one or two of you have noticed that i use derogatory terms when talking about matters religion.
i offer no apology.
you do, however, deserve an explanation.. my father, bless him and now dead, was a survivor of belsen, the german concentration camp.
Nuance.
Point taken. And, I personally do not engage in name calling. However, JWs call me "mentally diseased". Where is the nuance in that?
one or two of you have noticed that i use derogatory terms when talking about matters religion.
i offer no apology.
you do, however, deserve an explanation.. my father, bless him and now dead, was a survivor of belsen, the german concentration camp.
Good post.
On a side note, here are some epithets used by Jesus:
The guy had a mouth on him...
the problem of perfection(ism).
the best piece of advice i got was from my art teacher, aubrey mayhew.he told me, "art isn't about 'getting it right.
' it's about your mistaken views which you give yourself permission to explore.".
Good post. I am constantly reminded of the quote "A painting is never finished - it simply stops in interesting places." Paul Gardner.
On a side note, it was the JW's obsession with perfection that kept me from going back after I was DF'ed. When I was kicked out I felt so guilty and ashamed of not being "perfect" that I felt I was not worthy of being allowed back into the Organization and deserved having Jehovah kill me at Armageddon. In those early years of being out I had enough distance and time to develop a new perspective, learn to embrace being an imperfect human, and leave the JWs behind for good. Ironically, in my case, the JWs may have done too much of a good job in demanding perfection.
the reason i entitled this "problems with common atheist arguments" instead of "the case against atheism" is that many atheists claim that atheism is not a belief system, makes no claims, and has no requirements to follow, so there's no way to argue against atheism itself.
i will go along with this idea, and argue against the most frequently used arguments of atheists instead of atheism itself.disclaimer # 1: this is not an argument against atheism or all atheists.
no, rather this is an argument against the most frequently used claims and arguments made by the atheists i speak to on twitter.
FusionTheism - Many atheist arguments boil down to this (once you remove all the fancy words and hyperbole):
1:) I don't like the idea of God.
2:) I don't like the Bible.
3:) I hate the morals found in the Bible.
4:) I believe you should only accept science, even though I accept other things in my life.
Fixed...
Many atheist arguments boil down to this (once you remove all the fancy words and hyperbole):
1:) I have not been provided good evidence that there is a God (or any other deity).
The rest are not particular with atheism, but may be responses to theist arguments to their propositions...
2:) I have not been provided good evidence that the Bible (or any other holy book) is the unerring word of God (or any other deity).
3:) I find many of the morals of the Bible to be questionable if not immoral ((e.g. slavery, subjugation of women, treatment of gays, etc.) by modern standards
4:) The scientific method is the best process we currently have for understanding our universe. But I need not apply the scientific method in every facet in my life (e.g. My girlfriend loves me and I need not squeeze her into an FMRI machine to validate that)
i have no problem saying atheists and christians are equal.. but some people seem to have the belief that atheists are more likely to be morally good, or more likely to change the world for good, than christians and theists.. but what evidence do you have to support this claim?.
if atheism is what causes people to do great positive things for the world, then why weren't martin luther king, jr., william wilberforce, isaac newton, francis collins, barack obama, mother theresa, abraham lincoln, or john f. kennedy atheists?.
I have no problem saying atheists and Christians are EQUAL.
Not sure what you mean by "EQUAL". I am assuming you mean that "atheists and Christians" are two groups that are both "equally"capable of good and bad. If that is the case, sure, I'll play along.
But some people seem to have the belief that atheists are MORE likely to be morally good, or MORE likely to change the world for good, than Christians and theists.
But what evidence do you have to support this claim?
I am an atheist, and I do not make the claim that an atheist is likely to do more good than a Christian. Other atheists may disagree.
What I would claim is that a person that is a <insert preferred religion here> that gets their marching orders from <insert preferred deity here> from their <insert preferred holy book here> and follows unquestioningly, is likely to do more bad. And, if people can't grasp that by looking at history and current events, I don't know what to tell you.
If atheism is what causes people to do great positive things for the world...
I do not agree with that proposition. Atheism, again, is not a world-view or a religion, etc. All it tells you is what I don't believe in on a very specific issue (i.e. God's existence). It does not tell you anything about my morality, what I fight for (e.g. social equality), how I make decisions (e.g. critical thinking), or inform you on my motivations for doing "good" or "bad", or tell you what is my favorite flavor of ice cream, etc.
..., then why weren't Martin Luther King, Jr., William Wilberforce, Isaac Newton, Francis Collins, Barack Obama, Mother Theresa, Abraham Lincoln, or John F. Kennedy atheists?
So, should my response be a long list of non-Christian believers and atheists, and then debate who has the longer list or who has better/more famous people in it? In reality, I don't know why any of the above were not professed atheists. If I could answer that I would probably have the cure for religion.
in our super cappy fallacious public talk today.
i kept hearing "we do jehovahs will" "do jehovahs will" "not our will...jehovahs" there was a lot of crap in the talk to be irritated by.
but this got me thinking.... if you are required under penalty of death!
paradise earth after god kills all non jws.
paradise earth after god kills all non jws.
paradise earth after god kills all non jws.
interesting theory i thought on stephen lett.
if anything i would of thought tomo3 would of caused them more grief with his comments.. http://insidethewatchtower.com/governing-body/stephen-lett-dumped-from-governing-body/.
Vidiot - Now I have this bizarre image stuck in my head of the GB as an aging, over-the-hill boy-band.
Then my work here is done...
"We all live in a yellow submarine, yellow submarine, yellow submarine..."
it is time for christians to accept evolution, in my opinion.. there are many reasons why i think it is long overdue for all christians to finally accept what science says about evolution.
below i will show these reasons.. .
the bible tells people to pay attention to nature to see the glory of god (psalm 19; romans 1:19-20).
FusionTheism - Atheists WANT the Bible to be interpreted literally so they can have something to attack.
I am an atheist, and it is not that I "WANT the Bible to be interpreted literally". It is that I am not arrogant enough to think I know what God (if he exists) may have meant or is thinking. Instead, I listen to a number of interpretations from theists. What I find is that the number of divergent interpretations (and denominations) leads me to believe that the Bible does not seem to have a clear objective mechanism that can be used to determine what is an allegory and what is not.
Historically, it seems to me that often an idea in the Bible is treated as literal up until the point that science, history, or modernity have left the claim no wiggle room, then "voila", it becomes an allegory. If the Bible is the vehicle for God to communicate with humans, it would seem to me that having it open to interpretation is a recipe for disaster.
So, that begs the question, other than personal interpretation, what exactly is the objective process to determine what should or should not be taken literally, or seriously, or relevant in the Bible?
interesting theory i thought on stephen lett.
if anything i would of thought tomo3 would of caused them more grief with his comments.. http://insidethewatchtower.com/governing-body/stephen-lett-dumped-from-governing-body/.
