Don't dictate beliefs

Sep 5, 2012 Full story: The Star Press 11,175

No one else can say otherwise? That is basically saying those who do "believe in God" are better? Hardly.

Full Story

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#8143 Dec 10, 2012
derek4 wrote:
"The following is an account of how I went from hardcore skepticism to hardcore worship of the Savior, Jesus Christ.”
How about a little moderation? This sounds like an extremist with no core beliefs who was erratically looking for something to adhere to. Such people often end up strung out on Jesus.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#8144 Dec 10, 2012
derek4 wrote:
“Whatsoever is good for God's children they shall have it, for all is theirs to further them to heaven; therefore, if poverty be good, they shall have it; if disgrace be good, they shall have it; if crosses be good, they shall have them; if misery be good, they shall have it; for all is ours, to serve for our greatest good.” Richard Sibbes
Doormat and fool. He defines whatever befalls him as not just good, but chosen for him. Secularists define the good themselves and create it.

Christianity is a religion for doormats. It's apparent from its stated values that the Christian is to accept an inferior lot and be grateful for it.

Like the man quoted above, he is to be grateful for his poverty, his misery, and and ridicule heaped on him, for it is prophesied. He is to be meek and long-suffering, never objecting to his degradation, in fact increasing it by getting on his knees and thanking the ceiling for his lot. He is told that his reward comes later - after death - when all accounts will be squared.

But for now, when massah smacks his cheek, he is to smile and produce the other one.

Doormat.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#8145 Dec 10, 2012
derek4 wrote:
“Someone once said that if you sat a million monkeys at a million typewriters for a million years, one of them would eventually type out all of Hamlet by chance.”
Peter Kreeft professor of philosophy
Actually, the saying is that an infinite amount of time is provided, not a million years. Huge difference. And with that much time, a million monkeys aren't necessary. One will do.

You may consider these trivial criticisms, but they shouldn't be to a philosopher. This is a poor thinker. Let's see more:
derek4 wrote:
"But when we find the text of Hamlet, we don't wonder whether it came from chance and monkeys. Why then does the atheist use that incredibly improbable explanation for the universe?"
Does anybody other than Dim have trouble debunking this argument? Of course we don't wonder if Shakespeare was generated by monkeys. That would only be an option if an infinite time span containing at least one infinitely old typing monkey had transpired.

What quality philosopher makes such transparently fallacious arguments? Here's a chance to use one of our words from the word lists at http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/atheism/T... :

[8] Philosophaster - shitty or inferior philosopher

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#8146 Dec 10, 2012
derek4 wrote:
“The reason why many people do not believe in God is not so much that it is intellectually impossible to believe in God, but because belief in God forces that thoughtful person to face the fact that he is accountable to such a God.”
Robert A. Laidlaw
Au contraire. Christianity is a way of avoiding accountability for your moral crimes. You simply demand forgiveness from the ceiling fan and move on without making restitution or apologizing to your victim if you prefer not to.

What is the accountability for a person who sets off a bomb killing dozens, then finds Jesus and dies of a heart attack before he is brought to justice? He goes straight to heaven.

Secularists actually hold people accountable. According to secular ethics, you don't get to forgive yourself with cheap forgiveness on demand from the sky.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#8147 Dec 10, 2012
derek4 wrote:
“Even the most admirable of atheists is nothing more than a moral parasite, living his life based on borrowed ethics.” Vox Day
Speaking of moral parasites, for starters, the Christians stole the Jews' moral code.

Moreover, secularists have been teaching Christians how to be better people ever since. Where did Christians learn that it is immoral to burn people alive? Who taught them that? Jesus? Nope.He was burning witches in Salem. It was the secularist that replace theocracy with liberal democracies and outlawed it.

Who told the Christians that it's not right to own or beat slaves? Not Jesus. http://pathofthebeagle.com/2011/10/20/what-di...

If not Jesus, who, then? Mohammed? The Stalinists? Who else could it have been but the secular humanists of every era, by which is meant anybody who ever stood up against a god or its priests and employed reason and compassion in taking the side of mankind against them and their book.

And in these days, we secular humanists are leading the way again. We are presently teaching American society that the church is wrong in its scapegoating of gays, its antiscientism, its dehumanizing of atheists, its oppression of women's equal status, its deep pessimism about man, and its intense sexual prudery.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#8148 Dec 10, 2012
Khatru wrote:
Great stuff! That's a good list of words to have on hand.
Thanks. I'm glad you liked the lists. For me, they're interesting, instructive and fun. If you're interested, here's another word list - this time, words having to do with women - at http://www.topix.com/forum/topstories/TOCO8TE... .

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#8149 Dec 10, 2012
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
I love your word lists!
Thanks. I guess you saw the one I just linked to - girls and women.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#8150 Dec 10, 2012
polymath257 wrote:
Interesting. For me, it [caliginous] seems close to cartilage. Definitely not warmth and light.
I can see that. The idea that a word sounds like it should mean something else is probably pretty subjective. You are likely hearing "cartilaginous." I think I'm hearing "calorie" and "calefacient," which invoke a sense of heat energy that I am translating to light.

There are also the words beginning with the root "calli-" meaning beautiful, such as calligraphy and callipygian (on the girls and women list).

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#8151 Dec 10, 2012
Khatru wrote:
Come on Dim. Share with us how you took a bunch of quotes from an unknown called Miles Mathis and attributed them to Richard Dawkins.
I had forgotten that. He has a lot of nerve bringing that Jefferson crap to this thread after doing that himself.

Notice that there was no argument as to whether Jefferson MIGHT have said those apocryphal words misattributed to him, which were similar to many things that he actually did say, nor that the words were invalid whoever said them - just that Jefferson didn't happen to be the one to utter or write them himself.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#8152 Dec 10, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
"How did you know to give up stoning children to death if not from men that simply rejected that law of your Old Testament? Jehovah never recanted it, did he? It was a freethinker that simply said nonsense, and most of the West agreed."

In fact yes he did!

"Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? 6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. 7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. "
I would have liked a clearer denunciation of stoning people to death, and perhaps an explanation of why it had been considered moral in the past, but OK - I'll accept that. I will have to update my argument to reflect only things that Jesus DIDN'T correct.

Have you seen Monty Python on stoning for blasphemy?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#8153 Dec 11, 2012
KJV wrote:
it make very little sense to attack the news paper for the bad news in it. Go to the source if you don't like it.
Are you referring to me? What newspaper did I attack? I have criticized Dim and his fetch-and-pastes.

And why wouldn't I do that here? As I've said many times, my posts aren't written for believers, whether that be the apologists that wrote them, or Gunga Dim, who carries water for them. Wouldn't you agree that that would be a wasted effort?

The rebuttals are written for people that might evaluate them on their merit and maybe benefit from the ideas they contain. I don't expect that from the Christians, so why write to them? Dim proudly vaunts that he doesn't even read them. Why would I expect the pieces' authors to be any different?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#8154 Dec 11, 2012
KJV wrote:
I have yet to see the New York Times print a retraction.
How about a mea culpa? Here they are apologizing for their scandalous coverage of Bush's rush to war in 2002-03:

"Over the last year this newspaper has shone the bright light of hindsight on decisions that led the United States into Iraq ... It is past time we turned the same light on ourselves ... we have found a number of instances of coverage that was not as rigorous as it should have been." http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/26/internation...

There's an understatement! That was a complete abdication of the most critical function that the press plays in a democracy. "Our bad" doesn't cut it.
Thinking

Andover, UK

#8155 Dec 11, 2012
Hoyle was wrong.
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
I can tell by your vast vocabulary what grade you are repeating in elementary school.
Do you use the name Thinking to help remind you to think before you type?
If so it does not seem to be working.
I still find it hard to believe you knew about the tornado / 747 theory and still asked me the question "why would it a jet airplane is designed". Like what's up with that?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#8156 Dec 11, 2012
KJV wrote:
If there is no God then it's a majority rules on morals.
Correct. What would you prefer in the absence of a god? A dictator dictating moral law? Obeying an ancient book?
Thinking

Andover, UK

#8157 Dec 11, 2012
god was about as discriminating in that attack as 9/11

If only you knew of a deity that could be more accurate.
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Sodom and Gomorrah had a real high percentage of atheist so don't feel to bad. If I was you I'd watch my salt intake. LOL

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#8158 Dec 11, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Atheist love trying to add as many as they can to their little tiny group. I see now the want Satanists included to their group. Still trying to get their numbers above 2.5%. LOL
We don't care who calls themselves an atheist. Nor agnostic, freethinker, skeptic, irreligious, secularist, or humanist - just as long as they are not thralls for the church. We don't want people voting according to what they think Jesus wants, or hating whomever they believe Jesus hates.

And satanists are theists.

“Formerly "Richard"”

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

#8159 Dec 11, 2012
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yep, it's a great tool atheists use to escape facts. Scroll away, lol.
What facts?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#8160 Dec 11, 2012
KJV wrote:
Derek4 did not write the article. He did not lie
Of course he lied. He was one that claimed that Dawkins said those words, not Mathias.

Even so, Dim is responsible for the content that he introduces. Absent any disclaimer, his endorsement of it is implied.

Furthermore, he reposted the material several more times after being told that he was lying. He doesn't give a crap.
KJV wrote:
I've seen no proof from you or anyone that Dawkins did not say those things.
You see what you want to see.

The words he attributed to Dawkins didn't appear anywhere that Dawkins' words are normally found. This is my exposure of Dim's lying, one of several : http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/atheism/T...

In it is a link to a Google search of the words that Dim dishonestly attributed to Dawkins. At the time, it got only one hit - Mathias' page. Now, it has two - Mathias' page and this thread.

What was the proof that Jefferson did not write the words on the billboard attributed to him? Nothing more than that there was no record of the words where they ought to have been found had they been Jefferson's. That is the same argument being levied against Dim's deception as well.

“Formerly "Richard"”

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

#8161 Dec 11, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Here I correct a bunch of that weird letter crap
All new atheist population around the world!
"Atheism losing adherents in terms of the global population
The 2004 to 2007 publicity campaign for atheism in the Western World was not sustainable. The level of public interest in atheism is not coming back in the West and global atheism is shrinking.
See also: Global atheism and American atheism and Atheist Population and Resources for leaving atheism and becoming a Christian
In 2012, Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary reported that globally every day there are 800 less atheists per day, 1,100 less non-religious (agnostic) people per day and 83,000 more people professing to be Christians per day.
In 2011, the American Spectator citing research published in the International Bulletin of Missionary Research reported that atheism is on the decline as a whole in terms of adherents .
The American Spectator declared:
“The report estimates about 80,000 new Christians every day, 79,000 new Muslims every day, and 300 fewer atheists every day. These atheists are presumably disproportionately represented in the West, while religion is thriving in the Global South, where charismatic Christianity is exploding.”
In 2009, the book A sceptics guide to atheism indicated: "A worldwide poll taken in 1991 put the global figure for atheists at just 4.4% of the population. By 2006 it was estimated that only 2% of the world population were atheists."
In 2012 an article entitled Atheism in decline by Nigel Tomes declared:
The IBMR publishes yearly figures for religions (and non religions) around the globe. Their latest numbers, hot off the press (Jan. 2012) show some interesting trends.
Atheism is in Decline
In 1970 atheists (those avowing there is no God) numbered 166 million worldwide; that was almost one-in-twenty 4.5% of the global population. By 2012 atheists’ number is estimated at 137 million. Thats a decline of almost 30 million. Since world population is growing, atheists share declined to less than one-in-fifty under 2% in 2012. Put differently, every 24 hours there are 800 fewer atheists in the world!
Atheism is in decline.
Agnosticism is in Decline
In 2000 agnostics (those who don't know if there is a God) numbered 666 million, 10.9% of the worlds people. By 2012 agnostic’s number is estimated at 661 million--a decline of 5 million. In relative terms by 2012 agnostics represent less than one tenth (9.4%) of world population. Every 24 hours there are 1,100 less agnostics in the world. Agnostics are also in decline.
Added together these two groups make up a declining share of global population. In 1970 atheists and agnostics accounted for one-in-five (19.2%) of the worlds people. Based on current trends by 2025 they will represent less than one-in-ten (9.7%). Their population share will fall by half in 50+ years."
http://www.conservapedia.com/Atheism
And we know how reliable Conservapedia is.

“Formerly "Richard"”

Since: Mar 12

In the beginning e=mc^2

#8162 Dec 11, 2012
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
You must have gone to a really, really bad school.
Home schooled.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Islam for peace, or violence? 1 hr JIN 36
Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038 (Apr '12) 1 hr Thinking 22,989
Does Being 'Spiritual But Not Religious' Really... 2 hr Thinking 2
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 3 hr Thinking 230,010
Our world came from nothing? 3 hr Thinking 1,037
Adam Atheoi - the god of 'humanity' Mon Thinking 90
Man center of the universe. Mon Thinking 87

Atheism People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE