civilizations are possible and of course they exist. You claim that the discovery of other Earth-like worlds is "against" the possibility of intelligent life, but that's just an opinion. How the hell is that a "vote" against it? There never was a damn vote in the first place. It's time for facts and statistical probabilities, not mere opinions.

Originally posted by Lucifer777

Dear Jesus

I would also like you to give "Adjensen" the power to cure all lepors and blind people in the world, and the power to miraculously cast mountains into the sea, and I would like you to do this immediately; and while you are at it, I would like you to immediately remove all Christians and religious fanatics from the earth; I pray all this in Jesus name.

Regards

Your eternal enemy.

Lucifer

LOL! It's prayers like those that still, to this day, prove to me that christianity is a hoax. I don't even remember it saying anywhere in the babble that Lucifer's prayers wouldn't be accepted. As you've pointed out, it does clearly state that Mr. Jesus will do anything you ask of him, no exceptions. I guess that means both teams in NFL games should win because fans on both sides pray that their team will win. I guess that also means every soldier should return from war, unharmed and unaffected in any way. In reality, only one team wins; In reality, not every soldier comes home and not every soldier that does is unharmed. Prayers mean nothing.

Originally posted by Lucifer777
One could "cherry pick" and "quote mine" Hitler's Mein Kampf for perfectly innocent comments, however that is not how we judge others; similarly if a person is accused in court of incitement to gencoide, if they cite all their lifetime of writings which were perfectly innocent, this is irrelevant to the charge of inciting genocide, even of they only did this on a single occastion; similarly with the Bible, one can "cherry pick" it and "quote mine" it for perfectly innocent texts, but that is not how we reach the conclusion that the Biblical deity is, as Dawkins argues is "arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully"

Unfortunately the danger of religious fanaticism is not merely the acceptance of a psychotic, sadistic deity; it is that religious fanatics define this psychotic, sadistic deity as their definition of "goodness;" thus it is entirely a consequence of this that the religious fanatics themselves become "petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freaks; vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleansers; misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic and capriciously malevolent bullies;" and human history provides ample evidence of this.

Perhaps your not aware that most religious texts have been significantly altered and/or banned meaning the true words of god have been mixed with paganism, especially up to the 4th century ad by the romans. Why would the various religious councils need to ban something like 30 books and barely mention anything about satan in the meantime?

Originally posted by Lucifer777
Irrespective of the philosophical question of the Creator's existence or Her non existence, since this God does not lend Herself to empirical observation, the religious fanatics can define Her in any way they choose and such ramblings cannot be proven nor disproven.

"her"? What makes you think god is a her or him?

Originally posted by Lucifer777
Dear Jesus

I would also like you to give "Adjensen" the power to cure all lepors and blind people in the world, and the power to miraculously cast mountains into the sea, and I would like you to do this immediately; and while you are at it, I would like you to immediately remove all Christians and religious fanatics from the earth; I pray all this in Jesus name.

Regards

Your eternal enemy.
Lucifer

Ah this explains a lot! I was going to call you an ignorant fool but then I saw this ridiculous letter and realise your one of those new age LaVey satanists! Do tell us, are you a theistic satanist or an "atheist" satanist?

That should be interesting.