I'm a Christian. Convince me to become an athiest.
I'm listening...
- Login to post comments
- Login to post comments
Navigation
The Rational Response Squad is a group of atheist activists who impact society by changing the way we view god belief. This site is a haven for those who are pushing back against the norm, and a place for believers of gods to have their beliefs exposed as false should they want to try their hand at confronting us. Buy any item on AMAZON, and we'll use the small commission to help improve critical thinking. Buy a Laptop -- Apple |
I'm a Christian. Convince me to become an athiest.
Posted on: March 14, 2007 - 9:35pm
I'm a Christian. Convince me to become an athiest.
I'm listening...
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 12:40pm
#155
Well, it's pretty obvious
Well, it's pretty obvious that taking the route of "logic" and "reason" and "thinking" and "using your brain" and such isn't going to convert sugarfree to atheism. That said, my offer of "become an atheist, get a chocolate cookie" is still on the table. That's just the kind of guy I am. Edit: The cookie is starting to look appetizing. If you want it, you'd better become an atheist quick, 'cause I'm about to eat that thing. Re-edit: Hurry up, sugarfree. If you don't convert, there's no cookie. This is some serious Pascal's Wager shit here, man. Tri-edit: TOO LATE MMMMM COOKIE SO GOOD Götter sind für Arten, die sich selbst verraten -- in den Glauben flüchten um sich hinzurichten. Menschen brauchen Götter um sich zu verletzen, um sich zu vernichten -- das sind wir.
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 1:47pm
#156
tolerance
Sugarfree, you mention anger and hatred. I think it's that some folks feel frustrated and that's how it comes out. And I'm sure many on this board are angry because of their experiences with religious people. BUT. And it's a big BUT. In my opinion and belief, if everyone on the planet, in one great moment of understanding, simply agreed that we were all entitled to our own beliefs (or unbeliefs) and stopped trying to convert everyone, the anger would go away. At least it would for most. Because I, for instance, really have no investment in what people believe. I feel that it's a personal choice, and that their choice or understanding may change over time, and that we each should be free to walk our own paths without being bashed about the head for it. That open conversation is healthy. That preaching isn't The problem is that many religions feel it's their duty to bash everyone else over the head and try to convert them. It's a cult-like attitude that I find difficult to understand, and when taken to extremes, very offensive. I believe that you (Sugarfree) mean well. I'm happy for you, that you've found answers that work for you. Just please remember that the answers others have found may be different, and that if people on here perceive that you're preaching to them, they'll react pretty strongly. Peace. Karen and her hounds
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 2:26pm
#157
sugarfree wrote:
There is
sugarfree wrote: What is wrong with being angry about false beliefs?There is much bitterness, anger, and hate on this board. People who think there is something they refer to as god don't ask enough questions.
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 2:41pm
#158
There is much bitterness,
There is much bitterness, anger, and hate on this board. I think people don't realize that "atheism" is inherently a meaningless concept. We don't classify people based on whether they like toothbrushes or computers. Atheism only exists because religion has such power. If theism fell tommorow, the term atheist would cease to exist.
If it were up to me, I could put my feet up on this issue. I live in Hong Kong, one of the most secular countries in the world, a place where there are almost no religious, and where religion does exist, it is diverse and tolerant, and coexistence between the spheres of society is not marred by religion. There is no creation science, no vile protests with signs saying God of {insert violent religion here} warrants the destruction of {insert left-wing cause or hated minority group here} because of {insert Bible verse here}. There is none of that. Education is completely secular. There is no controversy of creationist students because there are none. There is no religious violence, no dogmatism. Religion has very much been placed in what should be its sphere of society, namely fully outside the public sphere. Here, there are churches, mosques and temples peacefully side by side. So why not put up my feet? Because a) I enjoy debate, which RRS offers, and b) I am gravely considered about the situation in parts of the world. From the Middle East to Middle America. We are on the brink of a scientific revolution. From theoretical physics to molecular biology, ancient spiritual questions, ones that once could only be answered by the myth of religion, are being answered by science. Yet instead of embracing this revolution in the interest of peace and progress for all mankind, people from Alabama to Afghanistan are turning inwards and embracing fundamentalism. And don’t say it is a small minority because it really is not. There is anger, surely, but only because of the hypocrisy. We don't seek to actively convert. Have you ever seen an atheist holding up a sign saying there is no God and you have to stop worshipping? Have you ever seen an atheist stop and demand you renounce Christ in the street or leave the God Delusion under the windsheild? Yet because religious are under the delusion that they are on the one true path, they are in a constant circular battle of conversion in an attempt to bring more people under their control. I look at religion and see a set of mutually exlcusive dogmas. Never a good thing. "Physical reality” isn’t some arbitrary demarcation. It is defined in terms of what we can systematically investigate, directly or not, by means of our senses. It is preposterous to assert that the process of systematic scientific reasoning arbitrarily excludes “non-physical explanations” because the very notion of “non-physical explanation” is contradictory.
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 3:37pm
#159
sugarfree wrote:
There is
sugarfree wrote: There is much bitterness, anger, and hate on this board. The truth will set you free, but first it will piss you off. The Rational Response Squad offers nothing but the unvarnished truth. We don't try to frighten you with hellfire or lure you with false hopes of an eternal existence in a perfect place. All we seek is the truth. Unfortunately, the truth isn't as popular as a fairy tale that makes people feel good. What you are perceiving as bitterness, anger and hatred may in fact be what you are feeling as you consider the possibility you may be wrong about Christianity. When these issues confronted me, I was very bitter and angry. Why not? I had been lied to and I'd built my entire life on that lie. That would make anyone angry. A psychologist I know refers to it as "shattered faith syndrome." When a person deconverts, it affects every single aspect of that person's life. I lost my world view. I lost all my friends, including my non-existent, invisible best friend. I lost my belief in eternal life and had to face death on its own terms. I lost any hope of closeness with my family. I lost the respect of everyone I knew. I lost the respect of society. I lost pretty much everything. And that is just plain wrong. At this point, someone who deconverts must face a great deal of pain, often alone. It's what makes deconverting so hard. Most people will hang on to the delusion as long as they can. I hope that in the future what I went through will make the path easier for others. All we offer you is a choice: the red pill or the blue pill. If you choose the blue pill, things may be easier but you will be in a state of total denial for the rest of your life. If religion were harmless, I'd leave religionists alone. But the truth about religion is quite ugly. We must end religion or it will end us. And because religion has got quite good with the carrot and the stick, offering the red pill of truth will not be enough for some people. This video of Sam Harris pretty much sums up why we must be so blunt, why we may come across as angry, bitter and hateful. All we are doing is using reason to destroy an artificial construct, but that construct is so ingrained in our society and the minds of its people, so needed (in much the same way an addictive substance is needed), that we come across as radical. There was a time when opposition to slavery, equal rights for women and child labor laws seemed radical. Now they are accepted as necessarily moral. There is no quarter for religion, just as there is no quarter for those who think the earth is flat (yes, there still are some). Christianity is demonstrably FALSE. That is a fact and not an opinion. Any reasonable person who looks at the evidence should be completely convinced, yet America continues to wallow in delusion, infected by this horrible mind virus. Books on atheism, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 3:50pm
#160
sugarfree
sugarfree wrote:
Leviticus 23:3 plainly states that the Sabbath is a day of rest. Number 15:32 Leads into the stoning of a man who worked on the Sabbath in observance with the rules. But then... Matthew 12:1 Jesus is working on the Sabbath, breaking the rules of the OT. So he didn't live a life according to the law of the OT.
-Triften
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 4:20pm
#161
Iruka Naminori wrote:
What
Iruka Naminori wrote: As I have studied Jesus, the bitterness and anger has begun to melt away. I perceive in you the old anger I used to have, that is why I am able to name it.
Iruka Naminori wrote: Has your life been fulfilling in a way that you would have people pattern themself off it? There are elderly in my church who have been studying scripture and attending church their entire lives, and their countenance is free of anger, and bitterness. They have love in their hearts for others. They are old in body, but young in spirit. I choose to follow the road that will lead me to that.
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 4:23pm
#162
triften wrote:
Matthew
triften wrote:
So perhaps my phrasing was wrong and I should have said he lived a sinless life. What you are arguing here is similar to what the pharisees said to Jesus to try to get him to trip up. He was against all the laws they had put into place that kept people occupied, however, kept them from knowing God.
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 4:36pm
#163
deludedgod wrote:
There
deludedgod wrote:
It's not about control, it's about freedom. Secularism is doing much damage to our society, from divorce to middle school kids having sex. They have no moral compass, and thus many of them are lost, trying to make up their own rules. The kids are suffering the most. I've never seen a vile protest of Christians over here except perhaps a few times on television, by groups on the extreme right fringes, who the rest of us Christians view as off balance anyway. And so what if someone stops me on the street to share their views with me. It's a free country. For now. If I meet you on the street someday, feel free to tell me to renounce God, but please do it kindly and without cursing. Then I will be more apt to listen to you.
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 4:46pm
#164
It's not about control,
It's not about control, it's about freedom. Secularism is doing much damage to our society, from divorce to middle school kids having sex. They have no moral compass, and thus many of them are lost, trying to make up their own rules. The kids are suffering the most. I do not understand your proposition. Furthermore, I am not American so that will not work on me. For years I have lived in the worlds most secular societies: Japan, China, Norway and Canada. These places have vastly better education, crime rates, health and life quality than the United States. Your American-centric veiw is meaningless to me. I've never seen a vile protest of Christians over here except perhaps a few times on television, by groups on the extreme right fringes, who the rest of us Christians view as off balance anyway. And so what if someone stops me on the street to share their views with me. It's a free country. For now. If I meet you on the street someday, feel free to tell me to renounce God, but please do it kindly and without cursing. Then I will be more apt to listen to you. When did I ever curse you? You still dont get it, do you? I dont care if people hold religious belief. I dont prosetlyize. I dont want to walk up yo you on the street and tell you not to believe in God. You know why? Because it is a free society. People can believe what they wish BUT! When religion operates under the delusion that deep down we are not free to believe in anything except what they believe because they think they are the only correct ones, then the problem becomes grave, especially when three billion people belong to the world's two evangelizing struggles for global hegemony: Christianity and Islam. I've never seen a vile protest of Christians over here except perhaps a few times on television, by groups on the extreme right fringes, who the rest of us Christians view as off balance anyway. This mentality of "small minority" must end. There are 55 million Evangelicals. They are extremely dangerous and weild tremendous political power. The far right of Christianity can bend the American political scene to it's will. "Physical reality” isn’t some arbitrary demarcation. It is defined in terms of what we can systematically investigate, directly or not, by means of our senses. It is preposterous to assert that the process of systematic scientific reasoning arbitrarily excludes “non-physical explanations” because the very notion of “non-physical explanation” is contradictory.
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 4:41pm
#165
AiiA wrote:
sugarfree
AiiA wrote: Is it righteous, Godly anger? That's what I would, personally, ask myself. Because such anger is without sin. In that case, you are, in fact, right about being angry. But it requires looking inward to see if your anger is in line with God's values. A belief in the Christian God gives you something to measure your anger against. This is what I mean when I say, I don't want to walk blindly thru my life. I want to be able to measure myself against a higher standard in able to keep myself in line, morally speaking.
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 4:44pm
#166
JeremiahSmith wrote:
That
JeremiahSmith wrote:
I appreciate the sentiment but I don't eat refined white sugars. Fruits only, in moderation. I've learned that sugar is bad for my mental health, which is pretty ironic, given your offer...
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 4:54pm
#167
GreyhoundMama: You are a
GreyhoundMama: You are a breath of fresh air. Bless you. I do not sense the same kind of anger or bitterness in your posts. Maybe I am wrong, and am not being Christ-like, by expressing my observation of the anger/bitterness/hate. I'm not doing it to point fingers, I'm just voicing what I am seeing. I was actually trying to help with that comment, but the more I speak, it seems I am just making people more mad at me. Anyways. I just wanted to say I appreciate your gentleness of spirit!
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 5:08pm
#168
deludedgod wrote:
These
deludedgod wrote: If you have not lived here, how can you judge. Do not trust the media. You would have to live here yourself to know for sure what's going on.
deludedgod wrote: Sorry, I have lost track of who has and who has not. I take it back if you have not.
deludedgod wrote: I mean this in all seriousness, can I educate you on this. This free country I am now living on was founded on Christian ethics. Whether the founding fathers were Christian, I will not debate, but they were influenced by the land in which they came, which was undeniably Christian. Obviously, they did not believe in state sponsored religion. Nor do I, nor does any Christian I know. I will repeat that. No Christian I know believes in state sponsored religion. Even the founding fathers, however, believed in a creator. "That all men are created equal, that we are endowed by our CREATOR, with inalienable rights, that among those are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Christianity is so supportive of a free society...in fact, it inherently CANNOT support anything else. You are biting the hand that has fed you, and it is dangerous, deludedgod. Because when you kill that which has allowed you to be free, you will be in a much worse state than you are, the entire world will be. If you want an enemy, call it Islam because they want us ALL to live under a totalitarian ISLAMIC society. You are my BROTHER in this fight deludedgod. We have to stop fighting with each other like this and name the real enemy of our time, which is Islamic fascism.When religion operates under the delusion that deep down we are not free to believe in anything except what they believe because they think they are the only correct ones, then the problem becomes grave, especially when three billion people belong to the world's two evangelizing struggles for global hegemony: Christianity and Islam.
deludedgod wrote:
It's this simple, deludedgod. Christians do NOT WANT state sponsored Christianity. They just do not want God to be stripped out of the public arena. The more you all try to strip the word God out of everything, the more Christians will fight. But we are not fighting for state sponsored religion. That is a complete fallicy.
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 5:17pm
#169
If you have not lived here,
If you have not lived here, how can you judge. Do not trust the media. You would have to live here yourself to know for sure what's going on. I am not judging, I am merely correcting your views of secularism by pointing out that they are American-centric. The only source of information I had in writing that was your comment. Obviously, they did not believe in state sponsored religion. Nor do I, nor does any Christian I know. I will repeat that. No Christian I know believes in state sponsored religion. You must not live in a red state. Christianity is so supportive of a free society...in fact, it inherently CANNOT support anything else. You are biting the hand that has fed you, and it is dangerous, deludedgod. OK, that is ridiculous. In Europe unlike America, the Church once wielded direct political power. That is why Europe is so secular, because they know first hand what happens when the church does have state-sponsored religion. For 1800 years Christanity was a state sponsored faith with iron grip. I trust you have heard of the Inquisition and the pogroms? Furthermore, this hand did not feed me. I was not raised in a Western country. Because when you kill that which has allowed you to be free, you will be in a much worse state than you are, the entire world will be. Like I said, you have no idea what you are talking about. It is secular influence that has morphed religion into a passive stance. moral progress almost never goes hand in hand with religion. I choose my words carefully here. Obviously religious people can make great contributions to moral progress, like Martin Luther King, but it does not require a history degree to realize that if Europe was still a theocracy, genial old scholars would still be burned alive for blaspheming the Bible (this, in fact, is exactly what is happening in Islamic nations, except, of course, with the Qur’an). In fact, “justice” only ceased to be a misnomer when the British secularized judiciary in the 19th century. If you want an enemy, call it Islam because they want us ALL to live under a totalitarian ISLAMIC society. You are my BROTHER in this fight deludedgod. We have to stop fighting with each other like this and name the real enemy of our time, which is Islamic fascism. Indeed. I am extremely well educated in Islamic history. You do not need to tell me this. On how religion steals from secular morality, the argument I always use is the comparison of Islam and Christianty. When Islam was at the height of it's empire, Christianity had sunk. Europe was a miserable ignorant cesspool. They were so evil and theocratic that when the Islamic armies stormed Barcelona, the Jewish inhabitants begged them to liberate them from the ghastly horrors of Christendom. Now, Islam was not much better but it certianly flourished! It brought the literacy, mathematics and astronomy back to Europe to later rekindle the Enlightenment. What made it successful? It was much more secular than Europe. The Islamic empire needed talent. It didn't care if the talent was Jewish, or Asiatic or from anywhere across the Fertile Crescent. It was not bound under the iron grip of the Quran just yet. Of course, the Islamic empire collapsed and Christianity surged through to the Enlightenment, benefiting off the knowledge the Arabs had brought to Spain. It was only when science tore free from being a branch of theology (Enlightenment) that it took off. The success of the West was it's secularization. The reason that it had such moral progress was secularization. The reason we don't behead unbelievers or ship slaves from the Canary Islands. You think it is faith that led such a revolution? Now let's look at what happened to Islam. With the collapse of the empire, the secular intellectual tradition vanished. Islam turned inwards and embraced fundamentalism. The black pearl of religious intolerance has passed to Islam. It is the only religion still in existence where proselytizing, religious debate, atheism, Judaism, apostasy, blasphemy, homosexuality, premarital sex and adultery are still punishable under the criminal code. Far worse, all of the above-mentioned offences carry the death penalty. When religion is running the morality show, you can be guaranteed that the results are not going to be good. Here is formula I use: Religion + Secular influence = diluted influence = good Religion - secular influence = dogmatism = theocracy = bad When societies are secularized, they become Enlightened and humane. When societies are subject to religious revisionism (the 1979 Revolution of Iran), the results are grave. It's this simple, deludedgod. Christians do NOT WANT state sponsored Christianity. They just do not want God to be stripped out of the public arena. The more you all try to strip the word God out of everything, the more Christians will fight. But we are not fighting for state sponsored religion. That is a complete fallicy. You can visit Tomas de Torquemada's grave and tell him that yourself. "Physical reality” isn’t some arbitrary demarcation. It is defined in terms of what we can systematically investigate, directly or not, by means of our senses. It is preposterous to assert that the process of systematic scientific reasoning arbitrarily excludes “non-physical explanations” because the very notion of “non-physical explanation” is contradictory.
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 5:33pm
#170
sugarfree wrote:
sugarfree wrote: Has your life been fulfilling in a way that you would have people pattern themself off it? There are elderly in my church who have been studying scripture and attending church their entire lives, and their countenance is free of anger, and bitterness. They have love in their hearts for others. They are old in body, but young in spirit. I choose to follow the road that will lead me to that. So, if it feels good, do it? There are many things wrong with this argument and I think you're intelligent enough to know it, but I'll point a few out for you anyway: 1) There are many, many atheists that live fulfilling lives, including me. Just because I have difficulties doesn't mean I'm willing to throw my life away. Nor am I willing to sacrifice the truth, hurting the world just so I can live in a fantasy. Doing otherwise would be cowardly and selfish. 2) Religion was, if not the cause, a major cause of the difficulties I experience. Getting rid of religion also caused a lot of problems in the same way giving up alcoholism will cause problems. There are painful withdrawal symptoms and you often find you can no longer hang out with your alcoholic buddies. Because I've seen the absurdity of the Christian religion, I couldn't go back even if I wanted to. And, what's more, I wouldn't want to. I do better swimming without the anvil. It was dragging me down. Eventually it would have killed me. Being raised fundamentalist is abusive. It's a wonder anyone manages to live through it. It's a tribute to the human spirit. Comparing my life with some old person who wasn't raised as I was, who doesn't have the same brain chemistry, who doesn't have the same personality, etc. is ridiculous in the extreme. Ignorance can be bliss, but it can also be harmful. In my case it was harmful. I like who I am now, but because of my background / brain chemistry, I will always struggle (unless a cure is found). It's a relief to be able to think what I want to think and be who I really am without kowtowing to some nasty, whiny fairy in the sky. What a relief! Books on atheism, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 5:44pm
#171
deludedgod wrote:
You must
deludedgod wrote: I DO, that's why I know what I know. We aren't a bunch of zealots, that's just how we are being painted. The media isn't helping the issue.
deludedgod wrote: I believe the secularism in Europe started after WWII, and happened in part because Europe took Roosevelt's socialist ideas and ran with them, but here in America we have put up more of a fight against them.
deludedgod wrote: You don't think you benefit from America's economy? "Made in Hong Kong"? America supports free societies because we would like to remain free also.
deludedgod wrote: Good. Then help me out, deludedgod, because I do not want to wear a burka. By being so against Christians, you are helping to strengthen their morale. They are trying to divide the world into two camps, yours and mine, and they are waiting for us to destroy each other. This is part of the propaganda war. And our enemy is winning. We need to wake up and stop fighting like this because it is going to be our downfall. I am not against you for being an atheist, but I feel you are strongly against me for being a Christian. But, we want the same things for this world, I'm telling you.
Okay, you gave me a lot of historical stuff to read thru on your post. I know you have focused on why religion was "bad" for society, but you know, some people have studied why it has been "good" and the arguments are equally compelling. deludedgod wrote:
Where does secularism get its morality from? 10 commandments, other religions? How would a secular society exist if it was not founded on religious morality. Religion started out as man's way to govern himself, so you are a product of it's legacy I leave you with this thought. Me + Burka = Bad.
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 5:54pm
#172
deludedgod wrote:
Now
deludedgod wrote:
Absolutely. Before Islam had its fundamentalist crisis, Baghdad was the intellectual center of the world. Algebra is an Arabic word. Ever hear of "Arabic numerals"? Ptolemy? 2/3rds of the stars have Arabic names. Then what happened? Fundamentalist religion happened. An Islamic cleric, Imam Hamid al-Ghazali, decided math was the work of the devil. The Arabic world never recovered. deludedgod wrote: You can visit Tomas de Torquemada's grave and tell him that yourself. And you still can't Torquemada anything. Books on atheism, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 5:58pm
#173
Iruka Naminori wrote:
1)
Iruka Naminori wrote: Okay, this part makes sense to me.
Iruka Naminori wrote: I strongly agree with you. Fundamentalism is extremely damaging, and I did not realize you had been subjected to it. Hear me out tho, my Christian experience is not like that, not at all. Not all Christians are fundamentalists...in fact, I do not know any. It makes sense that you would be wary of religion now. I'm sorry, perhaps I should have put myself in that sentence instead of you and said, would I want anyone to model their life after me? I'd much rather they model it after Jesus, because his morality was far superior than mine will ever be.
Iruka Naminori wrote: Iruka, I agree that mental health issues make the whole "God" issue much more difficult, because I have been there and wrestled with it myself. When I was baptized I was still pretty anti-religion. I just didn't get a lot of it, and I didn't understand a lot of the churchy stuff. But that churchy stuff is all man's design. What it came down to for me was I wanted to get to know Jesus, and that's what I always go back to, because it's more important than the church, the rules, etc. And Jesus isn't contantly whining and judging, I promise. When you mess up, you sincerely ask for his forgiveness, forgiveness is granted, and he forgets the sin ever occured. That's why, you perpetually have a fresh start, a clean slate.I like who I am now, but because of my background / brain chemistry, I will always struggle (unless a cure is found). It's a relief to be able to think what I want to think and be who I really am without kowtowing to some nasty, whiny fairy in the sky. What a relief!
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 6:00pm
#174
I believe the secularism in
I believe the secularism in Europe started after WWII, and happened in part because Europe took Roosevelt's socialist ideas and ran with them, but here in America we have put up more of a fight against them. Indeed, I have a dislike of Europe's left-wing attitude towards Islam. Nonetheless, I have travelled extensively in Europe and have found it a spiritual home. You don't think you benefit from America's economy? "Made in Hong Kong"? America supports free societies because we would like to remain free also. I was actually referring to social ideas not economic policy. Furthermore, I have seen with my own eyes the rise of China, and I am convinced that within 15 years America will be completely overshadowed by this giant. Interestingly enough, China in and of itself defeats the notion that religious morality is necessary. For 7,000 years they had a Confucian system of nontheist morality that served them perfectly. This society, which for so long has ruled the world, makes the idea of religion as a necessary force seem utterly ridiculous. Good. Then help me out, deludedgod, because I do not want to wear a burka. By being so against Christians, you are helping to strengthen their morale. If I could choose to wipe one religion off the face of the map, it would be Islam. Furthermore, I do not dislike Christians, many friends I have are Christian. But there is one issue I have not shared with you. I feel very strongly about the rise of literal Christianity again. I am referring to Creationism now. How few accept evolution in America? As a scientist, I feel extreme problems about the astonishing spread of misinformation, all of it Christian. If you can fix this, I will never breathe another word about my general dislike of the religion. But I concede. I despise Islam. They are trying to divide the world into two camps, yours and mine, and they are waiting for us to destroy each other. That is a little pessimistic. It is they seem to enjoy killing each other. I hope perhaps that they will just blow each other up and leave us alone. As Kissinger said of the Iraq-Iran war "a pity they can't both lose". I have studied Islamic fundamentalism and I have never heard the theory that they are attempting to split our society. They see Christians and atheists as one block of evil. This is part of the propaganda war. And our enemy is winning. I doubt it. When the oil dries up, Arabia will collapse. but I feel you are strongly against me for being a Christian. What? Please find a quote that supports that. Argue with does not equal dislike. Where does secularism get its morality from? 10 commandments, other religions? How would a secular society exist if it was not founded on religious morality. That is a revisionist approach. Secularism is founded on religious society (at least in the West, I trust my example of China straightened this myth out for you) but after that it is an unnecessary force. For instance, science used to be an arm of theology. But science only progressed when it tore free of that institution. Should scientists have to study theology then? Religion started out as man's way to govern himself, so you are a product of it's legacy that does not mean it is still necessary Me + Burka = Bad. You are merely rephrasing my formula Religion - secular influence = dogmatism = theocracy = bad "Physical reality” isn’t some arbitrary demarcation. It is defined in terms of what we can systematically investigate, directly or not, by means of our senses. It is preposterous to assert that the process of systematic scientific reasoning arbitrarily excludes “non-physical explanations” because the very notion of “non-physical explanation” is contradictory.
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 6:01pm
#175
You don't think you benefit
You don't think you benefit from America's economy? "Made in Hong Kong"? America supports free societies because we would like to remain free also.
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 6:04pm
#176
sugarfree wrote:
It's not
sugarfree wrote: It's not about control, it's about freedom. Secularism is doing much damage to our society, from divorce to middle school kids having sex. They have no moral compass, and thus many of them are lost, trying to make up their own rules. The kids are suffering the most. You've been misled. If anything, Christianity contributes to these problems. As deludedgod pointed out, the more secular Western nations are much better off than we are. What's more, divorce rates are LOWER among atheists than they are among Christians: http://dark-sided.blogspot.com/2006/10/divorce-rates-highest-for-christians.html Another interesting tidbit your church won't tell you: we've postulated that Christians commit more crimes than atheists: "Unfortunately, this is not the case. When one looks at prison incarceration, one sees Christians most represented, and atheists UNDERPERPRESENTED per capita (USA population has roughly 13% atheists, and yet prison population is 0.209% atheist: see http://holysmoke.org/prison.htm). Out of 74,731 prisoners, 156 are atheists; 62,594 are Christian; 5,435 are Muslim; 1,325 are Jewish. Given a conservative 10% of USA population being atheists, one would expect 7,473 atheists in prison: the data suggests that atheists commit fewer crimes than theists." The above is from http://www.holysmoke.org/hs02/unfit.htm Books on atheism, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 6:09pm
#177
That is a revisionist
That is a revisionist approach. Secularism is founded on religious society (at least in the West, I trust my example of China straightened this myth out for you) but after that it is an unnecessary force. For instance, science used to be an arm of theology. But science only progressed when it tore free of that institution. Should scientists have to study theology then?
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 6:11pm
#178
sugarfree wrote:
It's not
sugarfree wrote: It's not about control, it's about freedom. Secularism is doing much damage to our society, from divorce to middle school kids having sex. They have no moral compass, and thus many of them are lost, trying to make up their own rules. The kids are suffering the most. Societies with higher percentages of religious adherents have higher rates of homicide, teenage pregnancy and abortion and STD infection. There is not a positive correlation between belief in god and 'moral behavior' if anything there is a negative correlation. Check out this study published in the Journal of Religion and Society. There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 6:15pm
#179
sugarfree
sugarfree wrote:
Where do you get off making accusations like this? The U.S. has the highest teen pregnancy rate(there is no way obviously to count how many teenagers are having sex) in the world, and it also has the highest rates of religious affiliation amongst developed countries. In the U.S. the majority of states that have the highest teen pregancy rates, and divorce rates, are in the bible belt. Amongst developed countries, the safest and most desirable places to live also tend to have the lowest rates of religion. You want to know what's damaging our society? Look around you next time you're at church. "The powerful have always created false images of the weak."
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 6:21pm
#180
I used to be religious. I
I used to be religious. I wasn't raised to be though. My parents wanted me to make my own choices. I haven't been baptised. When I was 9 they took me to church just to give me the opportunity to see what it was like and I did, admittedly fall for it. The vicar there, really nice guy is actually fairly agnostic, in fact he doesn't really believe it. When I was 14 I started to think, realised Buddhism was pretty cool but by that stage I really wasn't bothered about commiting to irrational beliefs besides vegetarianism (which I adopted aged 5 - I'm still one by habit only at 20). My advice to sugarfree is to reread the bible (if you have actually read it) see what a bastard God actually is in it, then read the works of atheists, not just think about the fact that we have no belief in God, but actually consider our reasons not to- the problem of evil, logical problems in the theory of God, anthropological/psychological reasons why humans actually tend to believe in God, why you believe in God, and even if you believe accept God why does that make the bible true? Question the very basis of your faith down to the validity of the bible or what your parents may have told you. If you do this well it's very likely you'll become an atheist or agnostic. It's not up to us to convince you but to advise you how to enlighten yourself. I'm sure most people here are against the idea of indoctrination so we'll leave it up to you.
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 7:20pm
#181
Iruka--
At this point, I am
Iruka-- At this point, I am ready to agree to disagree with you on the whole religion/God thing. I understand why you have needed a religion "detox". I will await to hear back from you to conclude the "sugarfree challenge".
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 7:23pm
#182
magilum wrote:
Why are
magilum wrote:
There are ugly things in American history. But are we going to keep beating ourselves over the head because of it, or learn from it and move forward? There are also many good things about American history. No country has a 100% spotless record, including atheist country's. Look at China.
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 7:42pm
#183
deludedgod wrote:
deludedgod wrote: You may indeed be right.
deludedgod wrote: You would rather live in a country like China, than live among Christians in a country like America? If so, you and I will never come to a consensus. Would you put me in jail for worshipping my God the way I want to worship him?Interestingly enough, China in and of itself defeats the notion that religious morality is necessary. For 7,000 years they had a Confucian system of nontheist morality that served them perfectly. This society, which for so long has ruled the world, makes the idea of religion as a necessary force seem utterly ridiculous. deludedgod wrote: I think many Christians accept evolution as a possiblity and do not take the timeline of genesis literally. I would say, more often then not, that is the case. So, I do not think you need to be worried on this point.
deludedgod wrote: I personally find religion and science compatible. I do not feel threatened by scientific discovery. As a scientist, I feel extreme problems about the astonishing spread of misinformation, all of it Christian. If you can fix this, I will never breathe another word about my general dislike of the religion. deludedgod wrote: I hope you are right, but I think it will get worse before it gets better. If the U.S. goes to sleep again on the issue...it will not be good. But that's what is happening. People may not agree with how we are fighting the extremists, but we must fight them somehow. Sitting back and letting the chips fall where they may is not going to work.
deludedgod wrote: Okay. I accept that I may have misread you. But if you support the current government in China, it concerns me because they are putting Christians in jail who are worshipping differently than how the government allows them to worship. And hey, what about that guy Mao. He killed a lot of people. I am under the impression that China, like most countries, has it's own bloody past.
deludedgod wrote: Like I said, I believe religion and science can be compatible. I study both and am not chronically confused. Should scientists have to study theology then? deludedgod wrote: Then let me restate it more clearly
Global Islamic state = bad On that matter, we are in the same fight.
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 7:54pm
#184
sugarfree wrote:
triften
sugarfree wrote:
So it's not a sin to work on the Sabbath and steal? -Triften
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 7:58pm
#185
Sorry if I'm breaking the
Sorry if I'm breaking the flow of conversation, but I felt this needed a response. sugarfree wrote:
So, you were worried that you might be convinced not to believe in god? I think that reveals your bias quite clearly. You aren't interested in what is true, you just want to keep believing what you believe because it makes you feel better. Why else would you have been nervous? Isn't learning the truth something to be excited about? No one is trying to deceive you. If you aren't willing to use reason, then there's no point in anyone talking to you about religion. It won't benefit you or them. What do you want, a poem? It's only the fairy tales they believe.
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 9:12pm
#186
rexlunae wrote:
Why else
rexlunae wrote: This is a new endeavor for me, hence I was a little nervous. Plus, I don't know, I thought you might have arguments that hit home for me, but so far, not.Why else would you have been nervous? Isn't learning the truth something to be excited about? No one is trying to deceive you. If you aren't willing to use reason, then there's no point in anyone talking to you about religion. It won't benefit you or them. What do you want, a poem?
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 9:16pm
#187
poem
Roses are red Violets are blue God makes no sense 'cuz he saves so few.
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 9:30pm
#188
GreyhoundMama wrote:
Roses
GreyhoundMama wrote:
All you have to do is ask...
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 9:48pm
#189
sugarfree wrote:
This is a
sugarfree wrote:
This is a new endeavor for me, hence I was a little nervous. Plus, I don't know, I thought you might have arguments that hit home for me, but so far, not. Surely you must be aware that your feelings are unreliable. If you are not willing to use reason to approach the question of religion, you are at the mercy of your own emotional responses. If you just wait for something to 'hit home', you have no way of knowing that you're really right about religion. It's only the fairy tales they believe.
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 9:49pm
#190
sugarfree
sugarfree wrote:
Awww, I was hoping you'd respond to her with a poem. That would be a really new way to discuss religion. It's only the fairy tales they believe.
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 10:39pm
#191
There are ugly things in
There are ugly things in American history. But are we going to keep beating ourselves over the head because of it, or learn from it and move forward?
Says the subscriber to the iron age text. Its in recognition of history that I am so wary of naive imperialist flirtation.
There are also many good things about American history. No country has a 100% spotless record, including atheist country's.
Your argument was that American policies support worldwide freedom, and I suggest uncontroversial precedent for doubt in that claim. I could also point out that our imperialist ventures were supported by a belief in the moral superiority of white Christians over brown heathens.
And once again, Mao's and Stalin's state capitalist regimes were mired in dogma. Rationalism means rejecting failed ideas, not making excuses for them. I don't know why this has to be pointed out repeatedly.
Look at China.
One of many homes to outsourced US slave labor. What about it? Oh, right, that was supposed to prove something about Americhristian superiority or some such bollocks.
Posted on: March 18, 2007 - 10:39pm
#192
why?
Just ask him you say but I'll not, come what may 'cuz the whole thing makes no sense, regardless of day.
Karen and her hounds
Posted on: March 19, 2007 - 12:02am
#193
sugarfree wrote:
sugarfree wrote: ...I believe religion and science can be compatible. I study both and am not chronically confused. First, I highly recommend that you read the book, "Letter To A Christian Nation", by Sam Harris. But I find it astounding when otherwise intelligent people infer they see science as being compatible with the bible. I mean, the cognitive dissonance required of such an assertion is truely an amazing aspect of the human mind. I just saw these clips (two parts) of english comedian Ricky Gervais speaking on Genesis that I think helps to highlight the very real and profound difference between science and biblical teachings, by way of comedy. Part I: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_sfSDCV9Jo&eurl= Part II: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hU1BsFpkNUo&eurl=
Posted on: March 19, 2007 - 12:39am
#194
sugarfree wrote:
sugarfree wrote: really? you looked at all the infinite amount of other alternatives? you must have an infinite amount of time on your hands.Why am I a Christian? Because I looked at all the alternatives and Jesus's truths are the ones that held up to the most scrutiny. Hinduism? Paganism? Buddhism? Islam? Judaism? Bábism? Taoism? Confucianism? Shinto? Sikhism? Samaritanism? Yazdânism? Manichaeism? Mithraism? Zoroastrianism?Atenism? Caodaism? Chondogyo? Yiguandao? Pastofarianism? invisible-pink-unicornism? Rael? the matrix? Nihlism? no religion? You have not looked at all the alternatives. Even if you have looked at a lot of them, that doesn't automatically make your religion right. I'll suppose hypothetically for a minute that Christianity really has rationally and scientifically stood up to scrutiny. There are plenty of things that you can't prove false. You can't prove that we're not all living inside a computer simulation (the matrix). That doesn't mean we are living inside a computer simulation. Anyway, as far as scrutiny goes: Have you ever really studied the bible carefully?
Posted on: March 19, 2007 - 3:53am
#195
sugarfree wrote:
todangst
sugarfree wrote:
Yes, you did. You did a rather quick, self serving search, and you basically just ignored talking about the information I posted. Think about that. "Hitler burned people like Anne Frank, for that we call him evil.
Posted on: March 19, 2007 - 3:55am
#196
kmisho wrote:
sugarfree
kmisho wrote:
You said it in 3 words. Thank you. "Hitler burned people like Anne Frank, for that we call him evil.
Posted on: March 19, 2007 - 5:25am
#197
kmisho wrote:
sugarfree
kmisho wrote: LOL, brilliant.
Posted on: March 19, 2007 - 11:36am
#198
Hello all. Thank you for
Hello all. Thank you for joining me on this thread. I have learned from this discussion, and hopefully you have too. Now I am ready to let this thread die a peaceful death. (I can see your comments now..."yeah right, learn something from you?", "she can't handle it", "she dodged the questions", etc. There, I said 'em so you don't have too. Truthfully, this baby is taking too much time to keep alive, I don't want to trade my sugar addiction for an internet addiction.) See you occasionally on other threads. Good bye for now. sugarfree
Posted on: March 19, 2007 - 1:11pm
#199
The moral of the story:
So what have we learned, class? The best way to keep your faith is not to listen.
Posted on: March 19, 2007 - 2:51pm
#200
zarathustra wrote:
So what
zarathustra wrote:
Amen. I don't think anything we as atheists say about theism is as powerful a testimony against it as the willfull ignorance of it's followers. It's only the fairy tales they believe.
|
Copyright Rational Response Squad 2006-2024.
|
Gotta go now, but thanks for letting me in on your experience.
I have found food to be a good way to deal with my depression. If you are interested, try out the Sugar Addicts Recovery Program by Kathleen Desmaisons.
I do disagree with your perception of me, however, I will say again, as I said in a separate post, I am sorry if I have misled you. That was certainly not my original intent.
Oops, that last post should not have been a quote.
This is all you have to say to dismiss all 3, after saying "Don't even get me started on Scientology, and if I say what I really feel about Mormonism and Islam, you'll probably say I'm dumb in a smarter sounding way"? I'm sorry, you will have to do better than that, particularly after citing christianity's rapid spread in support of its validity. How did these "false prophecies" spread so quickly? Could not christianity just be another fast-spreading "false prophecy"? Once again, this is what I am referring to when I say "special pleading". In the case of christianity, X confirms that christianity is true, yet in the case of all other religions where we notice X, it doesn't apply.
Well, as it seems we are simply butting heads, we could probably go at this for another year or two. I may take leave of this chat for awhile, as I have contracted a stomach bug or something and nearly tossed my cookies on the church congregation this morning as I was singing. So, if I am absent from the conversation for awhile, that is why.