A Question for Atheists

[Thief]

So, is there any point to these posts of yours then? Any at all?

It is not like any make itself apparent, you know.

Well the digression is piling up....
this thread was a question for atheists....

 

[Desert Snake]

Sure, a rapist can repent, find God and be forgiven. There is no forgiveness for an atheist.

The RCC stated that atheists aren't disallowed from heaven. if you go to my '' everyone who doesn't accept Jesus,is going to hell'', thread, no one voted for that option, voted yes, to that statement.

 

[LuisDantas]

@Thief So no?

 

[LuisDantas]

I'm pretty sure that the RCC stated that atheists aren't disallowed from heaven. if you go to my '' everyone who doesn't accept Jesus,is going to hell'', thread, no one voted for that option, ie voted yes, to that statement.

So, you seem to be creating a strawman argument

I don't think so. Someone has been buying and supposedly reading those Left Behind things of fiction.

 

[Marisa]

So, is there any point to these posts of yours then? Any at all?

It is not like any make itself apparent, you know.

Not unless you enjoy arguing with a presuppositionalist.

BTW, are you familiar with Sye Ten Bruggencate? If not, you should google him. It'll make you want to slam your head into a solid object repeatedly.

 

[Marisa]

The RCC stated that atheists aren't disallowed from heaven. if you go to my '' everyone who doesn't accept Jesus,is going to hell'', thread, no one voted for that option, voted yes, to that statement.

The concept of disbelief is exceedingly foreign to many believers. IMO, it presents too great a challenge. If disbelief is right, the ramifications are frightening for some, as this thread has digressed to prove.

 

[Curious George]

I've got one question for you.
Would you be as adamant about doubting and systematically disproving faith if Christianity wasn't the supposed dominant religion in America? Or is Christianity special?

Yes

 

[Augustus]

Does this requirement to be nice go both ways? Because I can pull out polls which show that as an atheist, Revolt and I are generally less trusted than rapists.

Sorry, not having a go at you as this has been widely reported, it just isn't true though.

This 'finding' was not based on polls but an experiment (not generalisable to the whole population) and the experiment didn't even show that most people consider rapists more trustworthy than atheists anyway.

Study here: http://static1.squarespace.com/stat.../1375297859038/do-you-believe-in-atheists.pdf p1195 is the relevant information.

This is one of these internet myths that has a grain of truth to it, but is based on a fundamental misrepresentation of what the experiment actually showed. What the experiment showed that was amongst the participants there was no statistically significant difference between participants committing the conjunction fallacy in regards to atheists and rapists.

Although it showed that many of the participants demonstrated negative attitudes towards atheists, in no way can it be used to support the statement 'atheists are generally less trusted than rapists'. It gives much more support to the statement 'be very careful before believing what journalists report, especially about anything deemed scientific' though.

 

[Marisa]

Sorry, not having a go at you as this has been widely reported, it just isn't true though.

This 'finding' was not based on polls but an experiment (not generalisable to the whole population) and the experiment didn't even show that most people consider rapists more trustworthy than atheists anyway.

Study here: http://static1.squarespace.com/stat.../1375297859038/do-you-believe-in-atheists.pdf p1195 is the relevant information.

This is one of these internet myths that has a grain of truth to it, but is based on a fundamental misrepresentation of what the experiment actually showed. What the experiment showed that was amongst the participants there was no statistically significant difference between participants committing the conjunction fallacy in regards to atheists and rapists.

Although it showed that many of the participants demonstrated negative attitudes towards atheists, in no way can it be used to support the statement 'atheists are generally less trusted than rapists'. It gives much more support to the statement 'be very careful before believing what journalists report, especially about anything deemed scientific' though.

Interesting. I'll have a look at it.

 

[Thief]

@Thief So no?

as in ...point of my postings?

instead of digression here.....why not go for the conversation option?

 

[LuisDantas]

as in ...point of my postings?

instead of digression here.....why not go for the conversation option?

How is a conversation possible when your posts have no noticeable point nor meaning?

 

[Thief]

How is a conversation possible when your posts have no noticeable point nor meaning?

That my posts mean nothing to you.....is not a reflection of me.

 

[Marisa]

That my posts mean nothing to you.....is not a reflection of me.

Yeah, it kind of is. You wrote them, after all. You have the expectation that you will write stuff that makes sense.

 

[Thief]

Yeah, it kind of is. You wrote them, after all. You have the expectation that you will write stuff that makes sense.

yep....I wrote it.....and you read it....
and I get notes from others how they like it.

sorry you gotta frown....

 

[Nakosis]

The RCC stated that atheists aren't disallowed from heaven. if you go to my '' everyone who doesn't accept Jesus,is going to hell'', thread, no one voted for that option, voted yes, to that statement.

Yes, the RCC has the authority, according to itself, to represent God. The Pope has basically said one only needs to follow their conscience, the Church does not requires celibacy, and is open to homosexuals. Other men, other times, non-believers were burned at the stake and homosexuals were publicly castrated.

The RCC was wrong about what God wanted before? They are trying to remain culturally relevant. Ok, but it doesn't really provide a good feeling about their authority to talk about God.

As far as the question in the OP, I'm adamant about questioning any presumed authority. Religious or otherwise. Christianity comes up more because it is more relevant to my current situation. If any other religious authority were as predominate in my life, I'd be just as questioning.

 

[Marisa]

yep....I wrote it.....and you read it....
and I get notes from others how they like it.

sorry you gotta frown....

You also get plenty of people asking you just what the heck you mean. Yet you sit back and pat yourself on the head thinking we're all stupid, despite the fact that we manage to engage at the same intellectual level, or higher, with other members of the forum.

 

[Thief]

You also get plenty of people asking you just what the heck you mean. Yet you sit back and pat yourself on the head thinking we're all stupid, despite the fact that we manage to engage at the same intellectual level, or higher, with other members of the forum.

I'm doing just fine....thank you.

 

[Marisa]

I'm doing just fine....thank you.

You're welcome.

 

[Thief]

I've got one question for you.
Would you be as adamant about doubting and systematically disproving faith if Christianity wasn't the supposed dominant religion in America? Or is Christianity special?

I happen to be a believer....The Carpenter is my Inspiration.
but the dogmatic approach of ritual and recital no longer appeal.

so.....the Christian label kinda fell off.

Still, I have high regards for the Carpenter.
If He didn't make it to heaven.....the rest of us are screwed.

 

[Desert Snake]

Yes, the RCC has the authority, according to itself, to represent God. The Pope has basically said one only needs to follow their conscience, the Church does not requires celibacy, and is open to homosexuals. Other men, other times, non-believers were burned at the stake and homosexuals were publicly castrated.

The RCC was wrong about what God wanted before? They are trying to remain culturally relevant. Ok, but it doesn't really provide a good feeling about their authority to talk about God.

As far as the question in the OP, I'm adamant about questioning any presumed authority. Religious or otherwise. Christianity comes up more because it is more relevant to my current situation. If any other religious authority were as predominate in my life, I'd be just as questioning.

I don't consider the RCC an authority on that. My point was, actually, that Xian belief, if your going to be arguing against it, is going to vary from certain perhaps traditional 'talking points', against it. Forums may not represent Xianity, but, in context, if that's where the debate is taking place, then these opinions/beliefs, do matter,/in the context of debate coherency/; I would say, it's not even very intellectually responsible to be arguing things with no counter argument, it's basically similar to strawman arguments.