Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Are there bigger HYPOCRITES on this planet then atheists???

page: 12
17
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 5 2012 @ 10:32 AM
link   
reply to post by DelayedChristmas
 


We're not supposed to judge according to appearences but we may make righteous judgements, such as wether or not baby killers are evil. They are unrepentant, they continue to murder the unborn, they tell themselves lies and believe them to ease their burden of conscience (if they have a conscience at all) just so they can continue on in their wickedness. How then can we condone what these people do? If we condone what they do we are party to it.

Yes you can be merciful to them, and forgive them but don't get sucked into doing what they do. Forgiveness means that you know what theyre doing is wrong, but you choose to turn your back and walk away, not holding a grudge but not staying there to be party to it either. Just like how our Creator could forgive and turn his back on the people he made with his own hands, who were nailing him to a cross, spitting on him, ostracising him, cursing him and doing it gleefully.

Judging according to appearences is like saying a billionaire is worth more than a homeless bum, when the reverse is actually true. The brokenhearted, homeless man destitute and living in the streets has more value to and is closer to God than a man who needs nothing and no one, that endlessly seeks more power and more wealth, his mind firmly on his own god Mammon.




posted on Oct, 5 2012 @ 11:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Arsenis
reply to post by Soloro
 


Atheism is the absence of belief get it right.


Atheism is the belief in the absence of belief. Their god is the thoughts of those who reject the true God. They are hypocrites, but you also will find hypocrites in other beliefs too.



posted on Oct, 5 2012 @ 11:38 AM
link   
reply to post by truejew
 


No. Atheism is DEFAULT, Man made a belief, thus it is not a belief there is no belief. It is just NO Belief.

Default = 0, Religious = +1, Atheist = 0, brought back to 0.

If NOT playing Tennis is a sport and Bald is a hair colour then i guess i'll agree with you.


Wth is a true god? these 2000 yrs old god or more ancient gods?



posted on Oct, 5 2012 @ 12:19 PM
link   



posted on Oct, 5 2012 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by Arsenis
reply to post by Soloro
 


Atheism is the absence of belief get it right.


Atheism is the belief in the absence of belief. Their god is the thoughts of those who reject the true God. They are hypocrites, but you also will find hypocrites in other beliefs too.


How are the thoughts of people who reject god, our god? Are you suggesting we can't think for ourselves? I lost faith in the god of Abraham before ever hearing any words of other atheists.

Even as a young kid I could never bring myself to worship a god who basically said "Worship me or burn in hell for eternity!" and "Do as I say or be stoned to death!" or "You've made me unhappy! now you get a global flood/fire and brimstone/genocidal armies/plagues!!". To me that always sounded more like a tyrant than an all loving god. Those are reactions I'd expect from a figure like Satan.



posted on Oct, 5 2012 @ 01:44 PM
link   


Wheres yours, you may blind a child with your falicious statements but
I recon you have big red shoes and a big red nose with those comments
Pol Pot was an atheist educated in France, maybe once a Catholic
"In fact, the Pol Pot regime specifically preached atheism and sought to exterminate all religious expression in Cambodia. And, since atheist-led states were largely unheard of before the 20th century, atheists have only just begun to get in on .." p. 161 The dawkins delusion

Pol Pot was educated as both a Theravedic Buddhist and as a Catholic. Buddhism in general (and especially Theravedic Buddhism) is marked by NOT believing in a single all-powerful deity...but rather in all manner of lesser supernatural powers and the personification of things like Fate and Destiny as sentient supernatural entities as evidenced by these quotes FROM PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY KNEW POL POT.

"Pol Pot does not believe in God but he thinks that heaven, destiny, wants him to guide Cambodia in the way he thinks it the best for Cambodia, that is to say, the worst. Pol Pot is mad, you know, like Hitler." -Prince Norodom Sihanouk, former king of Cambodia from 1941 as well as Head of State from 1955 to 1970 before resigning in 1976

Furthermore...Pol Pot's Second in Command went on record and cited divine visions and guidance from The Iron God (Lok Ta Dambong Dek) as part of his defense IN APRIL OF 2012 during his tribunal. Here's the transcript.
Link: www.eccc.gov.kh...


Mao was an atheist, Tim Oakes, Donald S. Sutton - 2010 - Preview
Religion, Tourism, and the Chinese State Tim Oakes, Donald S. Sutton. Even Mao Zedong himself, an atheist, is mystified into a deity, and worshiped as a secular god. The continuing cult of Mao is popular in his birthplace of Shaoshan, and ...


Yeah...I'm sure the guy writing a book entitled "Mao Was an Atheist" doesn't have a vested interest in the outcome and conclusions of his "research". Here's a passage from Mao's little red book (written by the Mao himself) which assumes the existence of "god" is a given.
"There is an ancient Chinese fable called "The Foolish Old Man Who Removed the Mountains". It tells of an old man who lived in northern China long, long ago and was known as the Foolish Old Man of North Mountain. His house faced south and beyond his doorway stood the two great peaks, Taihang and Wangwu, obstructing the way. He called his sons, and hoe in hand they began to dig up these mountains with great determination. Another graybeard, known as the Wise Old Man, saw them and said derisively, "How silly of you to do this! It is quite impossible for you few to dig up those two huge mountains." The Foolish Old Man replied, "When I die, my sons will carry on; when they die, there will be my grandsons, and then their sons and grandsons, and so on to infinity. High as they are, the mountains cannot grow any higher and with every bit we dig, they will be that much lower. Why can't we clear them away?" Having refuted the Wise Old Man's wrong view, he went on digging every day, unshaken in his conviction. God was moved by this, and he sent down two angels, who carried the mountains away on their backs. Today, two big mountains lie like a dead weight on the Chinese people. One is imperialism, the other is feudalism. The Chinese Communist Party has long made up its mind to dig them up. We must persevere and work unceasingly, and we, too, will touch God's heart. Our God is none other than the masses of the Chinese people. If they stand up and dig together with us, why can't these two mountains be cleared away?
"The Foolish Old Man Who Removed the Mountains" (June 11, 1945), Selected Works, Vol. III, p. 322."



en.wikipedia.org...

Stalin atheist books.google.com.au/books?isbn=1456609106
Robert Firth - 2012 - Preview
After the Russian Revolution of 1917, religious instruction was banned by the State. While the Soviet Constitution of 1936 guaranteed freedom to hold religious services, the Soviet state under Stalin's policy of state atheism did not consider ...


This one is so nuts I don't even really know how to address it. Stalin didn't ban religion...he banned catholicism and REBUILT Russian Orthodoxy. Was Henry the VIII an Atheist for founding the English Anglican Church? Same thing...the Russians just showed up a couple hundred years late to the Reformation, that's all.

Why do you think Putin is so tight w/ the Russian Orthodox Church today? Why do you think those P^ssy Riot girls were protesting it? You can't call a guy who FOUNDS AN ENTIRE RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION an "atheist". If so, then by that same definition Martin Luther, St. Peter, and Adam Smith are ALSO "atheists".

You should really try reading some books sometime.



posted on Oct, 5 2012 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
reply to post by DelayedChristmas
 


We're not supposed to judge according to appearences but we may make righteous judgements, such as wether or not baby killers are evil. They are unrepentant, they continue to murder the unborn, they tell themselves lies and believe them to ease their burden of conscience (if they have a conscience at all) just so they can continue on in their wickedness. How then can we condone what these people do? If we condone what they do we are party to it.

Yes you can be merciful to them, and forgive them but don't get sucked into doing what they do. Forgiveness means that you know what theyre doing is wrong, but you choose to turn your back and walk away, not holding a grudge but not staying there to be party to it either. Just like how our Creator could forgive and turn his back on the people he made with his own hands, who were nailing him to a cross, spitting on him, ostracising him, cursing him and doing it gleefully.

Judging according to appearences is like saying a billionaire is worth more than a homeless bum, when the reverse is actually true. The brokenhearted, homeless man destitute and living in the streets has more value to and is closer to God than a man who needs nothing and no one, that endlessly seeks more power and more wealth, his mind firmly on his own god Mammon.


How can you make righteous judgement on those that arent part of the faith and dont really know the love of Christ. Remember it may take a "bad" person their whole lives to repent a la the thief that was crucified to the right of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ didnt use the vocabulary that you use to describe the individual, he looked at the thief as a troubled person that played the conventional card he was dealt because he didnt have the knowledge you do.

And there you go judging the rich man for being rich and assuming he worships a false idol. You do not know for an absolute fact, you are generalizing and therefore not righteous. You don know if that rich man was blessed wih financial blessings so that he can share that blessing with others.
edit on 5-10-2012 by DelayedChristmas because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2012 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by johngrissom
reply to post by Firewater
 



Originally posted by Firewater

Originally posted by johngrissom
reply to post by MarioOnTheFly
 



Originally posted by MarioOnTheFly
reply to post by borntowatch
 



Atheists don't have a standard ?

I'm sort of an atheist...I have standards...they are called:

peace, harmony, compassion, love and tolerance.


Don't need any book or higher spiritual authority to make me be that way. If you spend time to think about the world and yourself as an individual, these things come naturally to any sane person able to add 2 and 2 together.

I dare to proclaim, had I ever been more involved with the religions, I would not have been as free as I feel today. I have never loved people more than I do now.

I have broken off the religious path in my elementary school days...best decision of my life.




And this:
"I have broken off the religious path in my elementary school days...best decision of my life"

Is not having standards but more being closed minded.

Sorry truth hurts brother
edit on 3-10-2012 by johngrissom because: (no reason given)



Ha Ha. Straying from organized religion.. exploring other possibilities... you said that was being closed minded.. ha ha..... ha...... umm, you are joking? right?

So, someone who decides to take their nose out of the bible and allow themselves the freedom to learn about the infinite other beliefs and religions on this planet, is being "closed minded"? Is that what your saying?


Nope,


Im saying someone who made a decision like that in elementary school has no idea about religion and just find excuse not to try any of them but instead bashing them


. You really think that a grade-schooler decided to stray from religion out of laziness (excuse not to try any of them) and hatred (instead bashing them)?




I'am Nondenominational Christian. Which you clearly have no idea about.


What, about my comment, "clearly" suggests that?

Why the need to "claim" others beliefs. Can't you form your own conclusions and call it [your name]-ism or something like that?




If, you can't do the fact checking on everything. Then you have no right forming an opinion with no facts
.

I'm not really sure what opinion i formed?


But i probably did. My stupid brain just does it on its own. Its always just compiling info on different stuff and forming opinions. It does this even if i havn't consciously and meticulously researched the subject. I tell it to research more, but all it wants to do is play video games and watch porn. Stupid brain.



posted on Oct, 5 2012 @ 03:16 PM
link   
How about those atheist hippopotami? They are VERY big hippo-crites.



posted on Oct, 5 2012 @ 03:45 PM
link   
reply to post by luciddream
 


If you can prove there is no higher power, then I will concede that atheism is not a belief system. Otherwise, something that cannot be proven or disproven is a belief. End. Of. Story.

Why do these things always have to be so complicated? Are you so adamant against being lumped into a category alongside Christians? If that causes you distaste, maybe you should examine YOURSELF for judgmental issues.
edit on 5-10-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2012 @ 04:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by luciddream
reply to post by truejew
 


No. Atheism is DEFAULT,


It takes belief in the true infallible God to believe in the true God and belief in man's fallible intelligence (which atheists worship as a god) to not believe in the true God.


Originally posted by luciddream

Man made a belief,


Incorrect.


Originally posted by luciddream

If NOT playing Tennis is a sport and Bald is a hair colour then i guess i'll agree with you.


Atheists are bald without God.


Originally posted by luciddream

Wth is a true god? these 2000 yrs old god or more ancient gods?


Jesus Christ is the true God. What you call ancient gods are man made and not as "ancient" as you claim.



posted on Oct, 5 2012 @ 05:04 PM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 





If you can prove there is no higher power, then I will concede that atheism is not a belief system.


Religious make the claim, burden of proof is with them, i "worship" the default. You guys can follow a rule made by another human being couple of thousand years ago.

I'm willing to accept higher being(not supreme or ultimate) but i'm still 99% skeptical, But these man made garbage gods(with slavery, rape, murder) are nothing to me.

_____________________

reply to post by truejew
 




Jesus Christ is the true God


You lost all credibility soon as i saw that. How dare you say that about old religions? wait.. why do i even reply to "pastorized" people. if i ever turn to a "believer it would be a eastern religion like Buddhism.

i'll be looking forward to the day when Christianity and other abrahamic faith is added to the myth category such as zeus and co.



posted on Oct, 5 2012 @ 07:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by borntowatch
 


At least those quotes make some semblance of sense. All I hear from Christians is "Jesus said this, Jesus said that." I don't CARE what Jesus said. What original thoughts do YOU have that someone didn't put in your head for you?

Atheists seem very capable of original thought - or if they have unoriginal thoughts, they have very good reasons for those thoughts. Christians just have the desire to believe, and so they do. But why do they want to believe? Because their parents said they should? Because their friends do? Because that's how they grew up, and that's what's familiar to them, and they're trained to shy away from anything that is unfamiliar or associated with evil?

What is sin, exactly? Where does sin and evil come from? You'll get a textbook answer on that, but not one coherent response that the Christian is capable of elaborating on in their own words. That's because the Bible is so vague, it doesn't give answers, it gives commands and hints and very evasive innuendoes. As a rule book, it's incomplete and misleading.

Atheists work from their own heart, from EMPATHY. Empathy, in many ways, is a lot more effective than the Bible because it doesn't rely on old-fashioned ideals to keep the community is one rut, going in circles upon circles and denying progression. Empathy looks at something and says, "Hey, there's nothing wrong with that," and then everyone's happy. The Bible says, "That's wrong," and doesn't give a reason, so everyone is following that rule blindly, only to find out a hundred years later that the wrong thing isn't actually wrong.

And then we have labels. Oh yay, labels! The ability to JUDGE a person based on how they look at things, divide them into another group, then hate that entire group because they're not like you. Yay, labels! The Bible encourages us to do this, DESPITE saying, "Thou shalt not judge", whereas empathy allows us to look at it from THEIR perspective and realize that they have feelings too, and maybe they aren't as bad as we thought and let's give them a chance, yeah? See how it works out. Because we TRY to relate to them.

And there's the difference. One tries to be understanding, one demands change or damnation. I'm done here. I hope I made my point. Peace.


Oh well. whats your AMAZING original thought., your just a carbon copy of someone else.
Give me an original though.
Flatulence ???

Empathy I hear, show me the empathy taught by atheism!
Stalin Pol Pot Mao, hardly empathetic, nor their soldiers. Thats a pathetic answer.

Labele, atheists use labels as much as anyone else, its hypocritical to suggests otherwise.

Yes many atheists relate well to others but their is a growing fundamental atheism and its as bad as any fundamental religion.
Not one valid answer or one valid point in all your diatribe addresses my statement.


Dawkins said this, Dawkins said that. You be the judge



posted on Oct, 5 2012 @ 07:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by DelayedChristmas
[

How can you make righteous judgement on those that arent part of the faith and dont really know the love of Christ. Remember it may take a "bad" person their whole lives to repent a la the thief that was crucified to the right of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ didnt use the vocabulary that you use to describe the individual, he looked at the thief as a troubled person that played the conventional card he was dealt because he didnt have the knowledge you do.

And there you go judging the rich man for being rich and assuming he worships a false idol. You do not know for an absolute fact, you are generalizing and therefore not righteous. You don know if that rich man was blessed wih financial blessings so that he can share that blessing with others.
edit on 5-10-2012 by DelayedChristmas because: (no reason given)


Go read Corinthians, it teaches Christians their responsibility in judging other. its only a short book

I doubt you will do that so here is a reasonable link to look at
www.renewamerica.com...

If you want to preach, preach from scripture not what you think is right



posted on Oct, 5 2012 @ 07:26 PM
link   
reply to post by luciddream
 





i'll be looking forward to the day when Christianity and other abrahamic faith is added to the myth category such as zeus and co.


Don't hold your breath, you'll be holding it for eternity. 2000 years ago a jewish scholar named Gamaliel said if christianity wasn't born of God then it could be destroyed and would fizzle out quickly, but if it was from God then no one could destroy it lest they be found to fight God himself. 2000 years later, still here
. after many attempts to destroy us, we're still here. Can't defeat the Living God.



posted on Oct, 5 2012 @ 07:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by milominderbinder


Wheres yours, you may blind a child with your falicious statements but
I recon you have big red shoes and a big red nose with those comments
Pol Pot was an atheist educated in France, maybe once a Catholic
"In fact, the Pol Pot regime specifically preached atheism and sought to exterminate all religious expression in Cambodia. And, since atheist-led states were largely unheard of before the 20th century, atheists have only just begun to get in on .." p. 161 The dawkins delusion

Pol Pot was educated as both a Theravedic Buddhist and as a Catholic. Buddhism in general (and especially Theravedic Buddhism) is marked by NOT believing in a single all-powerful deity...but rather in all manner of lesser supernatural powers and the personification of things like Fate and Destiny as sentient supernatural entities as evidenced by these quotes FROM PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY KNEW POL POT.

"Pol Pot does not believe in God but he thinks that heaven, destiny, wants him to guide Cambodia in the way he thinks it the best for Cambodia, that is to say, the worst. Pol Pot is mad, you know, like Hitler." -Prince Norodom Sihanouk, former king of Cambodia from 1941 as well as Head of State from 1955 to 1970 before resigning in 1976

Furthermore...Pol Pot's Second in Command went on record and cited divine visions and guidance from The Iron God (Lok Ta Dambong Dek) as part of his defense IN APRIL OF 2012 during his tribunal. Here's the transcript.
Link: www.eccc.gov.kh...


Mao was an atheist, Tim Oakes, Donald S. Sutton - 2010 - Preview
Religion, Tourism, and the Chinese State Tim Oakes, Donald S. Sutton. Even Mao Zedong himself, an atheist, is mystified into a deity, and worshiped as a secular god. The continuing cult of Mao is popular in his birthplace of Shaoshan, and ...


Yeah...I'm sure the guy writing a book entitled "Mao Was an Atheist" doesn't have a vested interest in the outcome and conclusions of his "research". Here's a passage from Mao's little red book (written by the Mao himself) which assumes the existence of "god" is a given.
"There is an ancient Chinese fable called "The Foolish Old Man Who Removed the Mountains". It tells of an old man who lived in northern China long, long ago and was known as the Foolish Old Man of North Mountain. His house faced south and beyond his doorway stood the two great peaks, Taihang and Wangwu, obstructing the way. He called his sons, and hoe in hand they began to dig up these mountains with great determination. big mountains lie like a dead weight on the Chinese people. One is imperialism, the other is feudalism. The Chinese Communist Party has long made up its mind to dig them up. We must persevere and work unceasingly, and we, too, will touch God's heart. Our God is none other than the masses of the Chinese people. If they stand up and dig together with us, why can't these two mountains be cleared away?
"The Foolish Old Man Who Removed the Mountains" (June 11, 1945), Selected Works, Vol. III, p. 322."



en.wikipedia.org...

Stalin atheist books.google.com.au/books?isbn=1456609106
Robert Firth - 2012 - Preview
After the Russian Revolution of 1917, religious instruction was banned by the State. While the Soviet Constitution of 1936 guaranteed freedom to hold religious services, the Soviet state under Stalin's policy of state atheism did not consider ...


This one is so nuts I don't even really know how to address it. Stalin didn't ban religion...he banned catholicism and REBUILT Russian Orthodoxy. Was Henry the VIII an Atheist for founding the English Anglican Church? Same thing...the Russians just showed up a couple hundred years late to the Reformation, that's all.

Why do you think Putin is so tight w/ the Russian Orthodox Church today? Why do you think those P^ssy Riot girls were protesting it? You can't call a guy who FOUNDS AN ENTIRE RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION an "atheist". If so, then by that same definition Martin Luther, St. Peter, and Adam Smith are ALSO "atheists".




So one fella blamed religion at his trial, used religion as an excuse 30 years or so latter. Your argument is that he once believed in a god or gods so he was religious. Just about every atheist on this board once believed in some gods or something, are they still religious as well Stupid argument.
Stalin said state controlled religion is acceptable and you think thats a logical argument justifying your position.
thats just so corny. Again you embarass yourself. Think latteraly, or at least just think
Also none of that addresses the point I raised
edit on 5-10-2012 by borntowatch because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2012 @ 07:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
reply to post by luciddream
 





i'll be looking forward to the day when Christianity and other abrahamic faith is added to the myth category such as zeus and co.


Don't hold your breath, you'll be holding it for eternity. 2000 years ago a jewish scholar named Gamaliel said if christianity wasn't born of God then it could be destroyed and would fizzle out quickly, but if it was from God then no one could destroy it lest they be found to fight God himself. 2000 years later, still here
. after many attempts to destroy us, we're still here. Can't defeat the Living God.


And it flourishes in Africa and China, flourishes beyond what anyone could imagine. Lives changed.



posted on Oct, 5 2012 @ 07:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by luciddream

Religious make the claim, burden of proof is with them,


Only one question....Where do they say that.
Christianity is a faith based belief, we have no proof. How about lucid thoughts instead of lucid dreams....please.



posted on Oct, 5 2012 @ 08:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by luciddream

You lost all credibility soon as i saw that. How dare you say that about old religions? wait.. why do i even reply to "pastorized" people. if i ever turn to a "believer it would be a eastern religion like Buddhism.


In your eyes, those who say the truth don't have credibility, those who lie do. The question of why we have Obama and Romney to choose from, has been answered.



posted on Oct, 5 2012 @ 09:50 PM
link   



So one fella blamed religion at his trial, used religion as an excuse 30 years or so latter.

You obviously missed the part about Pol Pot's infamous levels of superstition and belief in all manner of Theravedic boogeymen. Read my post again and keep reading it until you understand it.


Your argument is that he once believed in a god or gods so he was religious. Just about every atheist on this board once believed in some gods or something, are they still religious as well Stupid argument. Stalin said state controlled religion is acceptable and you think thats a logical argument justifying your position.
thats just so corny.


No...that's not my argument. My argument is that NONE of the individuals you mentioned were "atheists" because ALL of them believed in magical beings who meddled in worldly affairs their entire lives. Stalin started and ended his life and career as devoutly religious. You are misinterpreting the period in which he booted the Catholic church out Russia as being "atheist".


Again you embarass yourself. Think latteraly, or at least just think
Also none of that addresses the point I raised

The only person I'm embarrassed for is the guy who can't spell "laterally"...and it ABSOLUTELY addresses your historically incorrect statement in the thread that Stalin, Pol Pot, and Chairmen Mao were "atheists". One guy founded an entire religion, another guy thought that Fate and Destiny personified worked their magical powers to put him at the head of Khmer Rouge, and the third flatly states and admits the existence of "god" in the Little Red Book you get so worked up about.

You might disagree with the religious institution that Stalin started...but that doesn't mean he didn't do it. You might not think there is a God of Destiny and a God of Fate as they aren't from the judeo-christian tradition...but that doesn't mean that Pol Pot didn't believe in gods. It might run contrary to what you've been told that Mao was a big time "believer"...but I cut and pasted his very own words from the Little Red Book that you have CLEARLY not ever once in your lifetime read.

I know it sucks to be wrong...but you're just going to have to get over it.





new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join