World’s most dangerous religion: Atheists face worldwide persecution

page: 8
10
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 05:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Lucid Lunacy
 

Just out of curiosity, how does this comment attract so many stars:


That was in jest. Honestly I am bothered not one iota at the prospect the religious might find my opposition annoying I don't believe in apathy. I am almost religious about it

I'm neither here or there about it, but how is it praise worthy?




posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 05:46 PM
link   
I am not worried about how the religious view atheism. From the time I was a kid till now the number of atheists have doubled, tripled, maybe even more. I think in the next 50 years that number will triple again. Religious institutions realize this as well and it scares them they will need a miracle a literal miracle to reverse the trend in society and as we know those do not exist. Those in the Middle East and in the southern United States will be the last hold outs but eventually everyone will be an atheist or agnostic atheist. It is just a matter of time if we don’t destroy ourselves first and that is a possibility with these religious nutters running around hoping for their savior to return. End of days can be a self-fulfilling prophecy with them.



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 05:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by bowtomonkey

You are working on a number of unproven hopes.
...
This is a hope. The descriptions you use are based on almost no evidence of anything living outside out planet and a very base guess at what would produce life.


And religion isn't an "unproven hope"?
Regardless of what I, or anyone might 'hope' for as extrapolated from science fiction and/or projections derived from observable historical trends in the evolution of technology, this 'hope' isn't entirely unproven nor near as unfounded as any faith that dedicates so much stock in invisible people in the sky.
How many different apocalypses and/or second comings of any sort of god have been prophesied, predicted and never come to pass?
You may be familiar with this thread: History of Doomsday & Apocalypse FAILURES.
On the other hand, as predictions apply to technological evolution, though hit and miss in finite specifics, we've developed a number of wonderful solutions, some beyond the capabilities and features imagined from yesteryear.



Your use of the word "natural" suggests that you understand that natural and sustainable are an equivalent. It does not suffice, however to expect completely unknown technology to replace something that is also not understood (by science), life. To suggest this will happen is none other an expression of attachment to science fiction.


As stated above, it's a projection; something far more reliable, predictable, reasonable, and even testable than some blind faith in invisible people in the sky.
To suggest that invisible people in the sky take part in anyone's lives is none other an expression bordering on schizotypy, if not just an attachment to magical thinking, delusions, poor logic, and pure fantasy.



...
I am interested in what you know about the energy of thoughts. I am less interested in the energy of creating mind blockages and frustration due to ego requirements.


You may need clarify whatever it is you're talking about as it seems lost in translation.
Energy of thoughts? Mind blockages?
Have you attended even a Psych 101 class? or Anatomy and Physiology?
If not, you may profit from reading this thread I've created: University Education - FREE online courses where you can obtain a better understanding of how the brain works, among sundry other items from well over 550 online courses offered from top Universities, all for free (non-accredited though).



I actually think that (perspective) may be the one thing that does requite an emotional attachment.


Certainly perspective can be gained, and also lost from an emotional attachment, and you're welcome to think that all you want, but, perspective certainly does not require emotional attachment, especially where objective perspective is in detail.



Yes, yes it's all a matter of perspective, and we are going to be robots so let's forget about out present position and project the future into present as if it was interchangeable. Of course it's relative, so your position reveals your bias.

... then there's solipsism.


I never claimed non-bias.

I'm entirely biased from an Atheist, and even sometimes an Antitheist perspective, and see certainty through projection in the demise of people taking stock in willingly offering themselves as slaves to invisible people in the sky over taking more stock in the real, the solid, as well as the more tangible fantasies the real and solid can offer through technology.

... through that technology too, forms of solipsism will also be realized.
If anyone still wants to offer themselves as slaves to worship invisible people, it's entirely their prerogative to do so.




posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 10:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Druscilla
 


This comment is aimed at me.


To suggest that invisible people in the sky take part in anyone's lives is none other an expression bordering on schizotypy, if not just an attachment to magical thinking, delusions, poor logic, and pure fantasy.

There you are again, making assumptions and addressing others with the lowest possible denominator.


You may need clarify whatever it is you're talking about as it seems lost in translation. Energy of thoughts? Mind blockages? Have you attended even a Psych 101 class? or Anatomy and Physiology?

It is you with the lack of education. You assume, again, that you know too much. I hope this doesn't occur regularly, whereby you create the lowest denominator against people who don't see things your way. Don't know how to be clearer but you and most others in this threat (see stars) are apt to invent a stupid opposition just to assume the greater intelligence, methodology and education.

I see people with personal issue that need gratifying in simple ways who are too shallow to see what others see when the create illusions of stupidity, which merely creates their own level / peers.


perspective certainly does not require emotional attachment, especially where objective perspective is in detail.

Do you think emotion is only an outpouring or a level of understanding 'on an emotional level'. Perspective is inherent in the process of emotional understanding, however I have not gone deep into this topic, but I think I am right.

What you have said seems to suggest that you don't know what emotions are?


over taking more stock in the real, the solid, as well as the more tangible fantasies the real and solid can offer through technology.

Not even star Trek would try to use the type of thing I have seen you call real! Not withstanding, you can't tell me you know what is real. The mistake you have made is to think that only your perspective (or your counter-religion) is real. Impermanence is real. This mitigates your counter arguments, lol.


through that technology too, forms of solipsism will also be realized.

I believe in everything and nothing but I don't subscribe to your belief systems or any that you would try to attribute to me.
You are correct in a way. Any kind of mistake will eventually get you to where you are going / where you came from / what is real. To worship technology is no different that any other limiting belief system.

When you admit that you don't know what to believe you have made a step forward.



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 11:09 PM
link   
reply to post by bowtomonkey
 



Just out of curiosity, how does this comment attract so many stars:

"That was in jest. Honestly I am bothered not one iota at the prospect the religious might find my opposition annoying I don't believe in apathy. I am almost religious about it"

I'm neither here or there about it, but how is it praise worthy?


People starred my post, but I think it's a rather big leap to say I was being praised for it
I don't know why. What do you want me to say? I will star a post if someone uses a word I've never seen before


Perhaps you can explain to me why it's commonplace for a religious person on ATS to collect stars when all that is posted is copied biblical passages, with little to no original thought included?? Anyone can copy and paste. It doesn't meet my *apparently* high criteria for intellectual discussion. Yet it doesn't stop these posts from out-starring my countries flag.

The point I wasn't really attempting to make, is that neither side should be deterred from speaking on their convictions because the other side's sensibilities have been offended. Yes, I said either side.

Now you don't have to star this post. A pat on the back, or a tipping of the hat will suffice. Or.....if you prefer you can throw holy water at me and see if I melt.



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 11:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Lucid Lunacy
 




Perhaps you can explain to me why it's commonplace for a religious person on ATS to collect stars when all that is posted is copied biblical passages, with little to no original thought included?? Anyone can copy and paste. It doesn't meet my *apparently* high criteria for intellectual discussion. Yet it doesn't stop these posts from out-starring my countries flag.


That's quite simple. They want to endorse their club.

The posts that I like the most seem to involve people who don't give stars at all. Whole pages with no stars ...

Your aggressive anti-religious attacks seem to have attracted a following, but I starred this response because I suspect you won't get any others ;P



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 01:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by Merriman Weir
which might go way to actually inflate the Christianity statistics as I know a couple of 'traditional' churches that have been formally taken over by 'charismatic' forms of Christianity with predominantly black worshippers.

Setting aside the racist overtone there, what's the point of this comment? How are Charismatic Christians artificially inflating the numbers of Christians? Do you think Charismatics aren't Christians?


Nothing racist about my comments or me. I was an active member of the anti-nazi league for a long time: not a racist bone in my body. I've been with the daughter of immigrants for the last 18 years too: hardly xenophobic either. Considering I've posted a couple of posts recently defending Christians (despite not being one), people would struggle to pin an anti-Christian or anti-religion charge on me too.

The point, and to be honest, a point I thought was a fairly obvious one, was that the Christian denominations that are historically traditional to Britain (and charismatic churches aren't no matter what you might like to think) are seeing a drop in numbers, which is largely shaping the overall trend in Christian worship in Britain. However, the rise in charismatic churches (largely due to a particular immigration trend) is offsetting this trend slightly: without this offsetting, the overall downward trend would be even more significant.

I'm not so sure why you're trying to make an issue out of a neutral interpretation of statistics.
edit on 14-12-2012 by Merriman Weir because: .



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 02:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by bowtomonkey
reply to post by Lucid Lunacy
 

Just out of curiosity, how does this comment attract so many stars:


That was in jest. Honestly I am bothered not one iota at the prospect the religious might find my opposition annoying I don't believe in apathy. I am almost religious about it

I'm neither here or there about it, but how is it praise worthy?


Stars and flags are a curious phenomena on ATS. I stopped caring about them a long time ago: it turns posting into an exercise in back-slapping and a popularity contest. I think the 'debate forums' are similarly flawed. It's a daily occurrence where I see a post and I think there's no way that it deserves the stars it gets. Not because I disagree with the post's contents, but often it's barely more than a one liner and doesn't actually make much of a point. I'm happy to star the post of someone criticising me/my posts if they do it well, make good points and so on.

I also think that there's a type of post that garners a lot of stars, and these posts might as well be auto-generated. Pro-gun topics, American patriotism &c will harvest stars like there's no tomorrow.



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 05:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Grimpachi
I am not worried about how the religious view atheism. From the time I was a kid till now the number of atheists have doubled, tripled, maybe even more. I think in the next 50 years that number will triple again. Religious institutions realize this as well and it scares them they will need a miracle a literal miracle to reverse the trend in society and as we know those do not exist. Those in the Middle East and in the southern United States will be the last hold outs but eventually everyone will be an atheist or agnostic atheist. It is just a matter of time if we don’t destroy ourselves first and that is a possibility with these religious nutters running around hoping for their savior to return. End of days can be a self-fulfilling prophecy with them.


If you understood that those "religious nutters" are the ones who made you an atheist in the first place, then perhaps you'd stop and think about what you just wrote. Do me a favour please. Go to the Science Daily website and look at the logo. Did you know that in the occult, red (matter)(fire)(Adam) and blue (spirit)(water)(Heavenly) is associated with transformation? See the little white R in the circle and the white accent lettering? "Illumination". Every single member of the occult, no matter what they choose to call themselves - Shi'ite, Hindu, Freemason, New Ager, Charismatic, gnostic Christian etc - are awaiting their "transformation" into becoming a godlike being....

The fact is, atheism was a means to an end and many of your fellow atheists have the same beliefs as these occultists. How? Look again at that logo. The website declares it's allegiance to the real "religious nutters" out there, and everything that website pushes to it's unsuspecting readers is designed to mold and shape your beliefs.

Thinking that true atheists are anything but a means to an end is tragic. They have no need for you once your beliefs accomplish what you were brainwashed to do - being the foot soldiers and voices to drive Christ's commands from the western lands. By doing that, you unknowingly allowed the occult's religion to flood right on in. You are right, they are taking us to the last days of this age , mirroring Jesus' ministry on Earth as the crowds in Judea (the world) were swayed by their teachers and leaders to call for the true Saviour to be crucified whilst choosing to release instead the son of the wrong father, the murderer and insurrectionist.

You are misled when you stated that "you are not worried about how the religious view atheism". You are right when it comes to Christ's faithful, some of whom may be next to you in the gallows....but you couldn't be more wrong with regards to the occult, for you will not worship their master if you are a true atheist. You therefore are not wanted in the world of their dreams because atheism is but a means to obtaining that end. And from a Heavenly viewpoint, both atheists and the occult reject God's will - to believe in His Son.



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 05:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Lucid Lunacy
 


Yup people starred that post because people agreed with what was said in the post oh and it made me smile...not hard is it?
Oh and dude I starred it
.

Oops meant to reply to bowtomonkey.


Oh and Bowto you can bow when ever you want to me or kneel like this guy.



I love Zod
If there is any justice in the world Zod will get many stars.
edit on 14-12-2012 by boymonkey74 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 08:22 AM
link   
reply to post by WhoKnows100
 





If you understood that those "religious nutters" are the ones who made you an atheist in the first place, then perhaps you'd stop and think about what you just wrote.


Well you took a huge leap in logic there stating you know how I became an atheist. I do not know what you are talking about when referencing the occult so sorry you are not making much sense to me. I was born an atheist like all are. I had no knowledge of deity’s and I was never indoctrinated or brainwashed to believe in them. My family practiced honesty with me growing up. It doesn’t mean I haven’t run into people who didn’t try to convert or brainwash me into religion it is just that I have never heard a single one of the wholly rollers say anything or provide evidence that could sway me into believing in some kind of supernatural being. My standard for proof isn’t even that high.

It is sometimes fun poking holes in their belief systems to be honest it is too easy. If their arguments were not so week I wouldn’t be able to. So if I can debunk religious nutter’s beliefs with ease then there is no way I will ignore the obvious idiocy of said religions and become a willful follower. You are wrong religions didn’t make me an atheist because I have always been one.
edit on 14-12-2012 by Grimpachi because: spelling



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 09:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Merriman Weir

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by Merriman Weir
which might go way to actually inflate the Christianity statistics as I know a couple of 'traditional' churches that have been formally taken over by 'charismatic' forms of Christianity with predominantly black worshippers.

Setting aside the racist overtone there, what's the point of this comment? How are Charismatic Christians artificially inflating the numbers of Christians? Do you think Charismatics aren't Christians?


Nothing racist about my comments or me. I was an active member of the anti-nazi league for a long time: not a racist bone in my body. I've been with the daughter of immigrants for the last 18 years too: hardly xenophobic either. Considering I've posted a couple of posts recently defending Christians (despite not being one), people would struggle to pin an anti-Christian or anti-religion charge on me too.


The term "predominantly black worshippers" is somewhat racist, because it implies that being black has something to do with your point. They're not "predominantly black worshippers" -- they're "worshippers". I'm sure you didn't intend to be racist, which is why I didn't make anything of it.


The point, and to be honest, a point I thought was a fairly obvious one, was that the Christian denominations that are historically traditional to Britain (and charismatic churches aren't no matter what you might like to think) are seeing a drop in numbers, which is largely shaping the overall trend in Christian worship in Britain. However, the rise in charismatic churches (largely due to a particular immigration trend) is offsetting this trend slightly: without this offsetting, the overall downward trend would be even more significant.


Well, that's a valid point if the subject of the survey was the decline of the Church of England, or traditional British denominations, but the subject is the decline of Christianity. Your argument there is a bit like saying that a survey which showed the decline of ice cream consumption is flawed, because it doesn't take into account people who are switching from vanilla to chocolate.

For whatever reason (and, frankly, I've never understood the appeal,) the Pentecostals are growing at a rapid rate -- last I heard, they're up to 25% of all Christians. Some of that is "new recruits", but a lot is people switching from an existing faith to that one.



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 11:45 AM
link   
Honestly, I'm a born skeptic. I'm the kind of guy that needs to go touch the paint to see if it's really still wet, and that's just when I see a sign! As for a claim of an omnipotent diety, I'd need to see substantial, verifiable proof to believe in it, but (and this is a big but) that's only how religion and faith applies to me. It bothers me greatly to see atheists (and religious people) furthering divides instead of focusing on universal features of human life. The closest I've ever come to what one might call a religious experience is when I'm listening to piece of music that makes the hair on my arms and neck stand up on-end, and there's a short, powerful feeling of transcendence, and then it's quickly gone.



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 11:48 AM
link   
reply to post by bowtomonkey
 

It's all about what team you are on.
I know the game, and I play it.



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 11:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Grimpachi
 

Yes, I see a lot of churchs for sale, the comers are so few they can't afford to even heat them anymore.
Am I bothered, no.

Anyone who's ever read a good portion of the bible would not be bothered either.
Christians don't read the bible, at least not the parts about mass killings, disembowelment, killing babies, stoning everyone for being gay, forcing rape victims to marry their rapists, all commanded by god!

But no, religious people ignore all that and wear out only the 'feel good' pages like it cancels out all the BS and contradictions and god sanctioned horrors.

At least give me a better quality god!



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 12:13 PM
link   
Someone posted this Youtube cartoon series and I watched it all.
I tried to find the thread where it was posted, couldn't find it or the author.

So here it is:


I posted my favourite one, love the 'chicken skin' part, and I love how god almost has an orgasm thinking about getting praise.

Have a beer or a coffee and watch them all! Note: Make sure your mouth is not full of drink during some parts, computer spray down may result.
Good laughs guaranteed!
edit on 14-12-2012 by Toadmund because: (no reason given)
edit on 14-12-2012 by Toadmund because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 07:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by adjensen

The term "predominantly black worshippers" is somewhat racist, because it implies that being black has something to do with your point. They're not "predominantly black worshippers" -- they're "worshippers". I'm sure you didn't intend to be racist, which is why I didn't make anything of it.


It's not racist as I'm using the point of their heritage to distinguish a subset of Christians - namely a black immigrant demographic. Nothing racist about that, no matter how hard you try to make it. It's neutral. It has 'something to do with my point' because, wait for it, that WAS the point I was making. Or do you think you you know the point I was making better than I do myself?


Well, that's a valid point if the subject of the survey was the decline of the Church of England, or traditional British denominations, but the subject is the decline of Christianity. Your argument there is a bit like saying that a survey which showed the decline of ice cream consumption is flawed, because it doesn't take into account people who are switching from vanilla to chocolate.


And I'm talking about the decline of Christianity in England. I'm not talking about switching as I've not seen figures on this and so I wasn't pulling something out of my arse. However, I did point out that a subset of Christianity as a whole was increasing whilst the overall figures were decreasing. The increase in that subset is tied to the increase of immigration of the subset - in England - that tend to be a part of this particular denomination.


For whatever reason (and, frankly, I've never understood the appeal,) the Pentecostals are growing at a rapid rate -- last I heard, they're up to 25% of all Christians. Some of that is "new recruits", but a lot is people switching from an existing faith to that one.


In my local area, the 2011 census reveals a massive rise in the immigrant population who are pushing this trend. I actually live only 50 yards from one of these churches, if I stand up now, I can see it from my kitchen _ Will you try and accuse me of being racist again if I state that I'm not seeing white worshippers at this church?
edit on 16-12-2012 by Merriman Weir because: .



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 10:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Grimpachi
 


Reading the bible did it to me, I began asking myself too many questions about stuff that did not make sense, a lot of the bible is just that.
I tried to be somewhat religious, tried to believe in a god, but I felt like I was kidding myself, my brain does not want to be religious, but it does crave the truth.

So I seek truth elsewhere.



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 05:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Merriman Weir
 


I know what you are saying.

The stars can motivate people to make entertaining comments, but the majority seems to be backslapping. On the positive side it makes me split up my paragraphs into sentences but I draw the line at keeping my comments short to cater for the lazy / illiterate.

Saying all that, I have a habit of giving stars as encouragement, though I notice that most of the more impressive contributes don't give stars at all. I certainly wouldn't want to be in the control of the star givers, lol. As you suggest, on ATS getting the most stars is not an indication of quality. It seems to be related to catchy one-liners and partisan support of pulverized topics.



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 05:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Toadmund
reply to post by bowtomonkey
 

It's all about what team you are on.
I know the game, and I play it.


haha, I like your honesty, but if you play the game, you in fact are being played. You offer up your opinions based on what you think will be appreciated by the type of people who would have you be in their control, like a trained monkey :-)





new topics
top topics
 
10
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join