The Flying Spaghetti Monster

Originally posted by Bardock42
Not really. He didn't say there aren't Christians of that sort. In fact he implied it is less so with Atheists, but it has to be said that 90% of Atheists are still dumb ****s. Not believing in God doesn't make you a better person suddenly. Christians get a huge amount of shit, and most justified, but you have to see that Atheists aren't better for the most part. They are just as stupid and have just as stupid ideals just not in regard of one tiny thing...

In other words....Atheist are as humans as any other Religious believer and can be right and wrong at times.

We can all live with that idea.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
In other words....Atheist are as humans as any other Religious believer and can be right and wrong at times.

We can all live with that idea.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Review of What's So Great About Christianity" William Faris

🙄

Or you can read it for yourself. I try to avoid critics.

I mean since you're an Atheist, don't you like to..."think for yourself"??

Originally posted by DigiMark007
So you quote a nasty little generalization about atheists (which is almost entirely false), give it thumbs up like it's entirely correct, then give us a book to read?

Sweet argument.

🙄

And try not being so hateful toward others. It works wonders.

...

Also, I found this quote from the above review to be a nice microcosm of his case for Christianity:
What is amazing, then, is that his arguments for Christianity in Chapter 25 consist almost exclusively of straightforward assertions of Christian doctrine. Almost nothing he says would be persuasive to someone with a different religious view.

The arguments Dinesh uses are nothing new to the argment for theism, and they are delivered by him with obviously less aplomb than more accomplished apologists.

It isn't entirely false though, que no? Most Atheists think they are intellectually superior than religious people because they don't believe in some "fairytale".

I don't want Atheists to read What's So Great About Christianity? because I'm trying to convert them, I want them to read it to hear the side of the argument from an intelligent, non-homophobic Christian who argues for creation, why Christianity is the only valid religion, and that Christianity is indeed compatible (not obsolete) in today's world all without quoting the Bible or using it as the crutch for his argument.

Originally posted by Neo Darkhalen
I shall do, does he still come on KMC?

Yup.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Not really. He didn't say there aren't Christians of that sort. In fact he implied it is less so with Atheists, but it has to be said that 90% of Atheists are still dumb ****s. Not believing in God doesn't make you a better person suddenly. Christians get a huge amount of shit, and most justified, but you have to see that Atheists aren't better for the most part. They are just as stupid and have just as stupid ideals just not in regard of one tiny thing...

But the generalization is still obvious when you're asserting that "90% of Atheists are still dumb ****s." I'd imagine that's a gross overestimation. Most atheists I know are generally pretty rational and humble. But I also realize that my particular experience is far from empirical, but so is anyone's experience with a religious sect.

Something along the liens of what WD said I can agree with:

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
In other words....Atheist are as humans as any other Religious believer and can be right and wrong at times.

We can all live with that idea.

👆

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Or you can read it for yourself. I try to avoid critics.

I mean since you're an Atheist, don't you like to..."think for yourself"??

...the hell? This rather pithy comeback does nothing to refute the arguments within the article. And all people think for themselves...but if you read something that you agree with, it's certainly not invalid to quote it or post it as evidence or as part of an argument.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
It isn't entirely false though, que no? Most Atheists think they are intellectually superior than religious people because they don't believe in some "fairytale".

I don't want Atheists to read What's So Great About Christianity? because I'm trying to convert them, I want them to read it to hear the side of the argument from an intelligent, non-homophobic Christian who argues for creation, why Christianity is the only valid religion, and that Christianity is indeed compatible (not obsolete) in today's world all without quoting the Bible or using it as the crutch for his argument.

See, I'd love to know what you're basing your assumption on, because my guess is that it's nothing more than an intuitive idea that "most atheists are smug" that seems to be in agreement with whatever you survey. There's no rational backing for this assumption, and it's kind of just like "Well, it seems that way, doesn't it??" No, quite frankly, it doesn't.

And you're also assuming that atheists aren't familiar with arguments for theism, as if they've studied atheism and not its refutations. Some aren't, but an equal percentage of Christians are unaware of the best refutations to your beliefs, so all you're doing is once again producing a generalization that could be just as true of anyone, and has nothing to do with atheism.

All the while you've been accusing atheists of some intellectual narcicism, you've been on a pedestal telling us what we should know (and what we don't know, and how we act and think, and....you get the idea).

It's really insulting.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
But the generalization is still obvious when you're asserting that "90% of Atheists are still dumb ****s." I'd imagine that's a gross overestimation. Most atheists I know are generally pretty rational and humble. But I also realize that my particular experience is far from empirical, but so is anyone's experience with a religious sect.

Of course, but it gets generalized both ways. And I think, seeing as 95% of all people are dumb ****s, my estimates are moderate.

Originally posted by DigiMark007

...the hell? This rather pithy comeback does nothing to refute the arguments within the article. And all people think for themselves...but if you read something that you agree with, it's certainly not invalid to quote it or post it as evidence or as part of an argument.

How can he "agree" with the review if he's never actually read the book himself. You can't critique a movie or book you've never seen or read. Read the book, and then your opinion is valid.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
See, I'd love to know what you're basing your assumption on, because my guess is that it's nothing more than an intuitive idea that "most atheists are smug" that seems to be in agreement with whatever you survey. There's no rational backing for this assumption, and it's kind of just like "Well, it seems that way, doesn't it??" No, quite frankly, it doesn't.

And you're also assuming that atheists aren't familiar with arguments for theism, as if they've studied atheism and not its refutations. Some aren't, but an equal percentage of Christians are unaware of the best refutations to your beliefs, so all you're doing is once again producing a generalization that could be just as true of anyone, and has nothing to do with atheism.

All the while you've been accusing atheists of some intellectual narcicism, you've been on a pedestal telling us what we should know (and what we don't know, and how we act and think, and....you get the idea).

It's really insulting.

I've known and spoken with many Athiests in my years, boy. The guy in the video Bardock posted describes most (over 50%) of them very accurately. "I don't believe in what my 5 senses can't detect, so that means I'm automatically smarter than everyone who believes in God" is the outlook and attitude of most Atheists.

The arguments Atheists are familiar with are the same old, boring, circular, Bible quoting arguments from people like JIA who don't get anywhere or have a logical approach. This book has an entirely different approach and you've probably never heard his arguments before.

When you get a chance, just take a trip to your nearest Barnes & Noble or Hastings and get it.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
How can he "agree" with the review if he's never actually read the book himself. You can't critique a movie or book you've never seen or read. Read the book, and then your opinion is valid.

Actually, I went back and checked his original post. Other than a 🙄 smilie, he niether endorsed it nor refuted it, and Adam's other argument do indeed "think for himself". So he was posting a review for the sake of posting it. It was relevant to the discussion....and then you bashed him for it. Cool beans.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
I've known and spoken with many Athiests in my years, boy. The guy in the video Bardock posted describes most (over 50%) of them very accurately. "I don't believe in what my 5 senses can't detect, so that means I'm automatically smarter than everyone who believes in God" is the outlook and attitude of most Atheists.

Case studies as empirical meta-analysis? Check.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
The arguments Atheists are familiar with are the same old, boring, circular, Bible quoting arguments from people like JIA who don't get anywhere or have a logical approach. This book has an entirely different approach and you've probably never heard his arguments before.

Once again telling me what I do and don't know, as well as unfathomably large groups of people you've never talked to or analyzed properly? Check.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
When you get a chance, just take a trip to your nearest Barnes & Noble or Hastings and get it.

Demanding, declarative statements in a public forum? Check.

...

Dude, listen to yourself. The gist of my entire presence here has been "be a little less intolerant of different groups, and quit generalizing" and this is your response to me. If this conversation were a case study that someone was basing their own generalizations from, they'd determine the exact opposite of what you're asserting.

We shouldn't allow the arrogance and pompous attitude of certain atheist and religious people cloud and make their side look bad.

Let's all agree that anyone who thinks that they're right all the time might actually be wrong.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Probably means I am wrong.

lolz

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth

I hear you, Blax. Non-believers of the ruler's religious denomination have always have the political shit end of the stick.

Gotta root for the underdog. 🙂

fa'sho. But my point was that if the tables were turned, and Atheists were and have always been in power, I have no doubt that it would be religious people getting slaughtered for years.

As such I find it ridiculous to say something like "It's not fair that Atheists get disrespected by religious people". That's actually a very ignorant point of view.

Originally posted by Blax_Hydralisk
fa'sho. But my point was that if the tables were turned, and Atheists were and have always been in power, I have no doubt that it would be religious people getting slaughtered for years.

As such I find it ridiculous to say something like "It's not fair that Atheists get disrespected by religious people". That's actually a very ignorant point of view.

Are you saying that religions have the right to "step on" atheists because if the tables were turned, the atheists would be doing the same to the religious people?

...yet more bigoted assumptions, if shakya's analysis is correct. I hope it isn't.

And I find it hard to believe that you have "no doubt" that atheists would be, I dunno, oppressive totalitarian rulers that slaughtered theists. In general, I find it hard to believe that atheists would be more violent at all, because death is a final end to them, so killing (which would also endanger themselves in the form of counter-attack) would not be to their benefit at all. Many theists have a concept of afterlife that justifies all sorts of hatred and violence for the sake of faith...and makes them less reverent of the life we have because they're so focused on the next life.

I do agree with you Digimark, but at the same time just because an Athiest doesn't beleive in life after death, doesn't automatically mean they value life any more than a religious person does or doesn't.

Look at China. Athiest Oasis..right ?

Despite thier, not only lack of religion, but complete intolerance of it, they still treat life and human rights like a joke.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Are you saying that religions have the right to "step on" atheists because if the tables were turned, the atheists would be doing the same to the religious people?

No, not at all.

My point was simply that no matter who is on top, they're always going to sh*t on the little guy. It's a human impulse, to dislike and fear things that are different. History has proven this to be true time and time again. And Digi I have to disagree with you. Religious extremists don't find it okay to kill because there's an afterlife at all. They think it''s because god tells them to. This is, of course, wrong. However if Atheists were on top there would just be a different reason to slaughter innocents. Look at Stalin's regime and SoD's example with China. Hate and prejudice will always be around.

Originally posted by SpearofDestiny
I do agree with you Digimark, but at the same time just because an Athiest doesn't beleive in life after death, doesn't automatically mean they value life any more than a religious person does or doesn't.

Look at China. Athiest Oasis..right ?

Despite thier, not only lack of religion, but complete intolerance of it, they still treat life and human rights like a joke.

I didn't mean to say they value life more. But I would think they value not dying more because they aren't going anywhere. I could guarantee, for example, that we'd never see a suicide bomber again if the world were atheistic.

And citing atheist regimes or governments is dangerous, because it assumes that the defining characteristic of the culture or government is atheism....there's a lot more to it than that. Atheism isn't inherently intolerant, just as no religion is unless it is applied to that end.

It's patently false to say "Stalin was atheist. All atheists governments would be similar." Surely you see the ridiculousness of that argument, no? That's not atheism. That's intolerance. To equate it with the religious practice is an incorrect correlation. I could cite religious intolerance from religious people as well, and I would be no more correct than you.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
I didn't mean to say they value life more. But I would think they value not dying more because they aren't going anywhere. I could guarantee, for example, that we'd never see a suicide bomber again if the world were atheistic.

I'm not sure if the Oklahoma Bombing was a suicide attack, but I doubt that global Atheism would stop a maniac from sacraficing him or herself to destroy another person or people.

People are suicidal regardless of thier religion or lack there of. In fact, we have very high suicide rates among teens and young adults here in the U.S. I'm sure many of them are Athiest.

A person who is that dissatisifed with life is not going to think "where will I end up" before killing himself. Especially if they hold that much resentment as to kill people.

Recent School shootings ? Hello !

I think your over confident in your guarantee.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
And citing atheist regimes or governments is dangerous, because it assumes that the defining characteristic of the culture or government is atheism....there's a lot more to it than that. Atheism isn't inherently intolerant, just as no religion is unless it is applied to that end.

OFcourse there is more to it than just Atheism, that goes without saying.

However, my point was Atheism does not guarantee a higher value to life. People value or disvalue life for different reasons, and I think you prove my point for me by reminding me that there are so many other reasons-culture, economics, politics, etc.-besides theism and atheism- that people would disvalue or value life to any degree.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
It's patently false to say "Stalin was atheist. All atheists governments would be similar." Surely you see the ridiculousness of that argument, no? That's not atheism. That's intolerance. To equate it with the religious practice is an incorrect correlation. I could cite religious intolerance from religious people as well, and I would be no more correct than you.

I did not claim that Atheists would be tyrants any more than religious rulers would be. I think there is far more to a tyrant than whether he or she is an Atheist or Theist.

Originally posted by Blax_Hydralisk
No, not at all.

My point was simply that no matter who is on top, they're always going to sh*t on the little guy. It's a human impulse, to dislike and fear things that are different. History has proven this to be true time and time again. And Digi I have to disagree with you. Religious extremists don't find it okay to kill because there's an afterlife at all. They think it''s because god tells them to. This is, of course, wrong. However if Atheists were on top there would just be a different reason to slaughter innocents. Look at Stalin's regime and SoD's example with China. Hate and prejudice will always be around.

Human is the common denominator. It dose not matter what people believe, for power corrupts.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Bertrand Russel is one of the greatest thinkers of the last century though.

😱 , i thought every 1 hated bertrand russel on these forums!! lol. join the club, hes me favourite philosopher/thinker 😄

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Human is the common denominator. It dose not matter what people believe, for power corrupts.

And that.. was my entire point. Sorry if I wasn't clear in my posts.