It seems to me that many of the atheists on here are just here because they hate Christianity.

[Magic Man]

Basically, you show me complete disrespect and then come back with this?

I'm not sure where you're getting "complete disrespect". I said you were being unnecessarily hostile. You're overreacting to posts here. Relax, and you'll get a better discussion.

As for the "come back with this"? I'm not even sure what that means. Did you not like something I said? Did you disagree with it? I said most atheists come here to discuss religion because it's an interesting topic. Some atheists hate Christianity, some don't like it, and some don't mind it (or even like it). I don't like it as it's currently practiced by most. I like it as mythology.

Are you taking exception to my calling it mythology? I tried to explain that that wasn't in insult. Mythology is great, and when used correctly, very educational and good for society.

 

[Reggie Miller]

Crying, complaining, whining... call it whatever you want. My interpretation of your actions is as charitable as your interpretation of others in this thread.

I just hope your contribution to your community is much greater.

 

[Reggie Miller]

I'm not sure where you're getting "complete disrespect". I said you were being unnecessarily hostile. You're overreacting to posts here. Relax, and you'll get a better discussion.

As for the "come back with this"? I'm not even sure what that means. Did you not like something I said? Did you disagree with it? I said most atheists come here to discuss religion because it's an interesting topic. Some atheists hate Christianity, some don't like it, and some don't mind it (or even like it). I don't like it as it's currently practiced by most. I like it as mythology.

Are you taking exception to my calling it mythology? I tried to explain that that wasn't in insult. Mythology is great, and when used correctly, very educational and good for society.

We're not communicating. Merry Christmas!

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I just hope your contribution to your community is much greater.

Whatever you need to do to distract from the hypocrisy you've demonstrated in this thread.

 

[james bond]

I'm in a festive mood today, so Merry Christmas to all!

In a nutshell, what I found is that this division today between atheists and Christians isn't based on just logical arguments vs religious beliefs. It's evolution vs creationism, so now the argument has been taken to the science realm. This started in the 17th century with Charles Lyell and Charles Darwin. Before that, science was the domain of the Christians and their scientists.

If the OP is referring to RF, then it's prolly because the believers are winning. Scoreboard.

 

[McBell]

Before you come out with another complaint about my answers... I assume you're not asking in terms of being a student of the Bible. My answer would be the same. However, if you were a student of the Bible, then you would understand and accept my answer. You can read the main different versions and see what the differences are by comparing. There are other sites that list it by chapter and verse. Why don't you try the New Revised Standard Version and see if you get anything out of it?

Bible Gateway passage: Genesis 1 - New Revised Standard Version

You siad the Bible is the Word of God.
I ask which one and you hesitate to name the one version of the Bible that you claim is Gods Word.
Since they are all different, they can't all be the Word of God, right?

Interesting that even now after more excuses you still do not give a clear straight answer.
Like you are unsure of which version of the Bible is Gods Word.

 

[metis]

In a nutshell, what I found is that this division today between atheists and Christians isn't based on just logical arguments vs religious beliefs. It's evolution vs creationism, so now the argument has been taken to the science realm.

A Christian can accept the ToE, as most Christian theologians do, as it neither affirms nor denies the existence of God. Some Christians reject the science, and I used to belong to one of those churches many moons ago.

 

[McBell]

I'm in a festive mood today, so Merry Christmas to all!

In a nutshell, what I found is that this division today between atheists and Christians isn't based on just logical arguments vs religious beliefs. It's evolution vs creationism, so now the argument has been taken to the science realm. This started in the 17th century with Charles Lyell and Charles Darwin. Before that, science was the domain of the Christians and their scientists.

If the OP is referring to RF, then it's prolly because the believers are winning. Scoreboard.

What is it you think the "Believers" are winning?

 

[Magic Man]

We're not communicating. Merry Christmas!

I'm communicating. You're refusing to. Merry Christmas! If you actually want to talk about the subject you started the thread about, let me know.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Funny, but not really. Pilate also asked Jesus, What is truth? when he had truth staring him right in the face.

Hubris, thy name is Reggie Miller.

 

[IndigoStorm]

Speaking for myself ... an atheist ... I don't hate Christianity or any other religion. I just find it hard to understand why an intelligent person with a free will would willingly want to worship a so called god simply because "it says so in the bible."

Don't they know that the bible was compiled by a few hundred Roman Catholic bishops at the Council of Nicea?

What was beneficial to the RC church became part of the bible while anything that might "enlighten" the masses was left out.

So called Christians should study history without wearing their blinkers and they too might become enlightened.

I think it was George Carlin who once said: "Religion has convinced people that there’s an invisible man…living in the sky, who watches everything you do every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a list of ten specific things he doesn’t want you to do. And if you do any of these things, he will send you to a special place, of burning and fire and smoke and torture and anguish for you to live forever, and suffer and burn and scream until the end of time. But he loves you. He loves you and he needs money."

So very very true!

 

[james bond]

You siad the Bible is the Word of God.
I ask which one and you hesitate to name the one version of the Bible that you claim is Gods Word.
Since they are all different, they can't all be the Word of God, right?

Interesting that even now after more excuses you still do not give a clear straight answer.
Like you are unsure of which version of the Bible is Gods Word.

See. Another complaint.

I thought I did give you a straight answer. I don't know. The version isn't important except for certain situations, but God's word is. I was right about you not being a student because you're still hung up on the version. Learn first and then find the answers for yourself. Of course, that takes work so there's that for you to overcome.

 

[james bond]

What is it you think the "Believers" are winning?

In regards to people believing and what they do in order to promote world peace. World peace is the ideal and probably not attainable, but the believers are closer to it than the non-believers.

 

[McBell]

In regards to people believing and what they do in order to promote world peace. World peace is the ideal and probably not attainable, but the believers are closer to it than the non-believers.

Based on what, exactly?

 

[metis]

In regards to people believing and what they do in order to promote world peace. World peace is the ideal and probably not attainable, but the believers are closer to it than the non-believers.

I certainly don't know about that as most evangelicals that I listen to certainly are often more than willing to go to war. How 80% of them could bring themselves to vote for a candidate like Trump says a ton about how unChrist-like they really are. They appear to believe about Jesus but not in him.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

In regards to people believing and what they do in order to promote world peace. World peace is the ideal and probably not attainable, but the believers are closer to it than the non-believers.

All I read from "the believers" most of the time reads like horribly contrived delusion. The above is no exception.

Have you ever seen a church service get ugly, people yelling, people being escorted out... all because one person is "believing" in a way that the others can't stomach? I have. It wasn't a very peaceful scene at all. "Believers" were then posted at the doors to make sure the ostracized "believer" couldn't get back in. All very welcoming and hospitable... or not.

The man they escorted out merely had different delusions than the ones doing the escorting. Being a non-believer witnessing all of this, that is my sincere assessment. I also don't attend many church services (you know... not believing and all)... so it would stand to reason that this sort of thing happens quite a lot.

 

[columbus]

In a nutshell, what I found is that this division today between atheists and Christians isn't based on just logical arguments vs religious beliefs. It's evolution vs creationism, so now the argument has been taken to the science realm.

In another century it was religious geocentric beliefs vs. nontheist heliocentric beliefs.
So, how's that working out for you?
Tom

 

[Reggie Miller]

Hubris, thy name is Reggie Miller.

I glorify Jesus alone and you accuse me of hubris? Whatever, dude.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I glorify Jesus alone and you accuse me of hubris? Whatever, dude.

I question your truth and you rustle up an analogy which puts me in the position of Pilate and you in the position of Jesus? Hubris seemed appropriate. Not to mention the fact that you don't discuss anything, despite writing an OP which basically suggests you can speak for atheists, something that I (as an atheist) wouldn't deign to do.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

I glorify Jesus alone and you accuse me of hubris? Whatever, dude.

You need to stop and think for a bit. Do you honestly believe that Jesus would approve of your behavior in this thread? Read back through your posts. Can you honestly say you posted as Jesus would have in all cases? Or even in a manner that Jesus would have been 50/50 on in terms of approval? I have a few below (keep in mind these are from the FIRST TWO PAGES ONLY), and my take on them:

tl;dr

This is just plain rude. All you had to do was not respond. Instead you took the time to be a jerk about it and try to hurt the poster's feelings. And you knew exactly what you were doing. Don't lie to yourself.

I'm happy for you. But since she isn't an atheist I skipped it for reasons previously stated.

The "I'm happy for you" bit was so obviously sarcastic and stated, flatly "who cares?" as the actual message. Do you believe that Jesus ever responded with "who cares?" to anyone, ever? Do you think he would have insincerely stated "I'm happy for you." at any given time? I know that you can try and back-track out of this one by saying you "really were happy" for the person... again, don't lie to yourself.

A religious gypsy is an atheist? Really? Hmm...

Do you believe Jesus ever used incredulity in this way? To try and discredit someone without having to actualy say anything creditable on his own about them?

I do not wish to reply at this time.

Thank you. Have a good day.

Did Jesus ever "plead the 5th"? Seems like cowardice if you ask me, and from what I have heard of Jesus, he was no coward.

I can certainly dig through some more pages and try to find more examples, if you like. Just say the word.