Why are atheists so intent on scorning "believers"?

by Chariklo 553 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  snare&racket

  you are a sneaky devil, you claim that atheists would need a physical apperance of god to believe in him.....

  once again thanks for soeaking on behalf of millios of people. Of course you are wrong. I have never seen a quark, but I knw they exist, I have seen the theory, the testing methods and the results.

  I dont believe in god, not because he hasnt waved at me... But because I have researched the history of his creation in civilisation, i have read the very human development of god, tarnished in selfish and political motive. I have researched the history of biblical texts I once held holy and now hold fanciful. I have researched the long history of human gods, monotheism, namely Yahweh being one of the last gods humans came up with, of course in ancient Greece the latest and last was Zeus... Before you claim relevance in Yahweh being ONE of the latter gods invented. Its not significant its a consequence of our time on earth, 2012 AD when much of the west believes in a god called YHWH and most in the east worship a dude called ALLAH.

  DO YOU KNOW ALL THE THINGS I KNOW ABOUT THE EVIDENCE AGAINST A BELIEF IN GOD......NOPE!

  AFTER. 20 YEARS AS A JW DO I KNOW ALL YOUR EVIDENCE FOR A BELIEF IN GOD..............WHat do you think? ( rhetorical)

  Final comment on this baited trap of a thread....its more a hint about thinking before you speak, with regard to your ideas about us ...

  Would you dare say the ludicrous comment that for santa deniers the only way theyd believe in him, was to see him! ...... Well duh.... But that is NOT why every individual that doesnt believe in santa denies his existance.... Its about the evidence of the suggestion of his existence too. The history of santa, the stories of santa, the hard evidence of santa...etc etc etc.. With regard to your god... It is exactly the same!

  snare x
• 

  rather be in hades

  that'd be up for "god" to decide if he actually wanted humans to know of his presence. so far, over thousands of years, he's been pretty silent wouldn't you say? kinda strange considering the stakes. actually, really strange considering the whole..."soul" business.

  all i can say is that if the rapture or a miracle happened, scientists would apply the scientific method and i described in detail how would look.

  the bible i find is interesting.

  there's the example of thomas who doubted and got his evidence. why not the rest of us?

  there's the pharisees, who saw, but didn't want to believe. that's more or less how i view believers.

  the evidence is there, you just don't wnt to believe for whatever reason.

  there's no proof of god, yet lots of proof that man made god up.when you combine all the evidence from archaeology, anthropology, etc...it all adds up.

  the evidence is there, you just don't want to believe it.

  well, god supposedly shouted in a market place, physically passed over mt sinai, led the israeiltes out of egypt through the red sea, provided them manna for 40 years, slaughtered untold thousands in their name, destroyed a couple cities with fireballs, ressurected the dead what...7 times???, cured however many sick, fed thousands with a couple loaves and some fish, swallowed people whole with earthquakes and a fish...you know...i'd take any one of those.

  some good ol' noncoincidental evidence that everyone can examine for themselves.

  did you skip the stuff regarding the development of religion? i just can't take your claims seriously. you say you studied math and science, but couldn't figure out how an atheist would investigate a miracle?

  in fact, after all of this, i think you guys turned me into an atheist. the lack of willingness to seriously examine physical evidence and the total misunderstanding of the scientific method, coupled with the totally bonkers method of looking to prove god's existence rather than observing the evidence and drawing conclusions is just too much
• 

  Christ Alone

  Dawkins redefined the term. You won't find Dawkins definition in any dictionary. At least that I've seen.

  Dictionary.com:

  atheist

  a·the·ist

  a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.

  Miriam Webster degines atheism as:

  athe·ism

  Definition of ATHEISM

  1 archaic : ungodliness, wickedness 2 a : a disbelief in the existence of deity b : the doctrine that there is no deity

  b : the doctrine that there is no deity
• 

  Christ Alone

  you are a sneaky devil, you claim that atheists would need a physical apperance of god to believe in him.....

  Not necessarily. I'm asking what would be proof enough to believe in a higher intelligence? I've asked it over and over again. It's just been ignored in favor of something that I've said that can be picked on.

  I said that I don't see most atheists believing in a diety short of a physical appearance. But then I asked YOU ATHEISTS, "What would it take?"

  But of course, the question was ignored and instead the comment before was picked on and the question was left unanaswered.
• 

  EntirelyPossible

  Rather be in hades among others. It's a common fallacy that some atheists use when out of ideas. Or the other fallacy is "Why don't you just go read some science and get back with me."

  Niether of those is a fallacy. If you are making assertions about untestable, unprovable, unseen creature, it's exactly the same as other unseen, untestable, unprovable creatures.

  If you constantly get science wrong, it's not a fallacy to suggest you read up on it.
• 

  Christ Alone

  AFTER. 20 YEARS AS A JW DO I KNOW ALL YOUR EVIDENCE FOR A BELIEF IN GOD..............WHat do you think?

  I don't think you do! My beliefs and evidences are COMPLETELY different than when I was a JW. So it looks like we both assumed something wrong, you sneaky devil! :-) You know all about me, but I know nothing about you. I have not researched what you have researched regarding disbelief in God. Neither of us know what either of us have read or researched.

  And yet, the best line of argument is to resort back to the "prove santa exists" line of thinking. Weak, dude. Weak.
• 

  still thinking

  Where does it say 100%?

  And I find it curious that it uses the word 'denies' in that definition of an atheist.

  de·ny /di'ni/

  Verb:

  Refuse to admit the truth or existence of (something). Refuse to give (something requested or desired) to (someone).

  Seems a bit biased to me....ROFL
• 

  elderelite

  i say the following as someone who has no belief in a specific god other than Thor (just watched avengers on blue ray... AWESOME!!!!!)

  Its all ego. Really. ITs all peoples attempt to show how superior THEIR belief system is, be it God or No God, may be a god or definatly maybe not a god possibly. Its all ego. The back and forth and the 'oh if only i explain it this way or that way' and the 'oh im so clever im the first person in history to ever theorize about god this way or that way'... its all self serving ego driven bull crap.

  When people REALLY believe something they arnt dissuaded by one view point or another easily, they are secure in what they think and believe. That sense of security in ones view point leads to easy going conversations that dont stink like week old fish left on a radiator. Yes emotions come into play of course, but really so much of this is the ego's need to convince someone else that we are right in our view point and the sense of affirmation that comes from having convinced someone else of it.

  Its all reminiscent of some stupid thug who got a gun and feels the need to wave it around to prove hes a big man, or some teenage girl who devlops nubs of breasts and wears cloths three sizes to small to show them off, of a body builder wearing some ridiculous tight shirt to flex in.....

  The reality is conversations and challenging each others beliefs is GOOD. we learn and grow and are forced to consider our own positions.

  What is going on here off and on for the past few months isnt even kindergarten sandbox stuff. Kindergarten sandbox stuff ends at some point because even little kids get tired of it. So far it hasnt grown old here. I truly and sincerely hope every last one of "us" ( i will include myself being guilty as I know i am) will get the hell over it all soon, learn to have rational discussions that challenge ideas and not take everything so goddamn personal.

  In other words, i hope we learn to STFU and learn to respectfully discuss and then accept others beliefs without feeling the need to 'kick at every barking dog'.
• 

  Chariklo

  Exactly.

  and utter one's point of view without scorn.
• 

  mrsjones5

  EE, especially the kindergarten/sandbox part.