The Atheist Agenda

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#42 Nov 23, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I was making fun of you planning the next 1,000 years. Because *you* can't.
That's what we want you to think. We will crush you beneath our boot heel. You god won't save you.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#45 Nov 23, 2012
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>I am knowledgeable about the bible. Not an expert, but I know it reasonably well. And as they say, the bible is the best argument for atheism there is. May I present a fine quote, one of many, of course.
And ye shall eat the flesh of your sons, and the flesh of your daughters shall ye eat.
That's the kind of stuff in your bible. It's not a special book. It's just like every other religious book - an interesting reflection of the culture that created it.
And I can "imagine" your god, I can imagine that a god might exist - but to believe in one in the absence of evidence would be wishful thinking.
Well, at least you admit you're no expert. But you've got it all wrong. It means the burdens of the fathers will be passed down to the sons, and the iniquity of the mothers passed down to the daughters. Iniquity inheritance.

Parallel that verse with Ezekiel 18, and the curse can be broken by faith in God.

Besides, it's an historical account, not a method of conducting oneself.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#46 Nov 23, 2012
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>That's what we want you to think. We will crush you beneath our boot heel. You god won't save you.
My boots (and my guns) are bigger than yours.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#47 Nov 23, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, at least you admit you're no expert. But you've got it all wrong. It means the burdens of the fathers will be passed down to the sons, and the iniquity of the mothers passed down to the daughters. Iniquity inheritance.
Parallel that verse with Ezekiel 18, and the curse can be broken by faith in God.
Besides, it's an historical account, not a method of conducting oneself.
What do you mean I've got it all wrong? I offered no analysis of that verse.

And, assuming your "interpretation" is correct, how does that make it any better? Is it right for "sin" to be hereditary? Isn't it something like 20 generations that it gets passed down? Is that right? That means everyone is doomed. Who has perfect ancestors?

So there are no commandments in the bible? It's all just a nice little historical record? No rules?

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#48 Nov 23, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
My boots (and my guns) are bigger than yours.
We have the power of the mind. Our lord, Richard Dawkins, is so smart, he will brain every last one of you to death. Prepare.

“To Eff The Ineffable”

Since: Nov 12

Wailuku

#49 Nov 24, 2012
My comment to Oliver "Brilliant reply" was meant as sarcasm.

Cookie_Parker

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#50 Nov 24, 2012
Atheists have no agenda to end Christianity. The Born Again Evangelical political cult is doing that quite nicely for everyone. ;)

“To Eff The Ineffable”

Since: Nov 12

Wailuku

#53 Nov 24, 2012
so what is the strategy for the christian purge?
and what is the atheist agenda?
and after the christians, do the purges move on to other faiths?
in what order?
what about buddhists...no belief in a god required.
and do agnostics get off with a warning?

“To Eff The Ineffable”

Since: Nov 12

Wailuku

#54 Nov 24, 2012
Zen Master Ein wrote:
<quoted text>You lose.
Atheism is a religion
Many of the leaders of the atheist movement, such as the evolutionist and weak atheist/agnostic Richard Dawkins, argue for agnosticism/atheism with a religious fervor.
Roderick Ninian Smart, a Scottish writer and professor, defined a seven-part scheme of understanding both religious and secular worldviews[18]. These can be understood as narrative, experiential, social, ethical, doctrinal, ritual and material.
English Pastor Daniel Smartt defines atheism as a religion, using Ninian Smart's seven dimensions of worldview as a list of criteria. It is not necessary in Smartt's model for every one of these to be present in order for something to be a religion.[19]. However, it can be argued that all seven are present in the case of atheism.[20][21]
Please see: Atheism: A religionand Atheism and Atheism is a religion.
Atheism is a religion and its legal implications relative to the teaching of evolution
Atheism is a religion and naturalistic notions of origins are religious which has legal implications relative to evolution being taught in public schools.[22][23][24]
John Calvert, a lawyer and intelligent design proponent declared:
“ The Seventh Judicial Circuit of the Court of Appeals of the United States held that atheism is a religion. Therefore, it cannot be promoted by a public school. Currently, public schools are often unwittingly promoting atheism through a dogmatic and uncritical teaching of materialistic theories of origins
I fail to see how the acceptance and teaching of the theory of evolution promotes the atheist "religion". Many denominations and faiths accept evolution as not contrary to their beliefs, although I don't know offhand of any that promote it as a tenet of their faith.
I'm still trying to get my mind around atheism as religion, some lawyer must have billed a load of overtime working out that one. I have known some atheists who promote their "faith" as passionately as a religious zealot, but most seem extremely passive in their non belief.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#55 Nov 24, 2012
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>We have the power of the mind. Our lord, Richard Dawkins, is so smart, he will brain every last one of you to death. Prepare.
Is Dick Dawkins still relevant in today's society? It's a shame that him and his other God-hating atheist buddies would rather compare phallic sizes all day over studying and learning the absolute truth that is the Holy Bible. I would love to have a conversation with this so-called "intellectual" just so I could stump him and his monkey worshiping buddies on why they are wrong.

Rest in Piece dear old Dick Dawkins, there will be no mercy once you are six feet under.

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#56 Nov 24, 2012
Tavita wrote:
...
and do agnostics get off with a warning?
I always give warning.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#58 Nov 24, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Is Dick Dawkins still relevant in today's society? It's a shame that him and his other God-hating atheist buddies would rather compare phallic sizes all day over studying and learning the absolute truth that is the Holy Bible. I would love to have a conversation with this so-called "intellectual" just so I could stump him and his monkey worshiping buddies on why they are wrong.
Rest in Piece dear old Dick Dawkins, there will be no mercy once you are six feet under.
It would be really funny to watch you debate one of the four horsemen, blessed be their souls.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#59 Nov 24, 2012
Tavita wrote:
so what is the strategy for the christian purge?
and what is the atheist agenda?
and after the christians, do the purges move on to other faiths?
in what order?
what about buddhists...no belief in a god required.
and do agnostics get off with a warning?
We round them up and stomp them with our boot heel! Duh!

The atheist agenda is nothing less than the total elimination of all religion, then, and only then, can we begin our master plan. We shall start a new world order, where worship of evolution is mandated and joy is outlawed!

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#60 Nov 24, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Is Dick Dawkins still relevant in today's society? It's a shame that him and his other God-hating atheist buddies would rather compare phallic sizes all day over studying and learning the absolute truth that is the Holy Bible. I would love to have a conversation with this so-called "intellectual" just so I could stump him and his monkey worshiping buddies on why they are wrong.
Rest in Piece dear old Dick Dawkins, there will be no mercy once you are six feet under.
You can't even defeat Henry in debate!

“To Eff The Ineffable”

Since: Nov 12

Wailuku

#62 Nov 24, 2012
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>We round them up and stomp them with our boot heel! Duh!
The atheist agenda is nothing less than the total elimination of all religion, then, and only then, can we begin our master plan. We shall start a new world order, where worship of evolution is mandated and joy is outlawed!
This would be much easier if you could first persuade the christians to accept a literal, straightforward interpretation of Jesus's sermon on the mount- they would roll right over.
Muslim jihadists present a more difficult problem- an explosive vest beats a bootheel every time. And buddhists and hindus would just come back in a new body. Someone's gonna be buying a lot of boots, adjust your investment portfolio accordingly.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#63 Nov 24, 2012
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
You can't even defeat Henry in debate!
Well, c'mon.

henry poses a fine argument.

You know!

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#64 Nov 24, 2012
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>We round them up and stomp them with our boot heel! Duh!
The atheist agenda is nothing less than the total elimination of all religion, then, and only then, can we begin our master plan. We shall start a new world order, where worship of evolution is mandated and joy is outlawed!
Maybe you should blow up the Vatican to show that you're serious.

Don't worry, you shouldn't be compared to Al-Qaeda too much.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#65 Nov 24, 2012
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>It would be really funny to watch you debate one of the four horsemen, blessed be their souls.
But the four horsemen haven't come yet..

Cookie_Parker

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#66 Nov 24, 2012
Zen Master Ein wrote:
<quoted text>You lose.
Atheism is a religion
Many of the leaders of the atheist movement, such as the evolutionist and weak atheist/agnostic Richard Dawkins, argue for agnosticism/atheism with a religious fervor.
Roderick Ninian Smart, a Scottish writer and professor, defined a seven-part scheme of understanding both religious and secular worldviews[18]. These can be understood as narrative, experiential, social, ethical, doctrinal, ritual and material.
English Pastor Daniel Smartt defines atheism as a religion, using Ninian Smart's seven dimensions of worldview as a list of criteria. It is not necessary in Smartt's model for every one of these to be present in order for something to be a religion.[19]. However, it can be argued that all seven are present in the case of atheism.[20][21]
Please see: Atheism: A religionand Atheism and Atheism is a religion.
Atheism is a religion and its legal implications relative to the teaching of evolution
Atheism is a religion and naturalistic notions of origins are religious which has legal implications relative to evolution being taught in public schools.[22][23][24]
John Calvert, a lawyer and intelligent design proponent declared:
“ The Seventh Judicial Circuit of the Court of Appeals of the United States held that atheism is a religion. Therefore, it cannot be promoted by a public school. Currently, public schools are often unwittingly promoting atheism through a dogmatic and uncritical teaching of materialistic theories of origins
You lose...atheism has no deity..it, like Buddhism, is not a religion.

So, you lose. And who cares what the court of appeals says? It lost to the supreme court....which is where it counts. They said it deserved EQUAL protection under the law but in NO way declared it to be a religion.

http://www.atheist-community.org/library/arti...

his is, essentially, the basis for their decision. They have, in the past, considered atheism to be a religion in the specialized sense that atheism, like theism, specifically addresses the concept of god for the individual. This definition is an attempt to address the implied protections guaranteed by the First Amendment.

"The Supreme Court has recognized atheism as equivalent to a 'religion' for purposes of the First Amendment on numerous occasions"

They referred to another Supreme Court decision (Wallace v. Jaffree, 472 U.S. 38 (1985)), where the court said:

"At one time it was thought that this right [referring to the right to choose one’s own creed] merely proscribed the preference of one Christian sect over another, but would not require equal respect for the conscience of the infidel, the atheist, or the adherent of a non-Christian faith such as Islam or Judaism. But when the underlying principle has been examined in the crucible of litigation, the Court has unambiguously concluded that the individual freedom of conscience protected by the First Amendment embraces the right to select any religious faith or none at all."

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#67 Nov 24, 2012
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
You can't even defeat Henry in debate!
Henry?

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.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 4 min uIDIOTRACEMAKEWOR... 184,765
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing 5 min Sandra 129
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 15 min PadMark 675,757
Something you hope your husband never finds out 30 min Crazy Guy 1
Why I’m no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 2 hr Eye no u 445,796
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 3 hr Gabriel 982,102
God is REAL - Miracles Happen! (Jun '11) 3 hr andet1987 6,231
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 3 hr Aura Mytha 110,398
More from around the web