It seems to me that some Christians on here do not understand Atheists

[Altfish]

A lost lamb because you cannot find your ride home.

Oh, I found it ok, but it was further than I thought

 

[james bond]

Ho hum. I understand atheism all too well. Atheism leads to communism. It's political. Not so much religious for the liberals. Just read Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto. As for China, they are trying to be the PRC but they have not eradicated CPC. How are they treating Taiwan which wants its independence? If it remains mostly an atheist country, then it will be the CPC once more.

If you want to claim it is religion, then it's personal. Up to you.

 

[Kemosloby]

Oh, I found it ok, but it was further than I thought

Lets hope you find your Aeroplane too.

 

[Altfish]

You're funny. Kids go to school five days a week all the while their brains are soft, taught implicitly every day that the world exists apart from God, if not taught Atheism more forcefully. These kids come home and turn on the TV and watch hours of TV learning implicitly that God has no relevance, if not explicitly told belief in God is ignorant.

I'm pleased that I am amusing you.
So, you define all lessons that aren't teaching 'god' as teaching atheism???
Religion has relied on catching children young 'while their brains are soft' for their followers for centuries.
I'm glad I don't live in your world.

Only a minority of kids go to church, and that's just a couple of hours a week, and most churches have become something between deistic motivational meetings and concerts, Christian only superficially. A pew study asked asked a basic question about the wine in Catholic Communion. There were two choices, and Hispanic Catholics got the question right 50% of the time. A retarded monkey that never heard of Catholicism would have done no worse. As I noted previously, most Christians are practically Atheists .

Whose problem is it that only a minority of children go to church? Perhaps churches should look at themselves and ask, why?
A Pew study proved that atheists knew more about religions that all the believers.

You're a victim of society, but your arrogance won't allow you to admit that to yourself.

I'm arrogant??
A victim of society? Why?
I live a great life without god; I have children and grandchildren, friends and colleagues, hobbies and pastimes. I don't need god.

You see science filling the gaps, leaving less room for God and exposing the ignorance of those who attributed natural things to God. If science accounts for the atheism today vs. the past, how do you know science won't point to God in the future? You already admitted that science has already once changed our views on God. (Actually, science doesn't point away from God, it just operates with naturalistic presumption.) We're very ignorant compared to what we'll be in the distant future. How do you know science won't once again change our views on God? A big flaw in your reasoning is that for Christianity to be true, acts attributed to various gods should be refuted by science. Your argument basically is that because science has shown Zeus doesn't throw lightning bolts, that Christianity is false. But, Christianity would only be shown false if Zeus really was throwing lighting bolts. Also, about those gaps being filled in, I see it as evidence of a well designed universe that doesn't need outside maintenance. If you had a car that never broke down, you wouldn't attribute its non-need of repair to it not being intelligently designed, yet that's what you're doing with the universe.

I certainly see science filling the gaps in human knowledge; I never mentioned ignorance of believers, it was you who did that.
If science were to prove the existence of a god, I will change my opinion and I would believe that she exists.
It isn't science remit to refute acts attributed to gods, science studies the natural world, miracles are outside of that.
I never said anything about Zeus or Christianity and science.
You see a well designed universe - then how come humans (as god's chosen people) can live on/in so little of it? Any engineer could design a better version of the earth, imagine no desserts, no polar regions, instead of 2/3rds being undrinkable sea water imagine if that was fresh water. Once you get outside of our atmosphere the vastness of space is uninhabitable to us.
This earth breaks down regularly - earthquakes, volcanoes, droughts, flooding, disease, etc., etc,. It is a lousy design best explained by geologists.

The point is, what you think is reasoning leading you to Atheism is just you interpreting what you see in the context of Atheism.

Until the age of 14 I was a church going Christian. It was when I started asking the vicar questions like, "Where did god come from?", "Why does god allow millions of children to die before they reach the age of 5?", "Why hasn't god or Jesus shown themselves in the last 2000 years" and received woeful answers, that I started to look for better explanations.

A world without god(s) then began to make more and more sense. I have not looked back since as every bit of knowledge I gain convinces me that there is no god.

 

[Altfish]

Lets hope you find your Aeroplane too.

Not in central London.

 

[McBell]

I understand atheism all too well. Atheism leads to communism.

wow.
You completely destroyed your first claim with the second claim.

 

[Kuzcotopia]

I have seen it so...

Where? I'd like to have a word with that community, so I can try to reason with them.

They're doing it wrong, and I want them to stop.

 

[Kuzcotopia]

Really? That isn't my opinion of atheists. If atheists were just anti-deity, then they wouldn't just focus on Christians
That might be more of a satanist convert stereotype
haha no, many atheists are ex-Christians, atheists usually are the ones trying to tell me what the gospel 'actually means' etc, not the other way around

Well, based on most research the average Atheist does understand the gospel better than the average Christian, so . . .

 

[Kuzcotopia]

Worm food vs. eternal reward? Easy choice. I understand Atheists, they say the chance of eternal reward is practically zero. I have two points to answer that 1) Regardless of chance, life is better with God. 2) You aren't qualified to say the odds are practically zero (arrogance isn't a qualification).

Atheists do have some good arguments. But, those arguments aren't why they're atheists. Those arguments are just window dressing. They're Atheists for the same reason many people are Christian, they've been taught to be that way. How many Atheists were there 200 years ago in America? 200 years ago, culture wasn't teaching Atheism. Today, even most Christians are practically Atheists.

Nobody taught me to be an atheist.

I don't even know another Atheist in real life. . . But I do know plenty of Christians. Because they tell me.

And then they tell me again.

So glad to have these forums, a least one spot in my world where there is someone else who doesn't claim to be a Christian.

 

[viole]

The reverse is also true. Many atheists do not understand Christians, and many will go out of their way to belittle them, try and prove that their religion is false, and verbally assault anyone that identifies as a Christian.

Usually, aggressive atheists come from a place where they are the minority. Where moral or social issues are forced into law not because of rational discussion but because someone believes that they are doing the will of that local god. At least, according to their claims.

So, it is obvious that if you do not agree with those issues, you attack the plausibility of the source thereof. First.

For instance, in Sweden, which is de-facto atheistic, things like the so called war on Christmas would be ridiculous. You can organize a nativity scene wherever you like and nobody would care. Those things are actually cute. And children like them a lot. We are also very tolerant for alterntive beliefs like Copyism (which is now an official religion in Sweden) or Jediism which is gaining in popularity.

And why is that? Because Copyism, Christianity and the others, are not relevant for what concerns social policy. They are just tradition, especially the older beliefs, Like other pagan traditions. And we are very attached to our traditions, as long as they do not tell us what to do in our bedrooms or what to teach in our school rooms. The moment they do that, they will be called out immediately.

Ciao

- viole

 

[McBell]

Usually, aggressive atheists come from a place where they are the minority. Where moral or social issues are forced into law not because of rational discussion but because someone believes that they are doing the will of that flavor of god. At least, according to their claims.

So, it is obvious that if you do not agree with those issues, you attack the plausibility of the source thereof. First.

For instance, in Sweden, which is de-facto atheistic, things like the so called war on Christmas would be ridiculous. You can organize a nativity scene wherever you like and nobody would care. Those things are actually cute. And children like them a lot. We are also very tolerant for alterntive beliefs like copyism (which is now an official religion in Sweden) or jediism which is gaining in popularity.

And why is that? Because Christianity, copyism and the others, are not relevant for what concerns social policy. They are just tradition, especially the older beliefs, Like other pagan traditions. And we are very attached to our traditions, as long as they do not tell us what to do in our bedrooms or what to teach in our school rooms. The moment they do that, they will be called out immediately.

Ciao

- viole

I can not help but wonder why it is that when atheists bring their "game", for lack of a better word, up to the bar set by theists, that theists throw a huge fit over it.

Any ideas?

 

[jonathan180iq]

I can not help but wonder why it is that when atheists bring their "game", for lack of a better word, up to the bar set by theists, that theists throw a huge fit over it.

Any ideas?

Same reason white people get angry when you talk about white privilege...
Same reason people who are allowed to get married don't understand all those "****" that keep arguing for fair treatment under the law. (Old issue, I know.)

Positional Blindness.

 

[columbus]

Kids go to school five days a week all the while their brains are soft, taught implicitly every day that the world exists apart from God, if not taught Atheism more forcefully. These kids come home and turn on the TV and watch hours of TV learning implicitly that God has no relevance, if not explicitly told belief in God is ignorant.

That isn't at all how it worked for me.
I came from a Christian family. Elementary and high school were private Christian schools. TV was a treat my parents monitored closely.
I didn't see Star Trek, despite being a sci-fi nerd, until I was in college because my mother disapproved.

But I realized young that religion was primarily Santa Claus for grown ups. And the more I learned about it the more obvious that became.
Tom

 

[viole]

I can not help but wonder why it is that when atheists bring their "game", for lack of a better word, up to the bar set by theists, that theists throw a huge fit over it.

Any ideas?

I don't know. A little gizmo in my head tells me that they do not believe that stuff, either. They just hate to be reminded of this fact. But I might be a bit superficial here.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Desert Snake]

Well, based on most research the average Atheist does understand the gospel better than the average Christian, so . . .

Lol

 

[jonathan180iq]

Lol

Critics of a topic generally spend more time studying said topic than its proponents...

 

[Desert Snake]

Critics of a topic generally spend more time studying said topic than its proponents...

It's also easy to reach the wrong conclusions, which, there is no more chance an atheist wouldn't, than a proponent.

 

[Father Heathen]

Who determines what is harmful or false?

Cause and effect, action and reaction, experience and observation, logic and evidence, etc.

 

[Jackrabbti]

Ho hum. I understand atheism all too well. Atheism leads to communism. It's political.

Yes, Atheism is inherently oppressive. We see this in the Democrat party which is moving toward communism (socialist Barney Sanders even comes from Big-C Communist stock). We see the Democrat Part working to oppress society in every way they can to force people to conform to how they want us to live. Their constant yelling of names (racist, homophobe, deplorables, etc.) is nothing but propaganda to achieve their ends.

In my life, I've never met an Atheist libertarian. Many of them claim to be libertarian, but they're full of BS. Some almost credibly claim to support a Free Market (economic libertarian), but libertarianism requires social freedom (see the real First Amendment), not social liberalism (Democrats have an Orwellian definition of freedom).

 

[JustWondering]

I see the motive or objective of challenging people's religions. I just don't see how it helps to challenge the people as if challenging them will make their whole foundation/their life/their religion just disappear.

I'm not afraid to bring up the topic of religion and politics with others in RL. 99% of the people I try to have discussions with are COMPLETELY clueless about the world they live in. I'm not a scholar by any stretch of the imagination but most of the people I talk to.... I lack the words to describe my frustration for the willful ignorance and apathy of the general population to important issues that really effect people. How can challenging people to become more thoughtful and educated be anything other than a good thing?

I don't think you're being to clear here. How do you define reality?

I define it as the universe we live in.

By whose authority should we follow? Logically why would a doctor's point of view be better than an all-powerful, all-knowing, and loving deity's point of view?

Because doctors actually exist and are trained to care for people's health. I've never seen/met a deity, so why would I assume such beings exist, let alone behave in a obviously irrational way that puts my life at risk to appease them? That being said, if a grown adult wants to refuse medical treatment for themselves, then so be it. If someone is so sick/old that their life is nothing but agony and they want to die, I can understand that too. Children on the other hand are helpless and need to be looked out for. If they want to refuse modern medicine after they grow up because an invisible entity they've never met says so, then they can do what they want. That's my stance on this.

Regardless their relations, it's oil and water. One isn't the other. At least not in America.

Yes, because laws to deny the LGBT community equal rights and respect never get passed in Merica.

What good has "people who follow said religions" have really done for humanity by the religions they follow? (Makes more sense, since religion doesn't do anything itself).

Think about it, though. If you took up, say Christianity, would you feel obligated to treat people unfair and unkind just because other people who follow christ has done the same?​

Depends on the person, but when the religion you follow demonizes certain people wouldn't you be inclined to be unfair in regards to those people?