As an Atheist, how do you deal with even the most beligerant, ignorant, and hateful?
- Thread starter Anti-Hate93
- Start date
- Status
zippy2006
New member
And that is the problem. For some reason you think that I am at your beck and call with my Bible, references, pencil, and paper, ready to look up and research and explain any of the many things you blurt out. Of course that's not how it works. If you actually want to learn, then go research it yourself and come to TOL when you run into a problem that you cannot resolve. If you want to make an actual assertion, then come with two possible solutions (for these things have been talked about many times) and why they are inadequate. I am not your servant when it comes to such things.
You must have missed the point. The point was that that should have been the starting point; I should not have had to point that out to anyone except a wholly insincere or lazy or perfectly ignorant person. I know that you already knew that the Christians believe Jesus is God and also that God is omnipotent, so it was just dishonest on your part. If you want to ask an informed question that you have already researched on your own, I would be happy to delve into it, but I have enough questions of my own to research without a slew of assertions to add to the list as well.
Enjoy your night :e4e:
Anti-Hate93
New member
What I offer are questions. Excuse me for coming off as an "Elitist", but I have no respect for a system of belief which offers justification for Homophoia, Sexism, Genocide, Rape, Murder, and pretty straightforward Sexism. If my being against all of those things makes me an "Elitist" than so be it.
When I say offer reason and such, I mean a challenging argument. I ask questions. I have a conscience to do so. And if I have learned anything it is that people HATE their beliefs being questioned. I refer mainly to Christians because that is simply the religion I have the most experience with. If I come off as smug, you're probably right. I take great pride in the fact that I'm not just a mindless zombie, bowing and praying at his every whim, cowering at his feet like an abused child or a whipped dog. I take pride in the fact that I'm no ones sheep, no ones slave, and no ones dog.
My original point, was to ask for advice as to how to deal with people that are so willng to tell you their beliefs but the moment you make an argument for your own, you are met with hostility and often anger. Perhaps this is lost on many of you sheep, because you follow a system of belief that quickly puts down the notion of asking questions that challenge your precious dogmas. You have been conditioned so much that the idea of asking a question is lost on you. But I've wasted enough breath. Thats my bit.
When I say offer reason and such, I mean a challenging argument. I ask questions. I have a conscience to do so. And if I have learned anything it is that people HATE their beliefs being questioned. I refer mainly to Christians because that is simply the religion I have the most experience with. If I come off as smug, you're probably right. I take great pride in the fact that I'm not just a mindless zombie, bowing and praying at his every whim, cowering at his feet like an abused child or a whipped dog. I take pride in the fact that I'm no ones sheep, no ones slave, and no ones dog.
My original point, was to ask for advice as to how to deal with people that are so willng to tell you their beliefs but the moment you make an argument for your own, you are met with hostility and often anger. Perhaps this is lost on many of you sheep, because you follow a system of belief that quickly puts down the notion of asking questions that challenge your precious dogmas. You have been conditioned so much that the idea of asking a question is lost on you. But I've wasted enough breath. Thats my bit.
Anti-Hate93
New member
-Its no surprise that a Christian, would discount any disparraging remarks and label them nothing more than "Belittling of others." If you cant take constructive critisism then you are on the wrong website. And also, the wrong religion.
Anti-Hate93
New member
But a good idea none the less. I know several muslims, and I feel they are very interesting, polite, down to earth people.
Buzzword
New member
Persephone66 said:
This can apply to anyone, at any time, across the board.
Followers of any belief system (or lack thereof) can let their emotions and/or malice and/or elitism and/or stupidity get the better of them in an argument or "discussion" (which on TOL means "throwing arguments at one another without ever stopping to listen").
...as we've seen several times on this thread already.
Katie
New member
I am not a Christian. There has yet to be anything given of the Atheists to show that they have anymore understanding than do the Christians. When did pointing out the errors of another's beliefs become proof of one's own personal beliefs? It makes little sense to me, personally. It seems appropriate to me in such discussions to make introductions between the two of you, christians and atheists ... pot, meet kettle.
What Reason is it that Atheists have to offer others that is of any value? What knowledge is it you all have that will solidify to the rest of us that there is not the Creator? I know Him ... for I am of Him. Then what do you have to argue with me on that you can prove me wrong? Nothing! That is all that Atheists have to offer ... nothing. And who wants to waste much time on nothing? You? really? :rain:
Memento Mori
New member
You could ask Stripe. He probably knows.
Hello, kettle... wait a minute!
Atheism is not a position meant to offer value. It assumes one thing, there are no gods. Beyond that, it's a crop shoot.
Proof of a negative... Hmm... Well, sit back, this could take a while.
And I know my room because I am in my room. What's your point?
I don't particularly care what you believe. It's what you espouse to the public which may influence their decisions or alter their perceptions of reality...
Well... Yeah, that too.
Well what else are we to waste time on? God? Because I've got a stack of video games to get through which will produce much more tangible results and please me far more. Just so you know, I'd rather waste my time on reality than an invisible man in the sky which controls every thing and we have to take on faith. But hey, that's just me.
Cracked
New member
Yeah but the word of your god sounds like foolishness and is thoroughly unreasonable and not always that wise... I mean, come on, animal husbandry isn't exactly the Bible's strong suit (Genesis 30:37-39) and neither is the cure for blindness (mud and spit, John 9:6).
That this primitive tome, chock full of bronze-age absurdities, contains much in the way of accurate information is certainly an opinion, and a bad one at that.
A condescending tone is worth a chuckle when it comes from someone who happily makes of themselves a sheep, a child and a slave to a master they can't see. That's what North Koreans do toward Kim Jong Il. You're just another brainwashed little sheep following a tyrannical dictator, except in Chosun, they have a chance of actually seeing the psychopath that steps on their faces
1 Cor. 1:18-31
Katie
New member
The statements I highlighted above I found amusing, being back to back ... thank you for the laugh. Despite there being nothing else to comment on, I enjoyed your humor at least.
put them on ignore
allsmiles
New member
The Bible does say you're supposed to have an answer ready to go when people question the hope you have. I don't recall 1st Peter 3:15 saying anything about playing games and excuse making...:think:
I don't expect you to be at my beck and call. I expect people at a forum designed for debate and discussion to be ready to be engaged on any number of different levels. Why you felt you had to stoop to the level you see me being at is beyond me, especially when it was within your ability to take the high road from the start. But that's not really what this is about.
That was my starting point. I made assertions and asked you how any of them were untrue. You had it within yourself to rise to the challenge at any time you wanted. You chose to play games and make excuses instead, so maybe I'm not the one who's missing the point? But that's not what this is about either.
In response to your explanation for the seemingly absurd anecdote of Jesus Christ walking on water:
My primary problem is that super powers and magic don't actually explain anything. On the face of it I suppose it's an incredibly easy solution to the apparent absurdity of walking on water/virgin birth/Genesis 30/etc. but I see it as compounding your problem. The way I see it, it's not possible to explain the absurd by positing a solution that is unexplainable. All you've done is replace a little question mark with a much larger one.
And I want to reiterate that I don't need to argue that things like virgin birth and the method of animal husbandry in Genesis chapter 30 are absurd. They are... they fly in the face of everything we know about breeding animals and human biology. The Bible says these things do sound foolish to one such as myself. It's not an outrageous or unreasonable thing to suggest that curing blindness with dirt and spit is absurd. I'm not making any extraordinary claims. You are. And you're making them on a basis of zero evidence. Why I need to supply an argument for why virgin birth is absurd is beyond me... it's an extraordinary claim made on a basis of zero evidence and can be written off with an equal scarcity of evidence. The onus for providing an argument is on the one making the extraordinary claim, and extraordinary evidence is integral to that argument. Does that make sense?
I did, thank you.
allsmiles
New member
Destroying wisdom and prudence? Sounds like Stalin or Kim Jong Il. Or Dunning-Kruger.
Well
Well
When the "Germ theory" was first put forth it was laughed to scorn.
It may be that there are seeming mysteries, even seeming absurdities, which will, in future, have logical explanations?
History does seem to teach us that we ought to keep an open mind.
peace, bybee :think:
Well
When the "Germ theory" was first put forth it was laughed to scorn.
It may be that there are seeming mysteries, even seeming absurdities, which will, in future, have logical explanations?
History does seem to teach us that we ought to keep an open mind.
peace, bybee :think:
I recommend it.
No. Continually and constantly tell them how hateful and wrong they are.
:rotfl: I would hardly call an atheistic viewpoint "reason." Usually it's nothing more than a diatribe of denial.
Leave the area prior to the arrival of the Spanish Inquisition.
Go
Go
Why do atheists always use a book written through man by "the sky spirit" to try and make their point? How can you use a book that you mock, yet when it comes to your own agenda, it has validity?
Regarding your "gods" (man and/or government):
The effects of atheism
It is contended that in broadly condemning "religion", atheism frequently focuses on Christianity, which is seldom defined according to its source (the New Testament), and which they often include Hitler in, and which they blame for atrocities such as the Inquisition and the Crusades. In addition, when confronted by the fact that the objectively baseless moral authority of atheism allowed atheists such as Stalin, Mao or Pol Pot to easily justify their atrocities (which seemed reasonable measures to them), they are observed seeking to disassociate the two. Harris attempts to do so by judging such men as "not especially rational", with this perhaps establishing Harris as the authority of what is, and then he proceeds to implicate religion for the evil of their regimes. [10] In response it is seen that the authority for the religion at issue at issue (Christianity), is what transcendentally condemns them.[11] (Jn. 10:10; Rm. 9:1-3ff; Gal. 6:10)
It is argued that while atheism did not directly cause these atrocities, because atheism provides no objective transcendent moral boundaries, it allows these atrocities to occur, while fostering "political religion" due to the tendency to worship mortal men in place of God.
...atheism has been tried as a basis for life in many countries in the 20th century. The results have been some of the biggest bloodbaths of all time under communist despots above the law, e.g., Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot. For example, the Inquisition killed 2000 people in three centuries; Stalin killed that many before breakfast.
http://conservapedia.com/Morality
________
UNIVERSAL HEALTH
Go
Yeah but the word of your god sounds like foolishness and is thoroughly unreasonable and not always that wise... I mean, come on, animal husbandry isn't exactly the Bible's strong suit (Genesis 30:37-39) and neither is the cure for blindness (mud and spit, John 9:6).
That this primitive tome, chock full of bronze-age absurdities, contains much in the way of accurate information is certainly an opinion, and a bad one at that.
A condescending tone is worth a chuckle when it comes from someone who happily makes of themselves a sheep, a child and a slave to a master they can't see. That's what North Koreans do toward Kim Jong Il. You're just another brainwashed little sheep following a tyrannical dictator, except in Chosun, they have a chance of actually seeing the psychopath that steps on their faces
Why do atheists always use a book written through man by "the sky spirit" to try and make their point? How can you use a book that you mock, yet when it comes to your own agenda, it has validity?
Regarding your "gods" (man and/or government):
The effects of atheism
It is contended that in broadly condemning "religion", atheism frequently focuses on Christianity, which is seldom defined according to its source (the New Testament), and which they often include Hitler in, and which they blame for atrocities such as the Inquisition and the Crusades. In addition, when confronted by the fact that the objectively baseless moral authority of atheism allowed atheists such as Stalin, Mao or Pol Pot to easily justify their atrocities (which seemed reasonable measures to them), they are observed seeking to disassociate the two. Harris attempts to do so by judging such men as "not especially rational", with this perhaps establishing Harris as the authority of what is, and then he proceeds to implicate religion for the evil of their regimes. [10] In response it is seen that the authority for the religion at issue at issue (Christianity), is what transcendentally condemns them.[11] (Jn. 10:10; Rm. 9:1-3ff; Gal. 6:10)
It is argued that while atheism did not directly cause these atrocities, because atheism provides no objective transcendent moral boundaries, it allows these atrocities to occur, while fostering "political religion" due to the tendency to worship mortal men in place of God.
...atheism has been tried as a basis for life in many countries in the 20th century. The results have been some of the biggest bloodbaths of all time under communist despots above the law, e.g., Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot. For example, the Inquisition killed 2000 people in three centuries; Stalin killed that many before breakfast.
http://conservapedia.com/Morality
________
UNIVERSAL HEALTH
Last edited:
Quincy
New member
Nobody acts hateful to me in real life, :idunno: . I rarely discuss my views in person but when I have most people who disagree just say I'm an intimidating guy so they won't try to tell me to what to do, :chuckle: . They talk a lot about me behind my back though I'm sure, but oh well.
On the internet, some smartalecks like to think anonymity entitles to them to run their mouth because you can't do anything to them through the silicon cyclops. I just ignore it. It's not like I value their reasoning behind thinking they have a right to say something to me.
On the internet, some smartalecks like to think anonymity entitles to them to run their mouth because you can't do anything to them through the silicon cyclops. I just ignore it. It's not like I value their reasoning behind thinking they have a right to say something to me.
Tyrathca
New member
It's called referencing, something which should be encouraged. It allows the author to show that what they criticise is actually said by their target, i.e. they aren't just making a strawman.
Oh wow, this is going to be good....:hammer:
Atheism isn't a moral code and it doesn't pretend to be. There are atheistic moral codes but other than a lack of god they often share little in common and regardless atheism itself says nothing about morality. Christianity however explicitly claims to explain morality.
Moot argument if the reality is there is no objective transcendent moral boundaries. You can argue until your blue in the face how having them would be better but it wont change reality, all you have are subjective transcendent moral boundaries.
By atheist you mean communist here, this is like talking to a Christian and telling them that their religion is evil while only using examples about Hindus (you are both theists after all).
Key point, they were all communist. You'll also note in more modern times that predominantly atheistic countries within europe (particularly in scandinavia) currently top measures of happiness, equality, freedoms and standard of living.
- Status