Theories on Why Atheists are met with Hostility

[Quantum Windbag]

You poor angry, fundie.

Daniel 4:11
11 The tree grew, and was strong, and the height thereof reached unto heaven, and the sight thereof to the ENDS OF ALL THE EARTH: (KJV)

How strange that a flat earth is a consistent theme in the bibles.

Poor angry, deluded troll.

Isaiah 40:22 He sits enthroned above the circle of the Earth...

Job 26:7 He spreads out the northern skies over empty space; he suspends the earth over nothing.

 

[sealybobo]

Many atheists are progressive liberal thinking democrats.

Moving from one religion to another religion doesn't seem like such a big change in thinking to me.

Based upon your bogus allegation that there is a "Religion of Liberalism" then you have become a devout follower of the "Religion of Conservatism".

The world doesn't always work in a tit for tat fashion.

Conservatism is built on the notion of adhering to policies which have been SHOWN to work. This is a grounding in rationalism and reality where evidence guides positions.

Liberalism works on an entirely different basis. It rejects the evidence of the present, and now pay attention, it embraces the PROMISES OF THE UNKNOWN. There is no way to escape this faith-based foundation. Liberals launch revolutions and seek change and they always desire to implement something that hasn't been tried before. This means that liberals have no evidence backing their vision. Liberals take society to the edge of a cliff and have us jump off on the basis of a promise that we will float upwards instead of plummeting into the canyon below.

There is no corresponding Religion of Conservativism because Conservativism values the tried and true, hence no need for faith-based visions and secondly most conservatives get their religious fix from God-focused religions so that have no need to satiate their brain with a political-religion based on faith-based propositions.

Nice right wing twist. Just remember conservatives will stick with what they know even when it isn't working. Just look at how the GOP handled the Iraq war. Stay the course. Or how they are so stubborn to keep their tax breaks for the rich in place regardless of if they are working or if we can afford them.

No leader in history has launched two wars and at the same time cut taxes for the rich like Bush did. That wasn't ever done before. Was Bush a progressive?

How about when the GOP deregulated the banks and mortgage industries? Actually you are right. Conservatives actually undid the regulations we put in place after the Great Depression so technically ou are right. They took us back to old school. Unfortunately like it did back then, those old policies caused the second great recession.

It's funny to watch you guys lashing out. It's liking watching a spazz in a boxing match against an actual boxer.

Whatever loser

You guys are the ones throwing everything plus the kitchen sink into the fight. You're policy and history illiterate. The regulatory state under Bush grew the highest in modern history:

After eight years in office, President Bush is on track to be one of the biggest regulatory budget spending presidents in history, according to a new study from the Mercatus Center at George Mason University and the Weidenbaum Center at Washington University in St. Louis.

An analysis of the U.S. Budget for Fiscal Years 2008 and 2009 shows that, contrary to conventional wisdom, President Bush is not alone among Republican presidents. The report also describes how eight of the 10 largest increases in regulatory spending have occurred under the leadership of Republican presidents. All but one of Richard Nixon’s annual budgets make the top 10 increases in the last 50 years, and Gerald Ford’s 1976 budget also makes the list. In addition, Nixon’s first term holds the record for the biggest increase ever at almost 82 percent. Reagan was the only president to reduce total regulation spending, bringing expenditures down by one percent during his first term.
​

You fundamentally misunderstand the mortgage meltdown - no amount of regulation could save, and no amount of lack of regulation, could cause the meltdown. Look at what the Dept. of Justice is STILL DOING:

In the suit, filed in state court, prosecutors outlined how, since 2009, Evans Bancorp has created a map that defined the “trade area,” places in the Buffalo metropolitan region where the bank would make mortgages and other loans. The bank, prosecutors contend, deliberately excised much of Buffalo’s East Side.

Rival banks, the authorities said, lent to neighborhoods on the East Side at a far higher rate than Evans Bank, suggesting that the lending patterns did not stem from a dearth of willing minority borrowers.
​

Bankers like making money, not losing money. They like making safe loans, not risky loans. The root cause of the mortgage meltdown was government trying to implement social policy, not by allocating funds in Congress, but by mandating that banks be the agents of change. Forcing banks to loan to risky minority borrowers or to face penalties:



You have a profound misunderstanding of the world and politics. That's why you look like a spazz, throwing all sorts of gibberish into the mix and it doesn't actually make your case.

Pot meet Kettle.

Yes, bankers like money, and they have more of it than ever before. This is just history repeating itself. When the robber barons started the Federal Reserve in 1913 they gave millions to charity. BFD. Why care about millions when you're going to make billions? Same thing happened today. They went from being billionaires to trillionaires and now your money isn't worth shit and the best interest you can get on a savings account at a bank is less than 1%. Fool.

Even the CEO's and corporations stopped worrying as much as they use to about the long term success of their companies. Today it's all about NOW. The CEO wants his bonus this year. And why worry about 10 years from now when he probably won't even be the CEO in 10 years? He'll get a sweet severance package and move on to another corporation where he can screw all the workers and max out his bonus again.

Look at all the highest paid CEO's in the last few years. What do they have in common? They laid off the most employees.

Anyways, there is so much wrong with your thinking. Either you are rich and greedy or an ignorant stupid worker bee who think she knows what she's talking about but in reality you are the reason they get away with what they do. Because you take it. Not only do you take it, you don't even blame the perpetrators. You blame the liberals because you've been brainwashed. Which is it? Are you rich or stupid?

 

[sealybobo]

I've always thought talking snakes to be more poetic than

...talking snakes.... dead men rising... all confirmed by science.

See what I mean? Snakes don't talk. But spirits do. And they can inhabit anyone or thing.
We have eyewitness accounts of Christ's return 3 days after He was crucified. They were there, you weren't.
I went to dinner with friends last night, but it has yet to be confirmed by science.

Eyewitness accounts written several generations minimum after the events. Please stop pretending that these are actual eyewitness accounts, you know they aren't.

I had sex with the Irish Ram 5 years ago. There were eye witnesses. Do you want to interview them? You can't. They're all dead. So you'll just have to take my word for it.

And even if you could interview them, you would have to take their word for it as eye witness testimony can be very unreliable.

 

[sealybobo]

Yea, I remember seeing how debate is done in high school. I thought it was rational, well thought out, calm, etc. It is not at all. They are taught to get as many talking points in as fast as possible. It is an absolute joke. Do you know what I am talking about? I can't believe they don't teach them how to really debate. I took debate in college and it is much different than high school debate. High school debate is a joke.

High school? I was debating in 5th grade, and it was nothing like what you describe.

Did you learn how to resort to threats of violence in college debate?

You TOTALLY have thrown me with the whole cancer thing. What were we even arguing about? What is your position again or what problem do you have with my position? I'm completely lost. What side are you on anyways? Do you believe in god? Lets start there. And what about my agnostic atheist position do you have a problem with?

I don't have a position, something you seem to find disturbing for some reason. As for my problems with your position, perhaps the reason you can't remember everything I already said is that your position no longer exists.

I am sure I'm right and you are wrong. Its funny how you think you are schooling me and I hardly even know who you are or what you have said. That's how important you are to me jackass. LOL.

There you go giving me positions I have not declared again. FYI, I am not schooling you, I am mocking you.

But I am sorry about your cancer. I hope you have some fun with and are distracted a little with USMB. It's not make a wish but I hope if you are sitting in a bed somewhere we are helping you pass the time. Sorry that when you die that's it. I hope you appreciated the time you had because when it's over it's probably over. Any hopes of an afterlife are just wishful thinking but if it makes you feel better who am I to say anything.

How do you know there is nothing after you die? Have you been there, or are you simply declaring a position based on your hatred of everyone else?

And if you are getting your feeling hurt, maybe you shouldn't be on USMB's religious thread.

There you go projecting again.

How do you know? I don't claim to know. Theists do.

 

[sealybobo]

I've always thought talking snakes to be more poetic than

...talking snakes.... dead men rising... all confirmed by science.

See what I mean? Snakes don't talk. But spirits do. And they can inhabit anyone or thing.
We have eyewitness accounts of Christ's return 3 days after He was crucified. They were there, you weren't.
I went to dinner with friends last night, but it has yet to be confirmed by science.

So a few thousand years ago, this god suddenly decided to reveal itself to several people in the most primitive, illiterate and remote portions of humanity in a completely unverifiable way – and then simply disappeared.

There is no evidence to support any of the claims made in the Bible concerning the existence of a god. Any ‘evidence’ proposed by theists to support the Bible’s various historical and supernatural claims is non-existent at best, manufactured at worst.

The Bible is not self-authenticating; it is simply one of many religious texts. Like those other texts, it itself constitutes no evidence for the existence of a god. Its florid prose and fanciful content do not legitimise it nor distinguish it from other ancient works of literature.

The Bible is historically inaccurate, factually incorrect, inconsistent and contradictory. It was artificially constructed by a group of men in antiquity and is poorly translated, heavily altered and selectively interpreted. Entire sections of the text have been redacted over time.

There is no contemporary evidence for Jesus’ existence or the Bible’s account of his life; no artifacts, dwellings, works of carpentry, self-written manuscripts, court records, eyewitness testimony, official diaries, birth records, reflections on his significance or written disputes about his teachings. Nothing survives from the time in which he is said to have lived.

All historical references to Jesus derive from hearsay accounts written decades or centuries after his supposed death. These historical references generally refer to early Christians rather than a historical Jesus and, in some cases, directly contradict the Gospels or were deliberately manufactured.

The Gospels themselves contradict one-another on many key events and were constructed by unknown authors up to a century after the events they describe are said to have occurred. They are not eyewitness accounts. The New Testament, as a whole, contains many internal inconsistencies as a result of its piecemeal construction and is factually incorrect on several historical claims, such as the early existence of Nazareth, the reign of Herod and the Roman census. Like the Old Testament, it too has had entire books and sections redacted.

The Biblical account of Jesus has striking similarities with other mythologies and texts and many of his supposed teachings existed prior to his time. It is likely the character was either partly or entirely invented by competing first century messianic cults from an amalgamation of Greco-Roman, Egyptian and Judeo-Apocalyptic myths and prophecies.

Even if Jesus’ existence could be established, this would in no way validate Christian theology or any element of the story portrayed in the Bible, such as the performance of miracles or the resurrection. Simply because it is conceivable a heretical Jewish preacher named Yeshua lived circa 30 AD, had followers and was executed, does not imply the son of a god walked the Earth at that time.

 

[sealybobo]

I've always thought talking snakes to be more poetic than

...talking snakes.... dead men rising... all confirmed by science.

See what I mean? Snakes don't talk. But spirits do. And they can inhabit anyone or thing.
We have eyewitness accounts of Christ's return 3 days after He was crucified. They were there, you weren't.
I went to dinner with friends last night, but it has yet to be confirmed by science.

Eyewitness accounts written several generations minimum after the events. Please stop pretending that these are actual eyewitness accounts, you know they aren't.

Christians will assert to Skeptics that over 500 people at one time saw the resurrected Jesus based on a line of scripture which was supposed to have been written by Paul. By claiming that over 500 people saw the resurrected Jesus at one time, Christians attempt to convince others that the Bible and the Bible's version of what Jesus was must be true.

I call bullshit.

 

[MaxGrit]

Poor angry, deluded troll.

Isaiah 40:22 He sits enthroned above the circle of the Earth...

Job 26:7 He spreads out the northern skies over empty space; he suspends the earth over nothing.

lmao why are new atheists still trying to troll?

 

[sealybobo]

Poor angry, deluded troll.

Isaiah 40:22 He sits enthroned above the circle of the Earth...

Job 26:7 He spreads out the northern skies over empty space; he suspends the earth over nothing.

lmao why are new atheists still trying to troll?

Most Christians can hear about the Muslim or Mormon faith and call bullshit. So they will tell you that all the people who follow these religions are following a lie.

Jews say Jesus wasn't the son of god. How come Christians get mad at us atheists for saying it but they don't seem to mind the Jews position that he wasn't the son of god? No miracles, no virgin birth. This is the position of the jews. Basically they're calling you Christians liars. But the Christians seem to have an unholy alliance with the Jews. They even call America a Judeo Christian nation. Odd they get along so well with another religions that calls BULLSHIT on the whole Messiah story.

That's all us Atheists are saying. We don't believe he was the son of god. Ask any Jew and they'll agree with us. Am I wrong about that? I don't think I am.

If 500 Eye witnesses supposedly saw Jesus rise from the dead, how come that isn't good enough for the Jews?

 

[PostmodernProph]

I find the 'four corners of the earth' to be much more poetic than 'from over here to over there'.......some just seem to lack a sense of drama.......

I've always thought talking snakes to be more poetic than

How remarkable. A Christian ministry chooses to defend the bibles.

We don't have to defend the Bible, <(no s) science does it for us. Again, Nachmanides, Hollie.
Oh LOOK! Time is a dimension. Who knew! lol. Oh LOOK, Life is in the blood! Who knew!
Blood let that.........

...talking snakes.... dead men rising... all confirmed by science.

not much that you believe is confirmed by science either......

 

[PostmodernProph]

I've always thought talking snakes to be more poetic than

...talking snakes.... dead men rising... all confirmed by science.

See what I mean? Snakes don't talk. But spirits do. And they can inhabit anyone or thing.
We have eyewitness accounts of Christ's return 3 days after He was crucified. They were there, you weren't.
I went to dinner with friends last night, but it has yet to be confirmed by science.

Eyewitness accounts written several generations minimum after the events. Please stop pretending that these are actual eyewitness accounts, you know they aren't.

/shrugs....you lie and think you've won the argument.....

 

[PostmodernProph]

If 500 Eye witnesses supposedly saw Jesus rise from the dead, how come that isn't good enough for the Jews?

it WAS good enough for the 500 eye witnesses....and a few billion people since then......

 

[sealybobo]

If 500 Eye witnesses supposedly saw Jesus rise from the dead, how come that isn't good enough for the Jews?

it WAS good enough for the 500 eye witnesses....and a few billion people since then......

Just remember it isn't just us atheists who call BULLSHIT on your stories. Jews and Muslims agree.

Are they angry, hateful and evil and sinners too going to hell because they don't buy your stories? Or are they ok as long as they at least believe in a generic god?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

How do you know? I don't claim to know. Theists do.

How do I know? Because my feelings are not hurt, oh he who who makes claims based on his lack of knowledge.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Christians will assert to Skeptics that over 500 people at one time saw the resurrected Jesus based on a line of scripture which was supposed to have been written by Paul. By claiming that over 500 people saw the resurrected Jesus at one time, Christians attempt to convince others that the Bible and the Bible's version of what Jesus was must be true.

I call bullshit.

Point one, Acts was not written by Paul.

Point two, your lack of knowledge does not make you right.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Most Christians can hear about the Muslim or Mormon faith and call bullshit. So they will tell you that all the people who follow these religions are following a lie.

Jews say Jesus wasn't the son of god. How come Christians get mad at us atheists for saying it but they don't seem to mind the Jews position that he wasn't the son of god? No miracles, no virgin birth. This is the position of the jews. Basically they're calling you Christians liars. But the Christians seem to have an unholy alliance with the Jews. They even call America a Judeo Christian nation. Odd they get along so well with another religions that calls BULLSHIT on the whole Messiah story.

That's all us Atheists are saying. We don't believe he was the son of god. Ask any Jew and they'll agree with us. Am I wrong about that? I don't think I am.

If 500 Eye witnesses supposedly saw Jesus rise from the dead, how come that isn't good enough for the Jews?

If that was all atheist were saying I wouldn't need to correct them when they lie about what the Bible says, would I?

 

[Hollie]

If 500 Eye witnesses supposedly saw Jesus rise from the dead, how come that isn't good enough for the Jews?

it WAS good enough for the 500 eye witnesses....and a few billion people since then......

There are no accounts that anyone saw hey-zeus rise from the dead.

Simply parroting the nonsensical claims you were told gives no one confidence that you have a clue.

 

[Hollie]

I find the 'four corners of the earth' to be much more poetic than 'from over here to over there'.......some just seem to lack a sense of drama.......

I've always thought talking snakes to be more poetic than

How remarkable. A Christian ministry chooses to defend the bibles.

We don't have to defend the Bible, <(no s) science does it for us. Again, Nachmanides, Hollie.
Oh LOOK! Time is a dimension. Who knew! lol. Oh LOOK, Life is in the blood! Who knew!
Blood let that.........

...talking snakes.... dead men rising... all confirmed by science.

not much that you believe is confirmed by science either......

Your goofy conspiracy theories are typical for someone who feels that science is a threat to their religious tales and fables.

 

[Hollie]

You poor angry, fundie.

Daniel 4:11
11 The tree grew, and was strong, and the height thereof reached unto heaven, and the sight thereof to the ENDS OF ALL THE EARTH: (KJV)

How strange that a flat earth is a consistent theme in the bibles.

Poor angry, deluded troll.

Isaiah 40:22 He sits enthroned above the circle of the Earth...

Job 26:7 He spreads out the northern skies over empty space; he suspends the earth over nothing.

Your argument is with the various men who wrote the bibles. How comically tragic that the "word of the gods" is so rife with errors, omissions and contradictions.

 

[MaxGrit]

Point two, your lack of knowledge does not make you right.

Sealybobo hates Jesus Christ to such an extreme that it's likely he's actually a demon possessed Satanic cultist, who plays the role of an hate-filled atheist.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

There are no accounts that anyone saw hey-zeus rise from the dead.

Simply parroting the nonsensical claims you were told gives no one confidence that you have a clue.

Actually, there is an account of that event. You might reject it, but that doesn't change the fact that it actually exists.