Why do the God-haters persist?

[emilynghiem]

What proof do atheists need? A God actually proving its own existence is what would convince an atheist. Why does he hide? Seems pretty petty to me.

HOW SAD!!! Must you feel the flames of eternal hell before you wise up????? Far too late then!!! think!

No, GISMYS
1. hell is caused by UNFORGIVENESS
so if you do not forgive God for making atheists for his reasons,
you have your own issues to answer to before God

2. as for atheists, if God made them to view and question the world from a secular nontheistic perspective, I trust God's plans, purpose and process behind this.

Sealybobo seemed to be asking perfectly honest questions
and is no more in doubt than you are, since you do not have faith
that God has reasons for making atheists question this way
and you do not see the good purpose it serves!

Romans 8:28 all things work together for good for those who love God
and are called to his purpose

So GISMYS the more you understand God's will you would be more
forgiving and understanding of atheists, nontheists and secular gentiles
who are put on this earth and made the way they are for a reason,
where God is in charge of all these things.

Be forgiving, be blessed, and you will open your mind to receive
greater understanding. The day you are THANKFUL for atheists
then you will understand the reasons why God created two separate folds of the flock.

 

[sameech]

We see them here everyday, interjecting their hate-filled insultuous attacks on the religious, mocking and ridiculing to a bizarre extreme, anything and everything to do with God. They largely profess to be "Atheists" although some, as if to denote a hint of reluctance to go quite that far, will claim agnosticism instead. Best play it safe if we're dealing with a super-force who can send you to the pits of hell for all eternity, eh? But they have a dirty little secret they don't want any of us to know. They are not, in fact, Atheists or agnostic.

True Atheists have absolutely no inclination to attack people who profess religious belief. If anything, they are amused by the "believers" and find them a bit of a novelty. Much like an adult who encounters a child believing in Santa or the Easter Bunny. There is no harm to the adult in such beliefs, the adult knows these are not real entities, and it's simply an amusement to them. In fact, they may even 'play along' with the idea, just in the name of fun. What does it hurt? No, you don't see hoards of smart-assed punks at the mall where Santa visits, ridiculing and belittling the people standing in line to see him. Message boards aren't clogged up with degenerate misfits decrying the belief of a giant bunny who brings candy and hides eggs, because it doesn't really matter to anyone that some people entertain this notion.

Oh but it's because those are just kids, Boss! Well okay, let's take the thousands of nutty conspiracy theories out there. Do you see any evidence of people devoting every waking hour to go on message boards and forums to "inform" these people how they are crazy and misinformed? Nope. It doesn't matter. As long as you know something is too far-fetched to be true, you could care less what other people think. If someone wants to think Elvis is still alive on some remote island, what difference does that make to me? I might be inclined to casually comment that I don't believe it, but I am certainly not devoting the bulk of my energy and time online to categorically try and refute any inkling of thought pertaining to such a theory. And I am certainly not going to the extreme efforts to ridicule and insult the nuts who believe such theories. It's just not that important to me, nor to anyone else for that matter.

But with the God-haters and God, things are quite different. Although they claim to be Atheists or agnostics, my suspicion is they are anything but. It appears they are devout believers in God, who fully understand the power of God and how much God influences others who believe in Him. To put it in simple terms, they fear God. They are afraid if they do not stand up and fight God with all their might, God may become a bigger influence and that wouldn't be good for them, for whatever reason.

Most of the time, these reasons center around that person's life choices. They have totally abandoned the God they very much believe in, so they can be unaccountable for their moral behaviors. As long as there is "no god" to judge them, they can do whatever they please and there are no consequences. It's important that we understand, any time someone is doing something immoral or wrong, they had rather have company. This provides a codependency, a way they can somehow justify their behavior to themselves.

So this is why the God-haters persist on message boards and forums, to 'recruit' people over to their way of thinking. They believe they can ridicule and cajole people into being ashamed of their beliefs and those people will ultimately join their faction. If nothing else, it is 'therapeutic' for them to vent their anger and vitriol toward the God they know is real, and they are almost certain to meet up with others who are doing the same thing.

Now a normal person who didn't believe in or have any interest in something would not seek it out. I have no interest in NASCAR, and I certainly do not go out of my way to bombard people who do like it with negativity as that would be pointless. What you are seeing is that these people are wound collectors which involves "... the conscious and systematic collection and preservation of transgressions, violations, social wrongs, grievances, injustice, unfair treatment, or slights of self and others, for the purpose of attenuating, nourishing, fortifying, or justifying a malignant ideology, furthering hatred, satisfying a pathology, or for exacting revenge." (Wound Collectors | Psychology Today).

Hope that helps answer your question.

Sam

 

[emilynghiem]

The heart of his comment is about rejecting the childish notion of a personal god, as you do. Yet, he remains humble in the face of an awesome universe. There is much we don't, and will never, know. With that, he leaves the door open, if just a crack, and rejects those that don't.

Agnostic Atheism is the most logical position to have.

The least biased most universal position would be like a "bilingual"
person who can see through the perspective of both the
believer using the language of Biblical and spiritual laws
and the secular nontheist using science and natural laws.

If your position is already "biased" to EXCLUDE one side or the other,
how can your system calculate fairly by accommodating equal input from both sources?

If you have one person using binary numbers, one person using decimals,
one person using hex; wouldn't your system of logic need to be able to
accommodate all these diverse systems in order to handle people equally?

At the very least, if there is no universal system that can translate between
each person's individual logic or values; then we would need "translators"
individually to align the different values so we can communicate between them
relatively.

Note: I find that even having an emotional bias or division, putting one person or group above another, is enough to skew one's logic emotionally where it is not 100% objective.

The best way i know to counteract this is to pair up with people with the opposite bias.
No one I have found is so perfectly objective that we keep our emotions or preferences
aside. Everyone I know projects a little of our preferences. So it takes people of different biases to check and balance each other. No one is above or below anyone else; we all have equal strengths as weaknesses when considered in full perspective as a whole. We all need each other to catch us when we are not being perfectly fair or inclusive, but start imposing a bias.

Thank you, SB for being a fair minded person.
even though none of us is perfect, it is clear you and others here are very high up on the scale, and with help of counterparts, yes, we can all be made "perfect" or "whole."

 

[thebrucebeat]

The heart of his comment is about rejecting the childish notion of a personal god, as you do. Yet, he remains humble in the face of an awesome universe. There is much we don't, and will never, know. With that, he leaves the door open, if just a crack, and rejects those that don't.

Agnostic Atheism is the most logical position to have.

Agnosticism certainly.
Atheism, debateable.
That was Einstein's point. He was too humble about what he knew, and what he perceived as being possible to know, to declare any kind of atheism.
The whole concept of a god was beyond consideration to him.
I happen to agree.

 

[emilynghiem]

Now a normal person who didn't believe in or have any interest in something would not seek it out. I have no interest in NASCAR, and I certainly do not go out of my way to bombard people who do like it with negativity as that would be pointless. What you are seeing is that these people are wound collectors which involves "... the conscious and systematic collection and preservation of transgressions, violations, social wrongs, grievances, injustice, unfair treatment, or slights of self and others, for the purpose of attenuating, nourishing, fortifying, or justifying a malignant ideology, furthering hatred, satisfying a pathology, or for exacting revenge." (Wound Collectors | Psychology Today).

Hope that helps answer your question.

Sam

Dear Sam: even those whose conscious intent is to confront for ill will or revenge,
there is an UNCONSCIOUS drive to seek healing and peace.

The serial rapist who is plagued by demonic chronic rages and self-hateful destruction
really wants to be freed of the obsession; but in the meantime, if this person does not get help, the rage will be taken out on victims, spreading and multiplying the demonic burden.
So this is both a twisted cry for help, and a pattern of cause and effect; that if we in society do not do more to find and help sick people in advance, then we find out about them after they create more innocent victims, so this motivates us to take action.

We would only multiply the wrongs by responding with ill will and retribution.

The way to break the cycle of ill will, abuse and dumping the sins of the past forward,
is to forgive and heal the root causes.

Until all people receive healing of body, mind and spirit, then this ill will is projected forward onto relationships and manifesting as more conflict and abuses.

We are either conscious of the need for healing, or we are not aware and run on the negative forces instead. But it is still driven by the process of seeking justice and peace.

We will see this suffering repeat as a sign that we need to do more to resolve the causes.
It is to motivate us to make the necessary changes and take the right steps.
Otherwise, if we keep repeating the same retribution, then we get nowhere.

 

[emilynghiem]

The heart of his comment is about rejecting the childish notion of a personal god, as you do. Yet, he remains humble in the face of an awesome universe. There is much we don't, and will never, know. With that, he leaves the door open, if just a crack, and rejects those that don't.

Hi Bruce: What is wrong with being neutral?
Why can't a personal God be real for some people, and not necessary for others?
Why this need to reject 100%?

Note: by the natural laws that apply to all people, believers or not,
we still invoke the same reactions we impose on others.

So if we "reject" their views as false, they tend to "reject" our views as false.
Isn't the NEUTRAL objective position to hold the views equally?
So YOUR system is as valid for you (even with flaws if you aren't consistent with it)
as MY system is valid for me, etc. (even with flaws if I contradict myself and need correction, too)

Isn't that more objective and universal? Isn't that better than "mutual rejection?"
(and still allows equal room for correction, by holding each person to their own system)

 

[emilynghiem]

In response to your sig line. A note worth noting...

Not everyone that rejects the myths and groupthink of religion came to this from some trauma encountered in youth or at the hand of relatives. Some of us have just observed fairly and truly and come to the most rational conclusion we could.

The anger ...yes anger fueling mine and others argument is mostly from the defense of our well thought out position. I just don't see any justice resulting from giving liars and fools a pass on something so fundamental.

Hi Huggy:
Yes a lot of people abuse either religious or political groups as cults.

But that doesn't mean these systems can't be used for good.

Lots of people use religious and political organizing for useful outreach
to help people otherwise abused.

I see religions as "languages" for the laws to organize ppl in groups.
So the right leaders can keep the members in line, similar to states in the
union under local laws of the counties and cities to reach all people and levels of society.

Also, Huggy the best way to check against religious abuses
is to work WITHIN that group using their language and laws.

When used correctly each system checks itself.
You are right, that all systems get abused by exploiting cult mentality,
fear and division. The best way to counteract is not to play on these fears and divisions,
and they can be overcome so ppl are no longer manipulated, not even us looking on.

 

[thebrucebeat]

The heart of his comment is about rejecting the childish notion of a personal god, as you do. Yet, he remains humble in the face of an awesome universe. There is much we don't, and will never, know. With that, he leaves the door open, if just a crack, and rejects those that don't.

Hi Bruce: What is wrong with being neutral?
Why can't a personal God be real for some people, and not necessary for others?
Why this need to reject 100%?

Note: by the natural laws that apply to all people, believers or not,
we still invoke the same reactions we impose on others.

So if we "reject" their views as false, they tend to "reject" our views as false.
Isn't the NEUTRAL objective position to hold the views equally?
So YOUR system is as valid for you (even with flaws if you aren't consistent with it)
as MY system is valid for me, etc. (even with flaws if I contradict myself and need correction, too)

Isn't that more objective and universal? Isn't that better than "mutual rejection?"
(and still allows equal room for correction, by holding each person to their own system)

Because what is "real" isn't a choice.
It simply is.
Einstein found the proposition of a personal god silly, and so do I.
Your goal is to find a way to bring all people together and not to find an objective reality. If that investigation causes friction you are philosophically against it, because you, too, have a goal, and that is to calm the beast.
The goal isn't universality for its own sake. That is philosophical, not investigative.
In my opinion, and Einstein's, the proposition of a personal god and the possibility of something undetermined and unknowable are not equal in the least. That may be neutral, but it isn't accurate.
As a scientist, that had primacy for Einstein.
Einstein found the evidence for a personal god childish and untenable. He replaces it with no system of his own, but an acknowledgment that some things are beyond knowing, and accepting the humility of that position. He makes peace with what he is ignorant of, but doesn't invent a solution for his ignorance, which is how he sees the idea of a personal god.
And so do I.

 

[Montrovant]

We see them here everyday, interjecting their hate-filled insultuous attacks on the religious, mocking and ridiculing to a bizarre extreme, anything and everything to do with God. They largely profess to be "Atheists" although some, as if to denote a hint of reluctance to go quite that far, will claim agnosticism instead. Best play it safe if we're dealing with a super-force who can send you to the pits of hell for all eternity, eh? But they have a dirty little secret they don't want any of us to know. They are not, in fact, Atheists or agnostic.

True Atheists have absolutely no inclination to attack people who profess religious belief. If anything, they are amused by the "believers" and find them a bit of a novelty. Much like an adult who encounters a child believing in Santa or the Easter Bunny. There is no harm to the adult in such beliefs, the adult knows these are not real entities, and it's simply an amusement to them. In fact, they may even 'play along' with the idea, just in the name of fun. What does it hurt? No, you don't see hoards of smart-assed punks at the mall where Santa visits, ridiculing and belittling the people standing in line to see him. Message boards aren't clogged up with degenerate misfits decrying the belief of a giant bunny who brings candy and hides eggs, because it doesn't really matter to anyone that some people entertain this notion.

Oh but it's because those are just kids, Boss! Well okay, let's take the thousands of nutty conspiracy theories out there. Do you see any evidence of people devoting every waking hour to go on message boards and forums to "inform" these people how they are crazy and misinformed? Nope. It doesn't matter. As long as you know something is too far-fetched to be true, you could care less what other people think. If someone wants to think Elvis is still alive on some remote island, what difference does that make to me? I might be inclined to casually comment that I don't believe it, but I am certainly not devoting the bulk of my energy and time online to categorically try and refute any inkling of thought pertaining to such a theory. And I am certainly not going to the extreme efforts to ridicule and insult the nuts who believe such theories. It's just not that important to me, nor to anyone else for that matter.

But with the God-haters and God, things are quite different. Although they claim to be Atheists or agnostics, my suspicion is they are anything but. It appears they are devout believers in God, who fully understand the power of God and how much God influences others who believe in Him. To put it in simple terms, they fear God. They are afraid if they do not stand up and fight God with all their might, God may become a bigger influence and that wouldn't be good for them, for whatever reason.

Most of the time, these reasons center around that person's life choices. They have totally abandoned the God they very much believe in, so they can be unaccountable for their moral behaviors. As long as there is "no god" to judge them, they can do whatever they please and there are no consequences. It's important that we understand, any time someone is doing something immoral or wrong, they had rather have company. This provides a codependency, a way they can somehow justify their behavior to themselves.

So this is why the God-haters persist on message boards and forums, to 'recruit' people over to their way of thinking. They believe they can ridicule and cajole people into being ashamed of their beliefs and those people will ultimately join their faction. If nothing else, it is 'therapeutic' for them to vent their anger and vitriol toward the God they know is real, and they are almost certain to meet up with others who are doing the same thing.

Now a normal person who didn't believe in or have any interest in something would not seek it out. I have no interest in NASCAR, and I certainly do not go out of my way to bombard people who do like it with negativity as that would be pointless. What you are seeing is that these people are wound collectors which involves "... the conscious and systematic collection and preservation of transgressions, violations, social wrongs, grievances, injustice, unfair treatment, or slights of self and others, for the purpose of attenuating, nourishing, fortifying, or justifying a malignant ideology, furthering hatred, satisfying a pathology, or for exacting revenge." (Wound Collectors | Psychology Today).

Hope that helps answer your question.

Sam

Why would atheists not have any interest in religion? Just because they don't believe in something doesn't mean they shouldn't question why others do, or worry about possible repercussions of people believing (think radical Islamic terrorism).

Your sports analogy is actually pretty funny to me, because it is, like religion and politics, a subject that many people actually do get aggressive and rude about when talking of sports they don't like. There's been more than one thread on this board in that vein.

 

[HUGGY]

In response to your sig line. A note worth noting...

Not everyone that rejects the myths and groupthink of religion came to this from some trauma encountered in youth or at the hand of relatives. Some of us have just observed fairly and truly and come to the most rational conclusion we could.

The anger ...yes anger fueling mine and others argument is mostly from the defense of our well thought out position. I just don't see any justice resulting from giving liars and fools a pass on something so fundamental.

Hi Huggy:
Yes a lot of people abuse either religious or political groups as cults.

But that doesn't mean these systems can't be used for good.

Lots of people use religious and political organizing for useful outreach
to help people otherwise abused.

I see religions as "languages" for the laws to organize ppl in groups.
So the right leaders can keep the members in line, similar to states in the
union under local laws of the counties and cities to reach all people and levels of society.

Also, Huggy the best way to check against religious abuses
is to work WITHIN that group using their language and laws.

When used correctly each system checks itself.
You are right, that all systems get abused by exploiting cult mentality,
fear and division. The best way to counteract is not to play on these fears and divisions,
and they can be overcome so ppl are no longer manipulated, not even us looking on.

I view "working within" a group of people so totally vacant of personal responsibility in seeing the simple truth to be beyond creepy.

The communication gymnastics I would have to go through would give me a permanent headache.

Sure ... some of these organizations are capable of addressing some of the worlds problems ... especially if they can take advantage of others fears and just bad luck and recruit the needy to god as an entity that will solve all of their problems.

Maybe for some it makes more sense to at least get something to eat or a blanket after a flood or some disaster in exchange for the luxury of a free will.

We here in the USA are indeed a very special group of people that have the freedom to think and speak whatever we believe....or what we do not believe.

 

[koshergrl]

Time to smoke a bowl huggster.

 

[HUGGY]

Time to smoke a bowl huggster.

Why do you think they call it dope?

Pot just makes me dumber than I already am... no thanks.

 

[sameech]

Why would atheists not have any interest in religion? Just because they don't believe in something doesn't mean they shouldn't question why others do, or worry about possible repercussions of people believing (think radical Islamic terrorism).

Your sports analogy is actually pretty funny to me, because it is, like religion and politics, a subject that many people actually do get aggressive and rude about when talking of sports they don't like. There's been more than one thread on this board in that vein.

Because there is a difference between someone who is an atheist and someone who uses that as a curtain to hide behind in their compulsion to be hateful and obnoxious to others.

--Sam

 

[Boss]

Because what is "real" isn't a choice.
It simply is.

But what is "real" is also not confined to only things that have been discovered through science. If that were true, we could simply pack up science and send her off to the Smithsonian. There is no more use for it if everything is known and all has been discovered and nothing else is "real" ...which IS your position.

Whether it is "real" or not, or whether physical sciences can confirm and verify it, literally billions and billions of human beings profoundly believe they have connected with something beyond the physical. It is SO ingrained into who we are that a noted psychiatrist once said, "If God didn't exist, man would have to create Him."

So is it not "real" because physical science (to date) hasn't confirmed it? Did Jupiter exist before we confirmed it? Did the principles of electromagnetism not exist until we discovered them? Was the fact that we considered it a "spiritual" thing a reason to dismiss it and not explore it further? You see, you have adopted this closed-minded and ignorant approach to spirituality. You want to dismiss it as impossible or not "real" because you don't have evidence right now. Thank GOD scientists from the past had more courage.

Einstein found the proposition of a personal god silly, and so do I.

You should shut up quoting (or rather, misquoting) Einstein. He never said or inferred that he believed the proposition of a personal god was silly. NEVER SAID IT! He very much left the question on the table and made NO judgement on the matter. IF he believed as you claim, he would have certainly never stated "God doesn't roll the dice!" It makes absolutely NO logical sense for someone to invoke the name of something they consider "silly" to support their theory. He also expressed regrets that his words had been taken out of context by idiots like you to claim he was some sort of Atheist. He was first and foremost a scientist, and as such, his objective view was agnostic from a science perspective and context. Now, for some odd reason, we seem to have a crop of morons here who want to combine "agnosticism" with "atheism" and claim some kind of Agnostic Atheism, which simply doesn't exist. ....In other words, it's not "real!"

 

[Steven_R]

Again, we could see evidence of all those things long before they were described in the literature. We could see Jupiter in the night sky. We could see lightning and felt a shock when touching doorknobs. Occasionally fishermen would bring up something strange. There was the evidence of something in front of us.

There is zero evidence for the supernatural or spiritual realm. There is literally nothing for us to examine, even if it does exist because it doesn't intersect with whatever naturalistic plane of existence the universe is a part of.

 

[GISMYS]

The knowledge of GOD is programed into our DNA, mankind all over the world have a natural knowing that there is GOD,But many allow satan to blind them to truth!!!and you??

 

[Steven_R]

The knowledge of GOD is programed into our DNA, mankind all over the world have a natural knowing that there is GOD,But many allow satan to blind them to truth!!!and you??

Me? Waiting for concrete proof.

I brought a bagged lunch because I think I'll be waiting a while.

 

[GISMYS]

The knowledge of GOD is programed into our DNA, mankind all over the world have a natural knowing that there is GOD,But many allow satan to blind them to truth!!!and you??

Me? Waiting for concrete proof.

I brought a bagged lunch because I think I'll be waiting a while.

YOU DO HAVE CONCRETE PROOF!! You have the entire universe and life as proof of GOD!!! What kind of blinded fool needs more??????

 

[koshergrl]

Time to smoke a bowl huggster.

Why do you think they call it dope?

Pot just makes me dumber than I already am... no thanks.

Snoop's getting used to his little bro.

 

[GISMYS]

Could it be you choose to not believe in GOD because you love living in your sinful lifestyle and fear that when you find that GOD is real you know you will face judgment???????????===================BELIEVERS! know and expect to be attacked if you post GOD'S WORD=ETERNAL TRUTH. Unbelievers and false religious minions of satan hate GOD and GOD'S WORD = ETERNAL TRUTH. Against JESUS They screamed and gnashed their teeth crying ban him from the temple,then CRUCIFY HIM!!! CRUCIFY HIM!! Pilate knew JESUS was inocent but he wanted to please the people,so he washed his hands and said ," you crucify him but I find him inocent"!!! ==The world hates you, you know that it has hated Me before it hated you. 19"If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, because of this the world hates you.. John 15:18