Why do some atheists have to be so insulting and mean?

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Henry Fairfield Osborn, President of the American Museum of Natural History, examined the Piltdown and Sheffield Park finds and declared that the jaw and skull belonged together "without question"

LMAO! Riiight. Your "argument" consists of decades-old "conspiracy" that has long since been discredited by.... scientists?

In all the history of Science, not once has Religion gained the upper hand, and told Scientists: "See? We were right all along!"

It has always gone the other way.

You theists are so desperate to "prove" your ugly non-arguments, you stoop to National Enquirer stories, now?

people can, scientists don't have such a great track record-

Science is infinitely superior to all religion-- everywhere.

Why? Because science is self-correcting, even if the correction takes a generation or three.

Religion is never--EVER-EVER self-correcting! EVER!

In every case where Religion has been forced to back down? The correction always came from outside.

Usually from science-- which was a side-effect of doing science!

Science is willing to change with new evidence.

Religion buckles down, lies, suppresses, makes "illegal" and actively murders ANY AND ALL dissenting facts every time it is allowed to.

A scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.
Max Planck

Non-sequitur. Look it up.

In future you may be safer sticking to answering every post with a 'funny' aka the 'I have no substantive argument' sign

I must laugh at you self-entitled, self-righteous, never-a-valid-argument types because none of you ever present anything new.

Even this rant of yours? OLD STUFF, long since discredited....

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

as above, Hoyle and many other atheists mocked and rejected the BB, arguably the greatest scientific discovery of all time, because it appear to THEM to have undesirable implications of God. We should not let our beliefs influence our judgement either way.

Oh. My. That has GOT to be one if the FUNNIEST REWRITES OF ACTUAL HISTORY EVER.

Seriously?

You ought to write for a Theistic Comedy Tour or something.

PS. I see you have your Mind Reading Hat working again... or is that simply your own projection into the minds of Hoyle?

 

[Guy Threepwood]

LMAO! Riiight. Your "argument" consists of decades-old "conspiracy" that has long since been discredited by.... scientists?

In all the history of Science, not once has Religion gained the upper hand, and told Scientists: "See? We were right all along!"

It has always gone the other way.

You theists are so desperate to "prove" your ugly non-arguments, you stoop to National Enquirer stories, now?




Science is infinitely superior to all religion-- everywhere.

Why? Because science is self-correcting, even if the correction takes a generation or three.

Religion is never--EVER-EVER self-correcting! EVER!

In every case where Religion has been forced to back down? The correction always came from outside.

Usually from science-- which was a side-effect of doing science!

Science is willing to change with new evidence.

Religion buckles down, lies, suppresses, makes "illegal" and actively murders ANY AND ALL dissenting facts every time it is allowed to.



Non-sequitur. Look it up.




I must laugh at you self-entitled, self-righteous, never-a-valid-argument types because none of you ever present anything new.

Even this rant of yours? OLD STUFF, long since discredited....

Be always humble, gentle, and patient. Show your love by being tolerant with one another.
(Ephesians 4:2)

Hot tempers cause arguments, but patience brings peace.
(Proverbs 15:18)

 

[Truly Enlightened]

thanks for the thoughtful response, I appreciate it

of course , 'science' doesn't care about beliefs, but scientists do. Big Bang was the term Hoyle coined explicitly to mock Lemaitre's primeval atom which he saw as 'religious pseudoscience'.

Their beliefs are irrelevant to the truth, and science won out over atheist beliefs in the end yes, but they severely delayed scientific progress, and I think still do in life sciences for instance



"Given an infinite amount of time, an infinite amount of materials, and an infinite amount of possibilities, any possibility becomes possible"

except God, right?

That's where multiverse theory ultimately shoots itself in the foot, it can create anything at all, except anything that could ever be described as 'God' which would defeat the whole purpose of it.

Yet this 'flying spaghetti multiverse' already 'accidentally' produced creative sentient beings with an insatiable appetite for reverse engineering the entire universe around them. oops!

Andre Linde, principle in modern inflationary theory considers it 'feasible' that we can engineer our own universe, and that this may possibly be where ours came from... not necessarily what I adhere to, but it certainly comes under the realm of your 'possibilities' as one version of intelligent design


The mind boggling level of fine tuning in the universe absolutely was the rationale for multiverse theories, an infinite improbability machine being the only way it could happen without ID- the only remaining way to 'make God redundant' as Hawking put it. The concept of all reality running on a handful of simple 'immutable' laws + lots of time and space to randomly bump around in... went out with classical physics.- though some still hold to this Victorian age model for the development of life



If a gambler sits down at 4 tables and plays a royal flush at each- chance is not impossible, it's just not the least improbable answer unless you can utterly rule out cheating, aka intelligent agency.

So ultimately chance must be granted the entire playing field to itself to be allowed to accidentally win out eventually, not so the other way around, merely permitting both possibilities, ID has the better power of explanation

You are very welcome. I'm afraid that God is not time, God is not material, and God is not even a possibility in a 4 dimensional Universe(under the 4 forces in Nature). Please don't say that God transcends space, time, and matter. That would mean that God exists in another dimension, which is the same as non-existence by default. Therefore given an infinite amount on zero time, and an infinite amount of zero materials, will only produce zero probability/outcome. An analogy would be if you never bought a lotto ticket. You would have zero chance of winning, no matter how much non-time and non-materials you use. The outcome will always be zero possibility of winning.

Again, Atheism of not a belief, it is a position of understanding if you will. There is absolutely Zero evidence to support a belief in a Deity. Therefore, atheist have nothing NOT to believe in regarding the existence of a Deity. You believe without evidence(faith), Atheists don't. Also, my non-belief(only in a Deity) has nothing to do with science. So Atheistic ideas didn't win, it was the new scientific idea that won.

Although you seem to mock the idea of a multiverse, you should really keep an open mind. Once we determine why Gravity is so much weaker than the other three fundamental forces, we may be able to know if a multiverse does, or does not exist. This research is going on now at the LHC and CERN. We just have to be patient. It may be one more nail in the Religious coffin.

The mind boggling level of fine tuning in the universe absolutely was the rationale for multiverse theories, an infinite improbability machine being the only way it could happen without ID- the only remaining way to 'make God redundant' as Hawking put it. The concept of all reality running on a handful of simple 'immutable' laws + lots of time and space to randomly bump around in... went out with classical physics.- though some still hold to this Victorian age model for the development of life

I think you missed the point of my car analogy. You are looking at a Cosmos the way it is(or was). We have no other cosmos to compare our fine-tuning to. We have no other life forms in the Universe, to compare our life forms to. The mechanics of Evolution is based only on how our species have evolved. What is the point you are insinuating? Are you implying that if the Cosmos were different, or the natural laws were different, then the Cosmos would be different? I certainly agree. BUT IT AIN'T! It is what it is. Since nothing in nature is absolute, fine-tuning is relative, and has already been debunked totally.

Andre Linde, principle in modern inflationary theory considers it 'feasible' that we can engineer our own universe, and that this may possibly be where ours came from... not necessarily what I adhere to, but it certainly comes under the realm of your 'possibilities' as one version of intelligent design

Really! Someone considers it feasible that we could engineer our own Universe, and you get excited? I'm afraid I don't share your enthusiasm. That would be like telling someone that if they bought two lotto ticket, their possibility of winning is improved. If an ID did exist, there would be evidence of his design. Not inferred, but implicit and objective. This idea was also debunked back on the 60's.

 

[Truthseeker]

If you read on the internet you will find any manner of false information and attacks on the Baha’i Faith. This is what people do when a religion is relatively new. Moreover, the Baha’i Faith is attacked more virulently because of the claims it makes. The only way to obtain accurate information about the Baha’i Faith is from the official Baha’i sources. There are explanations for everything you cited. We are not required to give up 10% of our income. Our ideology is not a mishmash of Hindi, Muslim, and Christian beliefs. We share some common beliefs but our beliefs are unique to our religion.

Baha’is share some but not all Christian beliefs. For example, we do not believe in the Jesus resurrection story the same way Christians do. We believe that man has a propensity to sin but we do not believe in original sin. We do not believe in an afterlife the same way Christians do. We do not believe in the soul the same way Christians do.


I never claimed that NDEs are proof of anything. They are an indication that consciousness can exist outside the body which indicates that there might be a soul, but they are not the reason I believe in an afterlife.


I do not know what you mean. What is the straw man I am arguing with? Some people were fooled and manipulated because they allowed themselves to be fooled because they did not do their due diligence. The fact that some people were fooled does not prove anything about the Messengers of God. What people believe is totally unrelated to the truth of their claims.

I know the value and purpose of objective evidence but I also know there can never be any objective evidence for God, a soul, or an afterlife. Objective evidence cannot be used to prove God exists, for obvious logical reasons, not the least of which is that there never has been and never will be any objective evidence of God since God is an immaterial Being.

Anyone who expects to obtain objective evidence of that which has no material properties is clearly illogical.

Anyone who expects to obtain objective evidence of that which has no material properties is clearly illogical.

God could provide objective evidence if He wanted to, like obvious incidents where the laws of nature are not followed.

 

[Technologicalsociety]

They don't have to but they choose to be that way. And why not? As a believer it doesn't bother me to see people so insecure they have to insult others to make themselves feel good. It's not like logic or reason would dictate people be decent, right? Hah.

 

[Milton Platt]

From what I know about the less religious countries such as in Europe, they are more universally educated and their systems of government are very different, so wealth is more evenly distributed and there is less poverty. That is probably one reason there is less crime. People in those countries are more content because they have their physical needs met, but I am not so sure they are that they are truly happy since humans are spiritual beings, not physical beings.

So what is the difference between happy and truly happy? LOL
While you are at it, define spiritual. I have only met human beings that are corporeal.

 

[Milton Platt]

I have sufficient evidence to prove TO MYSELF that God exists, as I just said in the post above, to Unveiled Artist. I just cannot prove it to anyone else, because everyone has to prove it to themselves, based upon the evidence that is available.

There is more than one meaning to knowledge, more than one way of knowing. I have knowledge because I have factual information about the Baha’u’llah, what He did and wrote, and coupled with my reasoning I concluded that He was a Messenger of God.

Definition of knowledge
1 a (1) : the fact or condition of knowing something with familiarity gained through experience or association
(2) : acquaintance with or understanding of a science, art, or technique
b (1) : the fact or condition of being aware of something
(2) : the range of one's information or understanding
c : the circumstance or condition of apprehending truth or fact through reasoning : cognition
d : the fact or condition of having information or of being learned
2 a : the sum of what is known : the body of truth, information, and principles acquired by humankind
b archaic : a branch of learning
Definition of KNOWLEDGE

You are correct. I have factual information about Baha’u’llah that can be verified and that is why I believe He was a Messenger of God. I know God exists because I know Baha’u’llah was a Messenger of God since God has to exist in order to send a Messenger. I cannot prove that as a fact but I know according to my reasoning and the sum total of what is known about Baha’u’llah that He was who He claimed to be, a Messenger of God.

Yes, those are all valid definitions. Knowledge is a subset of belief. You can believe something without knowing it to actually be true. Knowledge requires verifiable information. Belief only requires a desire to believe. Children believe there is a Santa Clause. That does not mean that there really is one. So while many children believe there is one, no child knows that there is one.

Where does one look for independent verification of the facts you claim to know about Baha’u’llah?

Please provide a few of the facts and provide references from sources other than your religious book that verify the facts.
They need to be things that are verifiable and need to be things that could not have been learned any other way.

You've been very patient....I know that I get pointed.

 

[wandering peacefully]

"

"Why do some atheists have to be so insulting and mean? I am a believer and I do not ever insult atheists; in fact I tell them their lack of belief is just as rational as my beliefs since nobody can prove there is a God. I never threaten them with hell because I do not even believe in hell.

But I constantly have to defend myself from being call brainwashed and stupid and having dumb arguments, just because I believe in God and have a religion that is different from Christianity, a religion they do not know how to refute. Nobody deserves to be treated this way.

If atheists want to say they need no God for morality then some of them are not doing a very good job of demonstrating that with their air of superiority, arrogance, and rude behavior, not to mention dishonesty, lack of self-awareness and unjust treatment of others.

I am not referring to any atheists in this forum. They have been more than civil and respectful and kind.

I am being called stupid but I am not stupid. I went to college for over 15 years and I have several degrees, two advanced. But I am called stupid because my degrees are not in science subjects, because I do not know a lot about history. So what? What is more important, how much one knows or how they treat their fellow man?

I am so sorry I missed your updated posts! I was just going by the original OP that you posted when I made my comments about questioning why you had such difficulty keeping "on-line" friends.

It seems you have changed your original complaint about atheists being mean.

Why do some atheists have to be so insulting and mean? I am a believer and I do not ever insult atheists; in fact I tell them their lack of belief is just as rational as my beliefs since nobody can prove there is a God. I never threaten them with hell because I do not even believe in hell.

But I constantly have to defend myself from being call brainwashed and stupid and having dumb arguments, just because I believe in God and have a religion that is different from Christianity, a religion they do not know how to refute. Nobody deserves to be treated this way.

If atheists want to say they need no God for morality then some of them are not doing a very good job of demonstrating that with their air of superiority, arrogance, and rude behavior, not to mention dishonesty, lack of self-awareness and unjust treatment of others.

I am not referring to any atheists in this forum. They have been more than civil and respectful and kind.

I am being called stupid but I am not stupid. I went to college for over 15 years and I have several degrees, two advanced. But I am called stupid because my degrees are not in science subjects, because I do not know a lot about history. So what? What is more important, how much one knows or how they treat their fellow man?"


I want to apoligize for my response to your original opening post. I had thought you were speaking the truth when you spoke about lumping atheists into the group you about were complaining about. I don't come here often as I have a lot of things going on in my life which have little to do with being "on line".

I orig

Why do some atheists have to be so insulting and mean? I am a believer and I do not ever insult atheists; in fact I tell them their lack of belief is just as rational as my beliefs since nobody can prove there is a God. I never threaten them with hell because I do not even believe in hell.

But I constantly have to defend myself from being call brainwashed and stupid and having dumb arguments, just because I believe in God and have a religion that is different from Christianity, a religion they do not know how to refute. Nobody deserves to be treated this way.

If atheists want to say they need no God for morality then some of them are not doing a very good job of demonstrating that with their air of superiority, arrogance, and rude behavior, not to mention dishonesty, lack of self-awareness and unjust treatment of others."



I am so sorry I responded to this post in a questioning manner! I thought you were telling your true thoughts about how you felt. I did not realize you meant something completely different than what you wrote.

I see now you were only talking about "one" or two atheist who had done you wrong? The way it was written sounded more as though you were judging people in general who did not believe what you do. I see from further posts you are totally accepting of atheists and what they don't believe. That is very wise of you. I see you have had trouble keeping "friends" when they don't accept your position and teachings.


As I have seen other posts on your ideas, may I ask what do you believe is the benefit to humanity by you spending your life "proclaiming the cause"?

What are the specific ideas from your messenger which you have found helpful to yoirself and other people? What are your favorite ideas from the messages that you follow and which will benefit all of humanity?

When you say that "proclaiming the cause" is the most important thing you can do in your life, what are you doing specifically to further humanity with your proclamations?

It is nice that you only care about other humans and bringing them the good news about the best and latest messages. Can you please list 10 of the best messages from the Bahai messenger which can help all of us to follow for this day and age?

Thanks so much for your dedication in proclaiming "the cause" which can help all of us. You really are sacrificing a lot of this life to teach us all these important messages. It is a precious thing to miss this life in dedication to humanity.

I am also glad you understand that not all "atheists" are mean and are only here because they hate you and your messenger. I find it a little strange that online people do not like you because of your religion and message. I mean, there are thousands of different religions and messages. Many people seem to be able to share their specific beliefs without being banned from forums or becoming disliked by other participants. It seems strange that you would be the exception. Maybe it is your presentation? I am only trying to guess from what you explained.

Besides all of the personal problems you seem to have with so many posters on other forums, what is it specifically you are doing to further the cause and helping humanity?

What exactly is "the cause" which your prophet wants you to proclaim?

 

[wandering peacefully]

So when you say that proclaiming "the cause" is the most important thing you can do in your life according to your Messenger, what exactly is the proclamation?

What does your sacrifice do to help you and what does your sacrifice do to help humanity?

 

[wandering peacefully]

If atheists want to say they need no God for morality then some of them are not doing a very good job of demonstrating that with their air of superiority, arrogance, and rude behavior, not to mention dishonesty, lack of self-awareness and unjust treatment of others."

I am wondering when you have claimed.to love these people in the past and have proclaimed how wonderful and accepting and loving they are, to all of a sudden proclaim how evil and vile and hateful they are and that they are liars on top of all that, where in this does your responsibilty lie?

Is it truly that they are the ones who have done you wrong all together? Or are you partially to blame at all?

How does proclaiming the cause and your seemingly endless rejection by those who you thought were your friends, fit together?

 

[loverofhumanity]

Why do some atheists have to be so insulting and mean? I am a believer and I do not ever insult atheists; in fact I tell them their lack of belief is just as rational as my beliefs since nobody can prove there is a God. I never threaten them with hell because I do not even believe in hell.

But I constantly have to defend myself from being call brainwashed and stupid and having dumb arguments, just because I believe in God and have a religion that is different from Christianity, a religion they do not know how to refute. Nobody deserves to be treated this way.

If atheists want to say they need no God for morality then some of them are not doing a very good job of demonstrating that with their air of superiority, arrogance, and rude behavior, not to mention dishonesty, lack of self-awareness and unjust treatment of others.

I am not referring to any atheists in this forum. They have been more than civil and respectful and kind.

I am being called stupid but I am not stupid. I went to college for over 15 years and I have several degrees, two advanced. But I am called stupid because my degrees are not in science subjects, because I do not know a lot about history. So what? What is more important, how much one knows or how they treat their fellow man?

This shows you are a tolerant and courteous persons!

 

[Trailblazer]

This shows you are a tolerant and courteous persons!

Thanks, but now I feel bad that I offended some atheists here when I in no way was referring to any atheists here... It is a small subset of atheists who are insulting and mean, thinking they are intellectually superior to believers... I do not know any atheists who are mean except this one I was referring to in the OP. And he is not really mean, he is just cold and insensitive. I cannot reach people like that so I decided I would just have to give up trying.

Most atheists just require more evidence for God's existence and that is not blameworthy at all. Sure, we see Baha'u'llah as evidence but not everyone thinks like we do. However, if they knew more of what we know and understood why we consider that evidence then they would at least have that opportunity... So that is what I try to do, understand where people are coming from and answer their questions and concerns... you know, the hollow reed thing.

 

[Trailblazer]

If atheists want to say they need no God for morality then some of them are not doing a very good job of demonstrating that with their air of superiority, arrogance, and rude behavior, not to mention dishonesty, lack of self-awareness and unjust treatment of others."

I am wondering when you have claimed.to love these people in the past and have proclaimed how wonderful and accepting and loving they are, to all of a sudden proclaim how evil and vile and hateful they are and that they are liars on top of all that, where in this does your responsibilty lie?

Is it truly that they are the ones who have done you wrong all together? Or are you partially to blame at all?

How does proclaiming the cause and your seemingly endless rejection by those who you thought were your friends, fit together?

I will catch your other posts and everyone else's posts on this thread tomorrow... but I had to respond to this one tonight.

I never should have said "some atheists" because it was just ONE atheist who hurt me badly and when I posted the OP I was reacting to that shortly after it happened...Long story short, I liked and trusted this man and he turned on me. He had said rude and insulting things to me over the years but that is not what I was upset about. I was upset about unfair treatment and injustices towards me that occurred on his forum.

I am trying to put this behind me and move on. I would like to make amends with him because I do not like any bad feelings between us. I reached out to him but he won't talk to me so it is out of my hands.

I am not saying I did not do anything wrong, but I know I did not do most of what he accused me of doing. I accepted responsibility for what I did do wrong and that is all I can do.

So there is no THEY, just a HE. I have no issues with any other atheists, my best friends on forums are atheists. There are some who chide believers but I do not post to them unless they post to me. .

 

[Truly Enlightened]

If atheists want to say they need no God for morality then some of them are not doing a very good job of demonstrating that with their air of superiority, arrogance, and rude behavior, not to mention dishonesty, lack of self-awareness and unjust treatment of others."

I am wondering when you have claimed.to love these people in the past and have proclaimed how wonderful and accepting and loving they are, to all of a sudden proclaim how evil and vile and hateful they are and that they are liars on top of all that, where in this does your responsibility lie?

Is it truly that they are the ones who have done you wrong all together? Or are you partially to blame at all?

How does proclaiming the cause and your seemingly endless rejection by those who you thought were your friends, fit together?

Atheist DON'T say they don't need a God, they say they don't BELIEVE a God exist without evidence. It would be illogical to need something that doesn't exist. It is bad enough to merely want something that doesn't exist. Atheist or anyone else would never want to adopt the moral standards demonstrated in the Bible. Our morality begins with "to do the least harm, and to do that which is the most beneficial" to others. The Bibles' moral standards begins and ends with, "obey or die". Do you want examples? If God was not believed to be all powerful and everywhere, he would just be another insecure, immature, egocentric despot. Maybe some people are genetically preconditioned to serve. Maybe they are like sheep looking for a shepherd to follow.

If you walk out of the house with no clothes on, expecting others not to have a range of comments would be naïve and illogical. To avoid this attention, just stay in the house. There are those that claim the earth is flat, that Obama was never a citizen, the Titanic never existed, animals can talk, Zeus still exists, and the universe and earth were created 10,000years ago. Should these claims receive any critical attention, because they are only proclaimed truths? Are those making these extraordinary claims, simply complaining about the undo due diligence they receive from critical thinkers? Or, does being a victim only adds credence to the idea of being persecuted? I don't think so. When you make claims that is not based in historical or natural reality, expect people to be a little suspicious

, and

So no, it not simply about making a proclamation, it is about the nature of the proclamation and its validity.

 

[oldbadger]

Why do some atheists have to be so insulting and mean?

I don't know.
And I certainly don't know any like that here.

But I constantly have to defend myself from being call brainwashed

That's not insulting.

.....and stupid ....

If anybody calls you stupid here on RF they would get nobbled for it by the mods.

If atheists want to say they need no God for morality then some of them are not doing a very good job of demonstrating that with their air of superiority, arrogance, and rude behavior, not to mention dishonesty, lack of self-awareness and unjust treatment of others.

...and now you've changed 'some atheists' into 'atheists'.
Is this a general rant about atheists?

................................. I went to college for over 15 years and I have several degrees, two advanced.

So what?
I'll let you into an Oldbadger secret. When some folks tell us about how highly educated they are, it often seems as if they want to win some debate or contention just by throwing their qualifications down like some winning hand at cards. And it doesn't work.
What makes the difference here is what gets written down for all to see. Our posts show what we have found out, etc.

I'm sad to read about how badly you have been treated by some atheists, but in my experience the forums with a 'lean' towards atheism are very well behaved when compared with some more extreme religious forums, a couple of which are utterly shocking.

 

[Trailblazer]

Atheist DON'T say they don't need a God, they say they don't BELIEVE a God exist without evidence. It would be illogical to need something that doesn't exist. It is bad enough to merely want something that doesn't exist. Atheist or anyone else would never want to adopt the moral standards demonstrated in the Bible. Our morality begins with "to do the least harm, and to do that which is the most beneficial" to others. The Bibles' moral standards begins and ends with, "obey or die". Do you want examples? If God was not believed to be all powerful and everywhere, he would just be another insecure, immature, egocentric despot. Maybe some people are genetically preconditioned to serve. Maybe they are like sheep looking for a shepherd to follow.

If you walk out of the house with no clothes on, expecting others not to have a range of comments would be naïve and illogical. To avoid this attention, just stay in the house. There are those that claim the earth is flat, that Obama was never a citizen, the Titanic never existed, animals can talk, Zeus still exists, and the universe and earth were created 10,000years ago. Should these claims receive any critical attention, because they are only proclaimed truths? Are those making these extraordinary claims, simply complaining about the undo due diligence they receive from critical thinkers? Or, does being a victim only adds credence to the idea of being persecuted? I don't think so. When you make claims that is not based in historical or natural reality, expect people to be a little suspicious

, and

So no, it not simply about making a proclamation, it is about the nature of the proclamation and its validity.

The first video is not truth. It is lies about the Baha'i Faith, an effort to discredit and defame it, hoping that the unsuspecting viewer will not know the difference. They would not know the difference if they did not know what the Baha'i Faith was really all about; instead, they would believe the video's lies.

Accurate information about the Baha'i Faith does not come from Muslims or Christians, for obvious logical reasons. Would you go to a Christian to find out what Islam is all about? No, because Christians believe Islam is a false religion.
The second video you posted is accurate, as far as I can tell.

The following video is accurate information about the Baha'i Faith

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I will catch your other posts and everyone else's posts on this thread tomorrow... but I had to respond to this one tonight.

I never should have said "some atheists" because it was just ONE atheist who hurt me badly and when I posted the OP I was reacting to that shortly after it happened...Long story short, I liked and trusted this man and he turned on me. He had said rude and insulting things to me over the years but that is not what I was upset about. I was upset about unfair treatment and injustices towards me that occurred on his forum.

I am trying to put this behind me and move on. I would like to make amends with him because I do not like any bad feelings between us. I reached out to him but he won't talk to me so it is out of my hands.

I am not saying I did not do anything wrong, but I know I did not do most of what he accused me of doing. I accepted responsibility for what I did do wrong and that is all I can do.

So there is no THEY, just a HE. I have no issues with any other atheists, my best friends on forums are atheists. There are some who chide believers but I do not post to them unless they post to me. .

Any person can be described with many labels: you’ve mentioned that the atheist who behaved badly toward you is also a “him,” the admin of a forum, and a non-Bahá’í. I’m sure there are other terms we could use to describe him if we knew more details.

But despite all the ways you could describe him, you focused on his atheism. You went from one person treating you badly to asking why “some atheists” treat people badly. The implication is that his bad behaviour is associated with his atheism in a way that it isn’t associated with his gender, his role on that forum, or his other characteristics.

Do you understand now how this can be taken badly?

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Be always humble, gentle, and patient. Show your love by being tolerant with one another.
(Ephesians 4:2)

Hot tempers cause arguments, but patience brings peace.
(Proverbs 15:18)

Physician, Heal Thyself.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Anyone who expects to obtain objective evidence of that which has no material properties is clearly illogical.

God could provide objective evidence if He wanted to, like obvious incidents where the laws of nature are not followed.

What possible motive could this god of yours have, for absolutely refusing to do so? (provide objective evidence)

Serious question.