Why do the God-haters persist?

[Montrovant]

Well we all have our personal beliefs. That's neither here nor there. Giving someone a choice and explaining that you think that behaving in a certain way will not benefit them is not the same as telling them what to do. It's simply giving them the option of doing the right thing.

Telling someone what to do, in our language, is giving an order. Not a choice.

Telling someone what they should do, however, is not an order.

When you tell someone they will experience some terrible consequence if they do not behave in a certain way, that is, IMO, telling them what they should do. They certainly retain the choice as to whether or not to actually do it, it isn't an order, but it gets the point across that they ought to.

 

[thebrucebeat]

You are engaged in your own conversation, with yourself. Carry on, since you aren't capable of intelligently discussing the topic.

How would you know?
You are too afraid to discuss the topic at all.
I think my questions go to the heart of the hypocrisy of the faith, and you are its standard bearer.
You go hide from me if you like, but if you really believe in the god and Jesus of scripture, and think Paul was a reliable preacher, ask yourself why you piss in Paul's eye, and refuse to deal with the plank in you own eye before scratching at the splinter in your neighbor's. Running from me is easy, and well documented now, but if your god is real, can you run from him?
You should hope so.
As for this being a monologue, each of my posts address one of yours. You may have nothing interesting to say, I grant you. But you are in the conversation and can't avoid responding.

 

[thebrucebeat]

When you assume someone lies because you cannot comprehend a person behaving in an irrational fashion, arguing a point that isn't directly important to them, etc. would be a more accurate description. This is especially funny as I have not claimed to be an atheist, unless it is using the definition of simply not believing in any god. I don't deny the possibility of a god or gods. Of course, you have claimed that I actually do deny the possibility.....which is hilarious since you appear to be saying that I am one of your 'god-haters'. Obviously both of these things can't be true, but don't let the contradictory nature of your posts bother you!

I don't doubt that there are some people who believe in god but say they do not. I do not, however, accept argumentative and insulting behavior on a message board, a place well known for that kind of behavior in just about any discussion, as evidence a person is lying when they say they don't believe.

In fairness, if you don't believe in any god you are an atheist. The fact that you are also an agnostic and realize that you can't absolutely know that is the case is incidental. Not believing in any god is the very definition of atheism. Agnosticism is the realization that being able to actually know the truth of that is unavailable to you.
You are both.

I try to be clear about the definition of atheism I am using since, in my experience, people often argue about atheists while operating under different definitions of the word.

So yes, not believing in a god is perhaps the dictionary definition of atheism, but in common use, it is often a person who denies any god could exist.

We have to agree to disagree. I think the more common usage is simply not believing in a deity.

 

[BreezeWood]

other than their not building a car why is it necessary to distinguish a difference specifically to humanity ? - "we require consistent maintenance of spiritual fidelity" - "fidelity" ? are you saying they have no Spirit at all ?

No, Breeze, that doesn't appear to be remotely close to what I said. What is the problem here with people having to create completely different things for what others actually post?

"I believe the sky is blue!" ..."What? Are you saying you don't believe ice cream is delicious?" I mean, come on now man, really? Why has this grown to an epidemic in this thread? Where could you possibly get from the use of the word "fidelity" as applied to human spirit, that I am somehow saying humans don't have spirits?

Other than not building cars, there about a billion things that humans can do which no other living creature is capable of doing. Do I need to compile a complete list of those things or do you think it may be possible to stop being an obtuse nitwit for a hot second?

Humans, through our ability to spiritually connect, obtain inspiration through faith in a power greater than self. We can rationalize these inspirations to achieve things we dream possible, other animals simply seem to lack this ability. Horses, dogs, cats, pigs and goats, don't study mathematics and send their species to the moon... humans do.

B: Where could you possibly get from the use of the word "fidelity" as applied to human spirit, that I am somehow saying humans don't have spirits?

I derived from that, you were saying nothing else in "Nature" has a Spirit, not humans - otherwise if your quote is a misprint and you meant Nature, I would suggest obligations, duties, and observances outweigh "worship" handsdown.

Humans, through our ability to spiritually connect, obtain inspiration through faith in a power greater than self. We can rationalize these inspirations to achieve things we dream possible, other animals simply seem to lack this ability. Horses, dogs, cats, pigs and goats, don't study mathematics and send their species to the moon... humans do.

the smoking Gun -


Humans, through our ability to spiritually connect, obtain inspiration through faith in a power greater than self.

since you are using the plural Humans can you cite a period in "Human" history that is void of self ? of course the history of Nature is the exact opposite, no self exists.


We can rationalize these inspirations to achieve things we dream possible, other animals simply seem to lack this ability.

it is not out of the question that Nature could chose to manufacture a product it is not an indictment that that has not occurred, except the narrowness of perspective as what is Spiritual. - so far only your Humanity is threatening Gods Creation with the A-Bomb.


Horses, dogs, cats, pigs and goats, don't study mathematics and send their species to the moon... humans do.

is that a joke, T-Rex is extinct, it did not destroy the planet before it left, you on the otherhand are accomplishing the feat in a facet of multiple fronts ... and are perhaps to late to stop.


Spiritual Nature is just that - from Nature.

.

 

[Ronin]

IMHO there is a difference between having disdain for a perception of God (or a God) and taking the Bible or Koran as absolute reality. Is there anything which has ironically caused more war and human suffering than religion?

 

[GISMYS]

WHY BE A TOOL AND FOOR FOR satan??? Only fools say in their hearts,
“There is no God.”
They are corrupt, and their actions are evil;
not one of them does good! Psalm 53:1

 

[koshergrl]

IMHO there is a difference between having disdain for a perception of God (or a God) and taking the Bible or Koran as absolute reality. Is there anything which has ironically caused more war and human suffering than religion?

Yes..state embraced atheism.

 

[MrMax]

IMHO there is a difference between having disdain for a perception of God (or a God) and taking the Bible or Koran as absolute reality. Is there anything which has ironically caused more war and human suffering than religion?

Yes..state embraced atheism.

Not even close.

 

[MrMax]

other than their not building a car why is it necessary to distinguish a difference specifically to humanity ? - "we require consistent maintenance of spiritual fidelity" - "fidelity" ? are you saying they have no Spirit at all ?

No, Breeze, that doesn't appear to be remotely close to what I said. What is the problem here with people having to create completely different things for what others actually post?

"I believe the sky is blue!" ..."What? Are you saying you don't believe ice cream is delicious?" I mean, come on now man, really? Why has this grown to an epidemic in this thread? Where could you possibly get from the use of the word "fidelity" as applied to human spirit, that I am somehow saying humans don't have spirits?

Other than not building cars, there about a billion things that humans can do which no other living creature is capable of doing. Do I need to compile a complete list of those things or do you think it may be possible to stop being an obtuse nitwit for a hot second?

Humans, through our ability to spiritually connect, obtain inspiration through faith in a power greater than self. We can rationalize these inspirations to achieve things we dream possible, other animals simply seem to lack this ability. Horses, dogs, cats, pigs and goats, don't study mathematics and send their species to the moon... humans do.

And other species can do things that humans can't do. It's called evolution, you should try it sometime.

 

[ScienceRocks]

There's no evidence and science explains it better...

 

[Boss]

And other species can do things that humans can't do. It's called evolution, you should try it sometime.

LMFAO... You just get more stupid the more you talk. Humans can't evolve now? What about the midgets of the 1750s evolving into tall people? That was yesterday you made that irrational claim!

 

[Boss]

There's no evidence and science explains it better...

LOL... Science doesn't explain it at all.

 

[MrMax]

And other species can do things that humans can't do. It's called evolution, you should try it sometime.

LMFAO... You just get more stupid the more you talk. Humans can't evolve now? What about the midgets of the 1750s evolving into tall people? That was yesterday you made that irrational claim!

You must have misread my post, that's not what I said at all. And you were complaining about how posters here misinterpret posts for their own agenda, lol!

People over time have been getting taller, it's a fact called evolution. What's so hard to grasp. You know, Phd and all?

 

[PostmodernProph]

IMHO there is a difference between having disdain for a perception of God (or a God) and taking the Bible or Koran as absolute reality. Is there anything which has ironically caused more war and human suffering than religion?

Yes..state embraced atheism.

Not even close.

actually, I think if you add Mao and Stalin together they outnumber everything else combined.....

 

[thebrucebeat]

Yes..state embraced atheism.

Not even close.

actually, I think if you add Mao and Stalin together they outnumber everything else combined.....

I think if you take God alone and add up his mass genocides and the sufferings and plagues He has wrought according to scripture it isn't even a fair fight.
He would be far and away the heavyweight champion of slaughter and destruction.
Everyone else would just be trying to catch up with the champ!

 

[koshergrl]

IMHO there is a difference between having disdain for a perception of God (or a God) and taking the Bible or Koran as absolute reality. Is there anything which has ironically caused more war and human suffering than religion?

Yes..state embraced atheism.

Not even close.

"
Is a 58 percent chance that an atheist leader will murder a noticeable percentage of the population over which he rules sufficient evidence that atheism does, in fact, provide a systematic influence to do bad things? If that is not deemed to be conclusive, how about the fact that the average atheist crime against humanity is 18.3 million percent worse than the very worst depredation committed by Christians, even though atheists have had less than one-twentieth the number of opportunities with which to commit them. If one considers the statistically significant size of the historical atheist set and contrasts it with the fact that not one in a thousand religious leaders have committed similarly large-scale atrocities, it is impossible to conclude otherwise, even if we do not yet understand exactly why this should be the case. Once might be an accident, even twice could be coincidence, but fifty-two incidents in ninety years reeks of causation![10]

Atheism and Mass Murder - Conservapedia

 

[PostmodernProph]

Not even close.

actually, I think if you add Mao and Stalin together they outnumber everything else combined.....

I think if you take God alone and add up his mass genocides and the sufferings and plagues He has wrought according to scripture it isn't even a fair fight.
He would be far and away the heavyweight champion of slaughter and destruction.
Everyone else would just be trying to catch up with the champ!

/shrugs....yes, but that's just because you're making things up........

 

[thebrucebeat]

actually, I think if you add Mao and Stalin together they outnumber everything else combined.....

I think if you take God alone and add up his mass genocides and the sufferings and plagues He has wrought according to scripture it isn't even a fair fight.
He would be far and away the heavyweight champion of slaughter and destruction.
Everyone else would just be trying to catch up with the champ!

/shrugs....yes, but that's just because you're making things up........

Not at all. All documented in your scripture. You can look it up if you like.

 

[Boss]

I think if you take God alone and add up his mass genocides and the sufferings and plagues He has wrought according to scripture it isn't even a fair fight.
He would be far and away the heavyweight champion of slaughter and destruction.
Everyone else would just be trying to catch up with the champ!

But then, God also created Mao and Stalin, (and everyone else) so God is ultimately responsible for who they killed too. We should just hate God for creating humans at all. This world would have been a much better place without humans.

 

[thebrucebeat]

I think if you take God alone and add up his mass genocides and the sufferings and plagues He has wrought according to scripture it isn't even a fair fight.
He would be far and away the heavyweight champion of slaughter and destruction.
Everyone else would just be trying to catch up with the champ!

But then, God also created Mao and Stalin, (and everyone else) so God is ultimately responsible for who they killed too. We should just hate God for creating humans at all. This world would have been a much better place without humans.

God is responsible for the whole mess of human suffering, if you accept the god premise.
Totally agree.