|
Author
|
Topic: The Law Of Contradiction
|
jar
Member (Idle past 413 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
Here is why they speak out.
nemesis_juggernaut writes: Atheism 1. Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods. 2. The doctrine that there is no God or gods. 2. Godlessness; immorality. When you stick in that last item, immorality, then the Atheists not only can, they should call bullshit. If religion, particularly Christianity had ANYTHING like the ethics of secular science then perhaps it might have some right to speak out. But the fact is, Christianity doesn't have anything like the ethics of secular science and so assertions like equating atheism with immorality not only rings hollow, it is simply wrong.
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 90 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-11-2006 9:40 PM | | Hyroglyphx has replied |
|
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member
|
|
Message 92 of 177 (339431)
08-11-2006 10:06 PM
|
Reply to: Message 57 by subbie
08-11-2006 5:21 PM
|
|
Re: Welcome to EvC
You gave the first reason, something about all atheists deep down believing that god does exist, that's why we can't stop talking about it, or something along those lines. I don't think they all believe in God, what i think, is many, if not most, feel that twinge of doubt within their heart of hearts. If this isn't you then don't worry about it. But if its not, then getting angry over it might slightly infer that this isn't entirely true. Draw your own conclusion.
I've perused your posts in this thread and I'm not sure I know why you believe it's irrational and self-refuting. If you could spell it out for me, I'll let you know if I accept it or not. I don't believe in flying-purple elephants, do you? Would it make you angry if I believed in them? Does it make you angry that you don't believe in them? Does it matter either way? I doubt it. So what difference does it make to the atheist whether or not I believe in God? What compulsion exists in certain atheists to actually become angry over it, unless there is something in them that recognizes that its not as silly as they might like to portray, for perhaps, posterity among their peers? That's all I'm saying.
As far as the Roberts quote goes, can you supply a rational reason for rejecting the other gods that you don't believe in that does not similiarly explain a disbelief in all gods? There is no rational reason to suppose they exist. Now you say, aha, that's how I feel about your God, Nemmy! That would be all fine and good if your disbelief simply ended there. Here's the difference: I'm not mad about it. I have no reason to get all flustered over it. I would just be concerned that they are worshipping false gods. I don't believe in Zeus, and I could engage in long debates on why I don't believe in Zeus, but why spend all that energy on a Deity that I don't believe in the first place? Do you see the difference? If I spent all this time trying to destroy the notion of Zeus, wouldn't that be a tip-off to you that somewhere in the dusty recesses of my mind, that I was concerned that Zeus might actually exist? I'm generalizing here. If I'm not talking about you, then let it roll off your back.
“If chance be the father of all flesh then disaster is his rainbow in the sky. And when you hear of, state of emergencies, sniper kills ten, youths go looting, bomb blasts school, it is but the sound of man worshipping his maker” -Steve Turner
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 57 by subbie, posted 08-11-2006 5:21 PM | | subbie has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 122 by Annafan, posted 08-13-2006 5:00 PM | | Hyroglyphx has replied |
|
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 93 of 177 (339435)
08-11-2006 10:10 PM
|
Reply to: Message 91 by jar
08-11-2006 9:55 PM
|
|
Re: Here is why they speak out.
When you stick in that last item, immorality, then the Atheists not only can, they should call bullshit. If religion, particularly Christianity had ANYTHING like the ethics of secular science then perhaps it might have some right to speak out. But the fact is, Christianity doesn't have anything like the ethics of secular science and so assertions like equating atheism with immorality not only rings hollow, it is simply wrong. That isn't my definition, its Dictionary.com's. If you don't like the defintion write a letter to them. And even then, its not like they invented the English language and neither did I. " If you change the meaning of a word, then you are trying to change the meaning of the world." -Ravi Zacharias
“If chance be the father of all flesh then disaster is his rainbow in the sky. And when you hear of, state of emergencies, sniper kills ten, youths go looting, bomb blasts school, it is but the sound of man worshipping his maker” -Steve Turner
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 91 by jar, posted 08-11-2006 9:55 PM | | jar has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 94 by jar, posted 08-11-2006 10:22 PM | | Hyroglyphx has replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 413 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 94 of 177 (339436)
08-11-2006 10:22 PM
|
Reply to: Message 93 by Hyroglyphx
08-11-2006 10:10 PM
|
|
Re: Here is why they speak out.
A dictionary is only a historic record, it records HOW words were used. When they are used incorrectly, it is time to point it out. Dictionary.com did not make that post, you did.
Here is the link Now you may well claim that immorality is one of the definitions given, but I do not find it on that page. What I do find is:
dictionary.com writes: a·the·ist Audio pronunciation of "atheist" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (th-st) n. One who disbelieves or denies the existence of God or gods. and:
dictionary.com writes: atheist adj : related to or characterized by or given to atheism; "atheist leanings" [syn: atheistic, atheistical] n : someone who denies the existence of god
No mention of immorality. Like I said, if Christianity had the ethics of secular science then maybe it would have room to talk.
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 93 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-11-2006 10:10 PM | | Hyroglyphx has replied |
|
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member
|
Re: Welcome to EvC
Interesting. Why do you spend your time arguing against atheism? Because I see it as a destructive heresy and because I believe that people's lives are at stake. My reason is philanthropy. Is the atheist able to claim this?
Is this because you are really an atheist, or does your magic pop psychology in which people magically believe the opposite of what they say only apply to other people and not to you? Naw, pop psychology is overrated.
“If chance be the father of all flesh then disaster is his rainbow in the sky. And when you hear of, state of emergencies, sniper kills ten, youths go looting, bomb blasts school, it is but the sound of man worshipping his maker” -Steve Turner
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 61 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-11-2006 6:09 PM | | Dr Adequate has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 106 by subbie, posted 08-12-2006 1:51 AM | | Hyroglyphx has not replied |
|
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member
|
Re: Welcome to EvC
It's hard to know where to start--but, yes, skillful debate and strong arguments earn respect here; they will also elicit skillful rebuttals with strong arguments. You believe this is wrong? No, not if it comes up. My question is, why is being an atheist so exilerating that you'd want to? If you are here primarily for the scientific aspects then this doesn't really apply you.
The "liar" insult carries little weight with rational folk. I'm surprised to see you undermine yourself in this self-trivializing way. I didn;t mean lying, as much as I meant conealing one's inner-beliefs. Again, I was generalizing, not singling anyone out. Would you say that most atheists don't feel the twinge of belief every now anf again? It would be silly to assume that theists don't occasionally feel the twinge of disbelief. I'm just asking honest questions here.
The forum's focus is Evolution vs. Creationism. You will note that the faith-centered forums here draw little attention from the atheists and agnostics. But when Creationists venture into the science forums to attempt justifying intrusions of religious belief into public education and policy, the response is, indeed, as multivocal and focused as it should be. Fair enough. I know where you stand. Nothing more will be directed towards you.
That's pretty sad logic, nj. Try promoting instruction in the tenets of FPEs in public schools, and you will see a commensurate response. It's fine to be a partisan, but don't delude yourself into believing that rhetoric is reason. I don't believe that ID encompasses any given ideology. Its an inference that some ubiquitous, higher cognizance is at work in nature as opposed to a wholly random and purposeless force. Where does the objection lie within you?
Your initial response to the OP is a good case study. You make broad charges against other forum participants, typifying their beliefs and behaviors--and then refuse to substantiate your claims, instead referring vaguely to other forums and brushing aside demands for examples as though the very idea of evidence were an insult. Because I didn't point the finger at or allude to EvC's atheists as the culprit. I've said many times that I was generalizing and not pointing any fingers towards anyone. As for substantiating my claims that I've been treated poorly at certain times by certain individuals, I'm not about to look on every single thread I've ever been on to show you that. I don't care enough about it. I was merely responding to someone who asked me that question specifically. You have the option of believing me or not believing me. It doesn't matter to me either way because that's a side issue.
This is one of the science forums. You could flail away in one of the faith-based forums, and elicit little response. But that was not your intent; just so, Creationists are largely not content to hold their own beliefs, but wish to impose public policy and educational consequences on others. The fact that we more secularly minded folk resist does not validate their pernicious beliefs about our motives. Impose their beliefs on others? The theory of evolution hasn't set up a monopoly in science, especialy when it is but one aspect of biology-- theoretical biology at that. That's ridiculous. If ID didn't make a lick of sense, it could have never reached the level its attained if it were some psuedo-scientific and pernicious belief. If you knew anything about the debate you wouldn't make such baseless assertions. Evolution is fighting for its last breath, be it good or bad. But please don't hate on ID because it conflicts with your personal beliefs by undermining the first tenet of the Humanist Manifesto.
“If chance be the father of all flesh then disaster is his rainbow in the sky. And when you hear of, state of emergencies, sniper kills ten, youths go looting, bomb blasts school, it is but the sound of man worshipping his maker” -Steve Turner
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 66 by Omnivorous, posted 08-11-2006 7:11 PM | | Omnivorous has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 109 by nator, posted 08-12-2006 7:13 AM | | Hyroglyphx has not replied |
|
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 97 of 177 (339455)
08-11-2006 11:51 PM
|
Reply to: Message 94 by jar
08-11-2006 10:22 PM
|
|
Re: Here is why they speak out.
A dictionary is only a historic record, it records HOW words were used. When they are used incorrectly, it is time to point it out. Dictionary.com did not make that post, you did. Here is the link Now you may well claim that immorality is one of the definitions given, but I do not find it on that page. What I do find is: No Jar, you are in error. Here's the link: Atheism, not atheist.... Atheism Definition & Meaning | Dictionary.com
“If chance be the father of all flesh then disaster is his rainbow in the sky. And when you hear of, state of emergencies, sniper kills ten, youths go looting, bomb blasts school, it is but the sound of man worshipping his maker” -Steve Turner
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 94 by jar, posted 08-11-2006 10:22 PM | | jar has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 111 by jar, posted 08-12-2006 8:14 AM | | Hyroglyphx has not replied |
|
Ben!
Member (Idle past 1417 days) Posts: 1161 From: Hayward, CA Joined: 10-14-2004
|
Re: Welcome to EvC
Atheism 1. Disbelief in or denial of the existence of God or gods. 2. The doctrine that there is no God or gods. 3. Godlessness; immorality. Pretty straightforward, wouldn't you say? ... If you claim to be an atheist then excuse me all over the place for jumping to a conclusion that your belief mirrors that of its very definition. I hate meta-talk about words. It's utterly ridiculous. Dictionaries do not define words. Dictionary describe how words are generally used. They listed 3 common usages. Clearly #1 or #2 is being used here, not #3. If you want things to be extremely clear, make new words to differentiate "godless and moral" vs "godless and amoral". Otherwise be content with the ambiguity of a word. It is the fact of everyday life, after all. Discussion about words is boring. How about addressing the real issue--that lack of believing in God does not mean lack of morals. Words are boring--trust me. Thanks.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 90 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-11-2006 9:40 PM | | Hyroglyphx has not replied |
|
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member
|
Re: Welcome to EvC
quote:
The mere fact that they spend inordinate amounts of time attempting to dissuade you in your faith coupled with the fact that many of them turn rabid against Christians speaks very loudly that there is still part of them that wants to believe, and in certain respects, do still believe.
This what he quoted me saying. This in no way encapsulates all atheists. If you don't fit in that category, let it roll off of your back. Anyone that spends gobs of time attempting to refute a Deity seems counter-intuitive and ultimately pointless to me. Is it unreasonable that those that do might have some sort of inherent fear over the fact that it might be true? I'm beginning to think that certain people in here aren't understanding me. Irrespective of whether or not you agree with my view, is everyone understanding my premise?
“If chance be the father of all flesh then disaster is his rainbow in the sky. And when you hear of, state of emergencies, sniper kills ten, youths go looting, bomb blasts school, it is but the sound of man worshipping his maker” -Steve Turner
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 70 by robinrohan, posted 08-11-2006 7:27 PM | | robinrohan has not replied |
|
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 100 of 177 (339469)
08-12-2006 12:48 AM
|
Reply to: Message 75 by nator
08-11-2006 8:00 PM
|
|
Re: Welcome to EvC
quote:
Why not just choose something arbitrary to get angry about? This leads me to believe that there is something in themselves that recognizes God as a threat. But a threat only comes from a fear that He might just exist.
It is condecending, arrogant, patronizing attitudes such as this that prompt some of us to become irritated. I'm sorry that you are so offended by this, but it really seems like common sense to me. If you don't believe in a Deity then why argue the point so ferociously? Wouldn't it be truly atheistic to just not acknowledge God either way? Again, I'm delighted that people feel so strongly about it, pro and con, because it tells me that they care about the subject. Its the apathetic and indifferent type that concerns me. What I have I said that is so egregious? That's my opinion. I figure anyone that preaches about tolerance, relativism, and unity so much could appreciate that I reserve the right to think as I see fit, so long as my views don't manifest into some sort of violent action. And that's not going to happen, so what's the problem? My gosh, you'd think that I just set fire to some people's houses?
“If chance be the father of all flesh then disaster is his rainbow in the sky. And when you hear of, state of emergencies, sniper kills ten, youths go looting, bomb blasts school, it is but the sound of man worshipping his maker” -Steve Turner
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 75 by nator, posted 08-11-2006 8:00 PM | | nator has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 123 by Annafan, posted 08-13-2006 5:17 PM | | Hyroglyphx has not replied |
|
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member
|
Re: Welcome to EvC
I notice that by n_j's reasoning I must be a right-wing religious conservative who believes in the Loch Ness Monster; crystal healing, an alien origin for crop circles; the complicity of GWB in 9/11; and homeopathic medicine. Oh, and I must really hate whales. Nasty blubbery fish. Hate hate hate. But of course I'm "in denial" and will never admit this. Throttle back, you're getting frothy spittle all over my screen. What did the whales ever do to you? 
Either that, or arguing for something is a sign that you agree with it, and arguing against something is a sign that you disagree with it. Here's the difference champ: I don't believe in Zeus but you don't see me developing a coronary over it.
You wouldn't think it would be necessary to explain this even to a creationist, but the motto of these people seems to be "If it looks like a duck and it walks like a duck and it quacks like a duck, it's an aardvark." In the same way, it seems that when they hear a man arguing that God doesn't exist, they immediately peg him as a theist. No, no, no.... you've got it backwards. If an evolutionists thinks it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, then it must be related to a nematode. 
“If chance be the father of all flesh then disaster is his rainbow in the sky. And when you hear of, state of emergencies, sniper kills ten, youths go looting, bomb blasts school, it is but the sound of man worshipping his maker” -Steve Turner
|
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 102 of 177 (339472)
08-12-2006 1:03 AM
|
Reply to: Message 77 by nator
08-11-2006 8:04 PM
|
|
Re: Welcome to EvC
All morals are relative, and always have been. The absolute phenomena concerning relativity... I like it. It should be a mantra emblazoned on a t-shirt. I'd buy one.
“If chance be the father of all flesh then disaster is his rainbow in the sky. And when you hear of, state of emergencies, sniper kills ten, youths go looting, bomb blasts school, it is but the sound of man worshipping his maker” -Steve Turner
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 77 by nator, posted 08-11-2006 8:04 PM | | nator has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 110 by nator, posted 08-12-2006 7:16 AM | | Hyroglyphx has not replied |
|
Nighttrain
Member (Idle past 4012 days) Posts: 1512 From: brisbane,australia Joined: 06-08-2004
|
Re: Welcome to EvC
Two things happen to people when they realize God. 1. They are filled with an inexpressible sadness as if their entire life was a facade. 2. After this sinks in, it is replaced with ineffable joy from one's innermost being-- at least in my own experience.
Funny thing, Jugs, that was the exact same experience that I had after making the journey from creoland to atheism. Do you think it might be demons at work?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 87 by Hyroglyphx, posted 08-11-2006 9:07 PM | | Hyroglyphx has not replied |
|
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 104 of 177 (339475)
08-12-2006 1:28 AM
|
Reply to: Message 81 by nator
08-11-2006 8:27 PM
|
|
Re: you've been answered, actually
No, your arguments are attacked because you have not supported many of your claims with evidence, nor logic. So its perfectly normal for people to get angry over gods they don't believe in? This is what most people do? Most people come on websites to discuss how much they dislike the notion of a God that they don't believe in? Seems like a worthless endeavor to me. I guess I am captain bizarro then? Come on? Hook me up a little bit here. Is this argument really so silly? Are you saying that there is no merit to the discusion? Now, not liking ID and arguing against it, I can understand. But feverishly arguing against God is like me feverishly arguing against flying-purple elephants. Why would I care enough to even argue the point?
At least in my own experience, I have had to continuously defend my atheistic position against a barrage of assaults. I know the feeling.
People telling me how I think and feel, then refusing to accept what i tell them about it. Do you get angry when a pyschologist does it?
People defining my lack of belief into something it isn't and arguing that I must believe in this or that. I'm not defining your belief or telling that you have to do anything. I presented an argument concerning some atheists. And I think I've supported a basis for that argument just on this thread alone-- or rather, my detractors supported the argument for me.
There is nothing I would like more than to just forget about God entirely but everywhere I look, my lack of belief is under attack. Imagine, someone forcing you to come on a forum that contains aspects of theology only to force you to discuss matters of theology, when all you want to do is forget. What... has this.... world..... come to? That's like someone saying, "I'm trying to give up porn so I hang out in porn shops and strip clubs. How dare they tempt me."
I answer.. Obviously you do since you brought it up and I didn't. I don't care in the slightest but I won't stand idly by and be dissed. I was having a discussion with someone else about my personal beliefs right before I maliciously accosted you and forced you to engage me in a conversation.
“If chance be the father of all flesh then disaster is his rainbow in the sky. And when you hear of, state of emergencies, sniper kills ten, youths go looting, bomb blasts school, it is but the sound of man worshipping his maker” -Steve Turner
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 81 by nator, posted 08-11-2006 8:27 PM | | nator has not replied |
|
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 105 of 177 (339477)
08-12-2006 1:43 AM
|
Reply to: Message 84 by nwr
08-11-2006 8:51 PM
|
|
Re: Welcome to EvC
Most of them pay no attention to the notion of God, until they are confronted by an attempt to impose religion on them. What would constitute imposition in your mind?
Evidence please (of such alleged anger)! I guess I could donwload pictures of my vehicle when it was 'keyed' because I have a 'Calvary Chapel' sticker on my car. What was I thinking? I shouldn't have imposed. I also suppose I could download pictures of my car that had a pint of urine and spit on the door because I have a Calvary Chapel sticker on the back window, if only I had taken a picture of the offense. What was i thinking? How dare I impose my beliefs? So, again I ask: Does that seem like rational behavior to you?
It sure does. So why are you falsely attributing such irrational behavior to atheists? We all might find oursleves thinking irrationally from time to time out of our emotions. And for the umteenth time, I'm not implicating all atheists. Many long-time friends of mine are atheists. We can discuss such matters like civilized adults. But there is a very large amount of atheists out there that act like I just kicked them in the face because I asked an important question, such as, 'why would you get so angry over something that you claim you don't believe in?'
The atheists I know don't talk about him unless is forced by theists. Ah yes... I'm sorry that I have accosted you and placed you in my God-lair where I incessently torture your eardrums with Scripture. The whole pity-party thing is wearing thin.
“If chance be the father of all flesh then disaster is his rainbow in the sky. And when you hear of, state of emergencies, sniper kills ten, youths go looting, bomb blasts school, it is but the sound of man worshipping his maker” -Steve Turner
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 84 by nwr, posted 08-11-2006 8:51 PM | | nwr has replied |
|
™ Version 4.2