Why don't atheists accept they are so evangelical and apologetic?

[McBell]

When you say "THE CLAIM", what do you specifically mean? Do you mean the strawman someone else created and you responded to defend that person because that person is also an atheist? This tribalistic tendency I have already explained in the OP. You proved it. You may not have even read my claim properly before you address it but it was instinct. That is tribalism.

You seem like a religious person. Now I am sure you would get offended, but this is fact and if you read the OP I have explained this.

Anyway, you are not addressing the OP, and you seem to be hell bent on making a character analysis of my personal self rather than addressing the points made in the post. I of course anticipated that because it is very normal. And I mentioned that in the OP.

Cheers.

And still you are going on and on out in left field instead of merely naming the name.

One wonders if you are ever going to present the name of this religious person who developed algorithms that made communication possible.

 

[McBell]

I shall cut and paste FYI.

Anyway, you are not addressing the OP, and you seem to be hell bent on making a character analysis of my personal self rather than addressing the points made in the post. I of course anticipated that because it is very normal. And I mentioned that in the OP.

Cheers.

Perhaps one day you will explain what the point of the thread is.
Though I am not going to hold my breath.

 

[firedragon]

Perhaps one day you will explain what the point of the thread is.
Though I am not going to hold my breath.

Already done in the OP. But of course, dont hold your breath.

And still you are going on and on out in left field instead of merely naming the name.

You want a name? No problem. But of course you will make up some excuse to dismiss people because they are theists. If you dont do that, that's fantastic. The normal responses here are character analysis of the man, and some other thing like where he is from, or something like he was not the first, or that because he was scientific not religious, etc etc etc which are just show of the users character, and I have already addressed that type of response in the OP.

It was "Muhammed bin moosa al Hawarizmiy".

 

[Samael_Khan]

Yes. Absolutely Israel Khan.

So then this thread is the case in point:

You are saying that I am correct and that the others on the thread are attacking strawmen, ie, not addressing the actual point of the OP.

If you are saying that least one atheist understands the OP, then why is it that the other atheists who commented do not?

What is the problem then? Do the others have their defense mechanisms activated, which is akin to being religious/tribalistic/indoctrinated because that is how religious people react to criticism? The immediate response, which is not to read critical points for what they actually are, but to overlay their own preconceived idea of what the "enemy" would usually say over what is written, thus creating a strawman? Are they afraid of something?

Maybe it is a communication problem with the way you convey your points, making them too complicated?

 

[Subduction Zone]

You didnt address the post at all. Thats a big sign of missionary type of activity.

Anyway, what you have just done is prove the OP. You claimed in other words that Atheists have started to evangelise and make missionary type of apologetics, but worded it differently.

Also, about science you missed the bus completely. Oh yes. Without science we will not be communicating. And there was a religious guy who developed algorithms that made that possible. Now someone might turn around and say "it was not because of religion" which would show that person missed the whole point.

You just made it clear that you seem to think science is exclusive to atheists. Also you made it clear that "we" as in your group, are a religious group.

Isn't it?

Your OP was far too long to read all of it or to properly reply to it.

Now if you are talking about atheists claiming various parts of the Bible should be interpreted in specific ways, I would say that is a rarity. Usually what we do is to point out the consequences of interpreting verses in specific ways. For example one of my favorite lines is to point out that if a person does interprets Genesis literally that person is calling God a liar. Amazingly they almost never understand that argument and they will ask "why do you think that God is a liar?"

Now occasionally a theist will get an interpretation of their holy books amazingly wrong, only then will I correct them.

 

[Altfish]

It was "Muhammed bin moosa al Hawarizmiy".

That is like saying the person who invented the wheel was responsible for High Speed Rail

 

[Sunstone]

@firedragon, human nature is deeply rooted in our DNA, which varies less than 1% (if I recall) from any human to any other human. In other words, humans are humans. If you see something in others that is really there, then you should be able to see it in yourself at least as a latent or potential behavior that might someday manifest itself.

Before I logged on, and less than a hour ago, it crossed my mind that self-deception might be about the only really important thing pushing the envelope of what it means to be human. That is, it seems possible it's the only general area of human behavior in which we're still now and then discovering new ways of being ourselves.

I know most people are more likely to react to my comments than they are likely to reflect on them. And I know both the most likely tone of their reactions as well as the points they will in general make. Who doesn't know such things, really?

The same thing happens all the time on RF and everywhere else in the world -- wherever humans are exchanging ideas, they even in their best moments totter on the edge of responding to them in stupid ways. Everyone of us. Some have received training in how not to do it, some have received training in how to do it, often without knowing that's what they've been trained to do. But that's about the only difference between one human and another. Everyone is prone to the same stupid blunders, albeit some a little more than others.

Yet, we're 'man the wise'. Homo sapiens. According to our official self image.

We're so self-deceiving, a realistic public conversation about it is always unlikely to happen. Your OP is essentially pointing out details. It's more or less in the vein of 'a particular group of humans as seen through a magnifying glass.' What you say in many ways strikes me as true and accurate. I also noticed you anticipated the most likely negative responses to your comments. Why are such comments so predictable? What does their predictability say about us?

I find checking to see if there's a likely fit between any individual or subgroup behaviors and the larger context of human nature is personally beneficial in helping me to understand what I'm seeing.

 

[stvdv]

try and make an analysis of what was said and provide your insight. I will truly appreciate it.

Why don't atheists accept they are so evangelical and apologetic?

That is quite easy to understand for me. Living in the West, most people are Christian. In 1899 ca. 97% were Christian in my country. And probably this was similar in other countries in the West. This means that great (great) parents probably were Christian. Old habits die hard. Many people who say they are Atheists nowadays, probably were brought up in Christian families.

The moment you become aware, and start thinking for yourself, and decide to become Atheist, you cannot just drop the old habits. Some Christians can be very dogmatic, judgmental and belittling towards people thinking differently. Hence these Atheists, not yet being able to drop their Christian habits, act out similar as Christians do

Of course just breaking out of Christianity, they will never accept that they still act like Christians do. Usually breaking free from family bonds, is not easy, esp. when they are so judgmental (you will end up in Hell and burn forever, etc.)

So, to me this is all very clear. And because I understand this, I can't even get upset when Atheists behave this way. So many Christians by their judgmental and evangelistic behavior create irritation and aggression, esp. in those who try to find their own way. My parents brought us up quite easy, though they were brought up as Christians, they quit Christianity. But recently my father and mother started judging me and my choice of religion. Even after like 50 years dropping Christianity, this dogmatic thinking was still in their system. Very tough to get rid off.

I can't blame Atheists for such behavior, they got it from Christianity, so if I want to blame, I would not blame the Atheists.

 

[firedragon]

So then this thread is the case in point:

You are saying that I am correct and that the others on the thread are attacking strawmen, ie, not addressing the actual point of the OP.

If you are saying that least one atheist understands the OP, then why is it that the other atheists who commented do not?

What is the problem then? Do the others have their defense mechanisms activated, which is akin to being religious/tribalistic/indoctrinated because that is how religious people react to criticism? The immediate response, which is not to read critical points for what they actually are, but to overlay their own preconceived idea of what the "enemy" would usually say over what is written, thus creating a strawman? Are they afraid of something?

Maybe it is a communication problem with the way you convey your points, making them too complicated?

It could very well be a problem with my communication. But when someone addresses that, I want a specific. Hope you understand. There is one person who said that it is a problem with the OP, but I want a specific, not a generalisation. But Never got it.

Anyway, I have many years of interaction with missionaries in both camps of Christianity and Islam. Most of these missionaries are taught a specific skill set to evangelise and counter criticism. I see the same pattern with the atheists in this thread. Of course not all, but most.

Not only that. By the definition of the word "Religion" and its background that I have explained in the OP, these atheists fall into that category very easily. And as I have explained, more so than the understanding of Dheen which is a different thing when you think about it.

Sorry, I took a long time to respond and in the middle of this post I had many disturbances and now I have lost the plot.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Many atheists aren't necessarily atheists for the right reasons. There are those who say that there isn't enough evidence at the moment for religious beliefs based off their critical thinking analysis which is the correct reason. Then there are those who say that there definitely isn't a god, at which point they become religious in the sense that they are taking a definite stance on something that cannot be examined.

There are also those who are atheist for emotional reasons and often their complimentary beliefs are also based off of emotion. As Matt Dillahunty would say, those atheists are not atheists for the right reasons. They deny religion based off of emotion and not facts.

People are religious largely because of emotion and tribalism. Many people believe religions because of tribalistic tendencies. But tribalism isn't limited to religion, as it also can apply to any other viewpoint a group might hold. Atheists can also stick to viewpoints because of peer pressure and tribalism and this is especially evident when they are not consistent with their reasoning.

I think that people shouldn't comment on the specifics of a religion unless that specific is really clear cut, such as saying that homosexuals can be killed. There is no way around that point so they can comment.

When quoting texts though, atheists do well to quote books that they have actually read so that they can do it in context. There is no point in using a tool when one doesn't know anything about it. Rather learn the tool and then when using it you will use it effectively.

That being said, there are certain points that one can criticize a religion based off logical conclusions. One point is saying that everybody knows that God exists. if you are an atheist and you know that you do not know that god exists, then evidently that religious belief is wrong. Unexaminable to others, but a fact to yourself.

I have never seen atheists worship science, but on order to be objective, they must realize its limitations at any given moment if they do not do so already.

As to people that are atheists for the wrong reason an excellent example would be someone that is "mad at God". For various reasons, often the loss of a loved one, people will strike out. And if they are theists their god seems like a reasonable target. The problem is that being mad at a nonexistent being makes no sense at all. The only thing one is doing by being mad at him is confirming a belief in him. Once the theist realizes this they tend to go back to their old beliefs.

 

[firedragon]

Why don't atheists accept they are so evangelical and apologetic?

That is quite easy to understand for me. Living in the West, most people are Christian. In 1899 ca. 97% were Christian in my country. And probably this was similar in other countries in the West. This means that great (great) parents probably were Christian. Old habits die hard. Many people who say they are Atheists nowadays, probably were brought up in Christian families.

The moment you become aware, and start thinking for yourself, and decide to become Atheist, you cannot just drop the old habits. Some Christians can be very dogmatic, judgmental and belittling towards people thinking differently. Hence these Atheists, not yet being able to drop their Christian habits, act out similar as Christians do

Of course just breaking out of Christianity, they will never accept that they still act like Christians do. Usually breaking free from family bonds, is not easy, esp. when they are so judgmental (you will end up in Hell and burn forever, etc.)

So, to me this is all very clear. And because I understand this, I can't even get upset when Atheists behave this way. So many Christians by their judgmental and evangelistic behavior create irritation and aggression, esp. in those who try to find their own way. My parents brought us up quite easy, though they were brought up as Christians, they quit Christianity. But recently my father and mother started judging me and my choice of religion. Even after like 50 years dropping Christianity, this dogmatic thinking was still in their system. Very tough to get rid off.

I can't blame Atheists for such behavior, they got it from Christianity, so if I want to blame, I would not blame the Atheists.

I await posts like this. Simple, but could be profound. So its our pedigree, be it Muslim, Christian or something else, that has made us what we are even though we have left our respective faiths. And since we left our faiths for many reasons, we dont want anyone to claim we still have the same traits we claim we left.

Alright mate. interesting. I must agree, but I am going to pursue this a bit and read up. Someone somewhere would have done some good research on this for sure.

Thanks brother. That was great.

 

[ChristineM]

I never said that.

So maybe you should respond to what was said, not what you want to respond to. Thats a strawman. Read what I said.

I said "there was a religious man who created algorithms". Not what you are saying. You have created a strawman to attack.

Strange.

I asked you for his name, you have refused to provide it.

I on the other hand peovided the name of the guy who created the means, which includes the internet algorithms to make online communication not only possible but a reality.

 

[firedragon]

I asked you for his name, you have refused to provide it.

When you say "His", you mean someone else, who did something else, that I never claimed.

So how could I name a strawman you created? Please try to understand.

Anyway, I just randomly mentioned this guy. And if you want the name, I will not give the name here because you are just saying "him" and seem to refer to a strawman. But if you wish, read this post.

#63

 

[ChristineM]

Oh right you provided 4 pages later

It was "Muhammed bin moosa al Hawarizmiy".

I wonder how he created algorithms to facilitate world wide communication over 1100 years ago when a/ much of the world was still undiscovered and b/ there was no means of communication further than shouting distance or horse courier

 

[ChristineM]

When you say "His", you mean someone else, who did something else, that I never claimed.

So how could I name a strawman you created? Please try to understand.

Anyway, I just randomly mentioned this guy. And if you want the name, I will not give the name here because you are just saying "him" and seem to refer to a strawman. But if you wish, read this post.

#63

You made a statement, i responded to that statement. You have since continued to evade. As expected

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

You just made it clear that you seem to think science is exclusive to atheists

He didn't say that at all, nore did he imply it in any way.

Also you made it clear that "we" as in your group, are a religious group.

Nope.

 

[epronovost]

Why don't atheists accept they are so evangelical and apologetic?

That is quite easy to understand for me. Living in the West, most people are Christian. In 1899 ca. 97% were Christian in my country. And probably this was similar in other countries in the West. This means that great (great) parents probably were Christian. Old habits die hard. Many people who say they are Atheists nowadays, probably were brought up in Christian families.

The moment you become aware, and start thinking for yourself, and decide to become Atheist, you cannot just drop the old habits. Some Christians can be very dogmatic, judgmental and belittling towards people thinking differently. Hence these Atheists, not yet being able to drop their Christian habits, act out similar as Christians do

Of course just breaking out of Christianity, they will never accept that they still act like Christians do. Usually breaking free from family bonds, is not easy, esp. when they are so judgmental (you will end up in Hell and burn forever, etc.)

So, to me this is all very clear. And because I understand this, I can't even get upset when Atheists behave this way. So many Christians by their judgmental and evangelistic behavior create irritation and aggression, esp. in those who try to find their own way. My parents brought us up quite easy, though they were brought up as Christians, they quit Christianity. But recently my father and mother started judging me and my choice of religion. Even after like 50 years dropping Christianity, this dogmatic thinking was still in their system. Very tough to get rid off.

I can't blame Atheists for such behavior, they got it from Christianity, so if I want to blame, I would not blame the Atheists.

This appears to me to be strangely bigoted toward Christians. Some atheists aren't ******** because they come from christian familly and background. They are ********...because the are ********. It's not like dogmatic violence is especially christian. You are Hindu and Hindu love sectarian violence, especially against muslim and have their own brand of special mix of ultranationalism and religious fundamentalism just like christian nationalism or islamists. There is no group of people on the planet that doesn't have a certain number of complete ******** in them and there isn't a link between their "assholeness" and the religion of their parent/grand-parent. More likel, they are ******** because their parents were ******** or they simply don't care too mch about harming the feelings of others.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

A religious man developed algorithms.

And I'm a non-religious man who develops alogirthms (I'm a software engineer).


So what?
Why does it matter if the algorithm developer is or isn't religious?

 

[SigurdReginson]

Tldr.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

It was "Muhammed bin moosa al Hawarizmiy".

aka Mr Algebra.

What of him?
How is this guy relevant to this thread, which seems to be about militant atheist behaviour?