Atheists vs Evangelist

Originally posted by Digi

the Christian video doesn't give me practical advice on picking a graduate school. What the hell is it good for? Actually, neither of them do, and it's some life help I could really use. So what's the use of Evangelism OR Atheism?

TI's Evangelism video features Billy Graham.

Your mention of graduate school got me to Google "Billy Graham" and "graduate school".

Within a few seconds, I discovered Billy Graham actually has scholarships for graduate students.

So now I have a link to share with you that can potentially provide you with money for graduate school. If money is a major consideration for you, that may be a great deal of help.

I wouldn't have been inspired to do that except I'd seen the video and thought

"Wow ... Billy Graham is still alive? Hmm. Here's Digi asking for help with graduate school. I'll bet Billy Graham has something for that ..."

So that (among a great many other things) is what evangelism is useful for.

Here's the link:

http://www.internationalscholarships.com/1842/International-Graduates-&-Post-Graduate-Scholarships-|-Billy-Graham-Foundation

That's more an example what the human minds capabilities for association and Google are good for really.

Originally posted by Bardock42
That's more an example what the human minds capabilities for association and Google are good for really.

I'd agree except you need the motivation to use them positively on behalf of another.
I'm not yet convinced Google and mind association all on their own are sufficient to produce that, and certainly not to the extent Evangelism has proven to.

Presumably this and related inclinations could be tested by getting demographic breakdowns on charitable donations worldwide, or some such, for a start.

I started doing that a few minutes ago on a lark.

Getting conflicting data regarding who is more charitable between Muslims and Christians, but atheists seem less helpful than members of either religion so far, regardless of who's doing the polling.

To be fair, though, I've only gone through a handful of Google hits.
Might be interesting to see what turned up after reading, say, the first 20 or 30 articles. Might even make for a good thread.

Here's what I've seen so far, though:

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/other/muslims-give-more-charity-others-uk-poll-says-f6C10703224

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2008/05/us-most-charitable-nation-oil-rich-muslim-countries-give-almost-nothing
http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/donorsprevious.pdf

http://grisham.newsvine.com/_news/2011/11/08/8691971-are-religious-people-more-charitable-than-atheists

I suppose the question is what is considered charitable donations. Say if religious people consider any donation to their church charitable I could see an issue there.

The point was that TI created an arbitrary criteria for the videos and determined that it was enough to condemn one and praise the other, without actually considering the point of the videos. BWR, per his norm, whiffed spectacularly on the comprehension.

I'm not looking for a grad school. It was a f---ing example.

But, I did say I was done responding to TI if he failed to grasp the point of the example. He never responded, but I may be able to extend that courtesy to BWR.

I don't understand why you are so angry. Thanks to BWR and Billy Graham you can now get a scholarship and go to any grad school you want!!!

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
1. Small sample size. These people aren't chronically depressed because there's no God. They could be serious or somber individuals in an intelligent discussion and show happiness or levity outside of it. Also, forced enthusiasm is a huge part of evangelist gatherings.

2. This is clearly a bait thread.

2. I would note that any threads about atheism would be the same was a bait thread by your logic.

This forum needs more comments and posts like Time Immemorial's.

Originally posted by dadudemon
2. I would note that any threads about atheism would be the same was a bait thread by your logic.

That's probably not true.

Originally posted by dadudemon
This forum needs more comments and posts like Time Immemorial's.

That's definitely not true. Other opinions, I can abide. Abject stupidity mixed with needless antagonism, not as much.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I don't understand why you are so angry. Thanks to BWR and Billy Graham you can now get a scholarship and go to any grad school you want!!!

You're right. How was I such a fool to see that atheism can't provide everything that Billy Graham can.

Originally posted by Digi
That's probably not true.

That's definitely not true. Other opinions, I can abide. Abject stupidity mixed with needless antagonism, not as much.

Okay, I'll make some very anti-atheist threads when I feel like it.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Okay, I'll make some very anti-atheist threads when I feel like it.

Gonna have to be a bit more clear here. Is this sarcasm? If not, what is positive or productive about this thread and how it's presented?

Originally posted by dadudemon
2. I would note that any threads about atheism would be the same was a bait thread by your logic.

This forum needs more comments and posts like Time Immemorial's.

I haven't seen an atheist thread yet using Youtube videos to say "Lol one looks moar borink dan da other so must not be legit". That is literally the entire point of TI's original post and subsequent posts as well. If you think this is constructive on any level, you're daft.

Originally posted by Digi
Gonna have to be a bit more clear here. Is this sarcasm? If not, what is positive or productive about this thread and how it's presented?

I really don't know how to make it more clear: I'll make some anti-atheistic threads when I get more time.

I have explained this to you, before, in depth.

Basically, "new atheists" are much like Mormons were when they first came on the scene (except the Mormons were not nearly as smug and pretentious about it). Just simply preaching your gospel and the way you go about doing it is enough to be considered baiting (not "Digi" you, ambiguous "you"😉. Mormons position was essentially, "No churches have the fullness of the Gospel and no churches have the authority to officiate in God's name." That is very offensive to others.

The new atheists' position is very similar: "No churches are correct because God doesn't exist and your religions are lies."

It's fundamentally bait-y. There is no avoiding that.

So positing a position which is anti-theistic will automatically be bait-y. When I read Time Immemorial's posts in this thread, I don't see bait, I see another position that just happens to be anti-theistic. Maybe you don't like the way he goes about posting his ideas?

If you wish to have some dialogue about the weaknesses and strengths of atheism, allow shit that seems "bait-y" even if you think it shits up the forums. The worst case scenario is you'll just be more content with your perceived sense of intellectual superiority. If that's the worst outcome for low-quality threads in a mostly dead sub-forum, I welcome it. 🙂

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
I haven't seen an atheist thread yet using Youtube videos to say "Lol one looks moar borink dan da other so must not be legit". That is literally the entire point of TI's original post and subsequent posts as well.

Do you honestly think you've properly represented his position?

If you do, you're daft.

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
If you think this is constructive on any level, you're daft.

If you think whining about opposing opinions, even if they do not fit your personal beliefs on how those opinions regarding religion should work, is going to change anything*, you're daft.

Also, you're daft.

Daft.

Daft.

*What's the real point? He's trying to show you why you're logic is flawed. Your logic doesn't work the way his does but you dismiss him as stupid/rude/offensive. Instead of acknowledging that, you get ragey and dismissive. I am pretty sure I do not believe as TI believes but it doesn't mean I'm going to pretend to be better and smug about those beliefs.

I think I'm better than TI. And all you other people too

Originally posted by dadudemon
Do you honestly think you've properly represented his position.

To be fair, neither has TI.

Originally posted by dadudemon
If you think whining about opposing opinions, even if they do not fit your personal beliefs on how those opinions regarding religion should work, is going to change anything*, you're daft.

Also, you're daft.

Daft.

Daft.

*What's the real point? He's trying to show you why you're logic is flawed. Your logic doesn't work the way his does but you dismiss him as stupid/rude/offensive. Instead of acknowledging that, you get ragey and dismissive. I am pretty sure I do not believe as TI believes but it doesn't mean I'm going to pretend to be better and smug about those beliefs.

Bitter, no. Smug, no. I think his opinion is shallow and stupid. I'm going to tell people when I think that. It's disingenuous not to.

You're much more eloquent in your opinions. TI is not. If his points can be refuted by grade school logic, he's not worth treating as a peer. I wish him luck in life and leave him to his beliefs. But dignifying them with a response is a waste of time, much like this thread as a whole.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I really don't know how to make it more clear: I'll make some anti-atheistic threads when I get more time.

I have explained this to you, before, in depth.

Basically, "new atheists" are much like Mormons were when they first came on the scene (except the Mormons were not nearly as smug and pretentious about it). Just simply preaching your gospel and the way you go about doing it is enough to be considered baiting (not "Digi" you, ambiguous "you"😉. Mormons position was essentially, "No churches have the fullness of the Gospel and no churches have the authority to officiate in God's name." That is very offensive to others.

The new atheists' position is very similar: "No churches are correct because God doesn't exist and your religions are lies."

It's fundamentally bait-y. There is no avoiding that.

So positing a position which is anti-theistic will automatically be bait-y. When I read Time Immemorial's posts in this thread, I don't see bait, I see another position that just happens to be anti-theistic. Maybe you don't like the way he goes about posting his ideas?

If you wish to have some dialogue about the weaknesses and strengths of atheism, allow shit that seems "bait-y" even if you think it shits up the forums. The worst case scenario is you'll just be more content with your perceived sense of intellectual superiority. If that's the worst outcome for low-quality threads in a mostly dead sub-forum, I welcome it. 🙂

Lol. I'm not trying to make statements about atheism vs. Christianity. I'm only - only - talking about this sh*tty, half-baked thread. You're talking about the New Atheist movement for some reason, and all I thought you were defending was TI's lame OP. If he wants to have a cogent debate on New Atheism, cool. If he wants to watch a video, say they look sad, then proclaim Christianity's superiority, he's going to incur my indifference and/or derision. Simple as that.

If you want to make threads, cool, we'll probably debate. Just don't do it out of a desire to spite me or others. It'll probably lead to more diatribes like these, which are unproductive, though often interesting.

Originally posted by Digi
To be fair, neither has TI.

Bitter, no. Smug, no. I think his opinion is shallow and stupid. I'm going to tell people when I think that. It's disingenuous not to.

You're much more eloquent in your opinions. TI is not. If his points can be refuted by grade school logic, he's not worth treating as a peer. I wish him luck in life and leave him to his beliefs. But dignifying them with a response is a waste of time, much like this thread as a whole.

Lol. I'm not trying to make statements about atheism vs. Christianity. I'm only - only - talking about this sh*tty, half-baked thread. You're talking about the New Atheist movement for some reason, and all I thought you were defending was TI's lame OP. If he wants to have a cogent debate on New Atheism, cool. If he wants to watch a video, say they look sad, then proclaim Christianity's superiority, he's going to incur my indifference and/or derision. Simple as that.

If you want to make threads, cool, we'll probably debate. Just don't do it out of a desire to spite me or others. It'll probably lead to more diatribes like these, which are unproductive, though often interesting.

The goal with creating those threads would not be to polarize or make fun of people but to demonstrate how offensive/stupid they are to others. KMC is very agnostic-atheist compared to most places. It's just the wrong place to post stuff like that. It is not welcome.

No matter how eloquently I phrase my ideas, it will rustle jimmies. That was my point. But sense I've talked about it, it will probably have the opposite effect making the entire thing stupid.

I have been wanting to do it for a while, anyway. 😄

Originally posted by Bardock42
I think I'm better than TI. And all you other people too

I value humans based on their intelligence, kindness, wisdom, education, and depth of thought.

You are probably better than most of us (by my measure), if we're being honest. 😐

Originally posted by dadudemon
The goal with creating those threads would not be to polarize or make fun of people but to demonstrate how offensive/stupid they are to others. KMC is very agnostic-atheist compared to most places. It's just the wrong place to post stuff like that. It is not welcome.

No matter how eloquently I phrase my ideas, it will rustle jimmies. That was my point. But sense I've talked about it, it will probably have the opposite effect making the entire thing stupid.

I have been wanting to do it for a while, anyway. 😄

I think people would be surprised about what does and doesn't rustle jimmies. I demand intellectual rigor in my opponents, not compliance. And however stereotypically atheist this next comment makes me seem, I find that far too few Christian apologists or atheist detractors come anywhere near the standards I hold myself to.

Take my general atheism thread. Read the OP. It's not condescending, but it is thorough and methodical. Now go back and read TI's OP. It's not the same level of rigor, and when it's quite obviously as shallow as this, it doesn't command my attention or respect.

However, if it's a thread that is deliberately offensive to make a point, there's probably no need. We can all understand your point without such illustrations.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I value humans based on their intelligence, kindness, wisdom, education, and depth of thought.

You are probably better than most of us (by my measure), if we're being honest. 😐

Are you coming on to me?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Are you coming on to me?

Only if you squeeze those boobs together.