Atheists Who Celebrate All The Good That God Causes.

Your earlier quote My view of "actual facts" is different than your view of "actual facts.

 

That's a good quote. It is very true and ties in with what I've been saying. Once you farm out your own sense of morality to another and equate good with obedience to that other, you have made yourself their weapon. And in the case where that other is an imaginary God, you've made yourself the weapon of anyone who can convince you that God wants you to do something heinous. That could be your own dark thoughts that you'd otherwise block or subdue when operating by your own moral compass. Or it may be a handler, priestess, rabi or Imam.

And it is why I asked JAG above something I don't expect he will dare answer. Is there anything he would refuse to do if he was convinced God wanted him to do it? Would he kill his child for God? Would he fly an airplane into a skyscraper for God? There were some muslims who answered yes.

 

Your earlier quote My view of "actual facts" is different than your view of "actual facts.

 

That is exactly right.
My view of "actual facts" is different from your view of "actual facts."
I explained that Christendom has scholars with PhD's from secular universities
that disagree with the scholars on your side of the debate about the historical
background of the Bible.
And I further explained with the following , ,

JAG Previously Wrote An Explanation To Trevorw
{1} I believe in keeping it simple.
{2} I believe Christianity is a Faith.
{3} I believe Christianity is true.
{4} Christianity is NOT an intellectualized philosophical system built on
Empiricism and Rationalism --- rather it is built upon Faith.
{5} So? So I look at the 66 books of the Protestant canon as being assembled
by the Providence of the Sovereign God. They are what God wanted us to have.
{6} So I disregard how the books were assembled because it does not matter
since I believe 1,2,3 4, 5 and 7
{7} I believe the finished product is all that matters and not how the finished
product was assembled or what sources were used to finish them.

________


You ignored this:

"Frankly I question his moral right to be listened to"___Trevorw

.
That is an attack on my character, isn't it?
Is that your way of saying that I am DISHONEST?
Is that your way of saying or suggesting that I am "not a good person"?


``

 

I really cannot be bothered to answer your imaginings, if you wish to discuss the odious homophobic Matt Slick and his vile beliefs rather than your "feelings" I will be only too happy to oblige but I would expect you to acknowledge your sources as per forum rules!

 

Yeah , ,let me give you a quote from The Guardian by the atheist Michael Ruse
on Richard Dawkins , , ,

"Second, unlike the new atheists, I take scholarship seriously. I have written
that The God Delusion made me ashamed to be an atheist and I meant it.
Trying to understand how God could need no cause, Christians claim that
God exists necessarily. I have taken the effort to try to understand what that
means. Dawkins and company are ignorant of such claims and positively
contemptuous of those who even try to understand them, let alone believe
them. Thus, like a first-year undergraduate, he can happily go around
asking loudly, "What caused God?" as though he had made some
momentous philosophical discovery. Dawkins was indignant when,
on the grounds that inanimate objects cannot have emotions,
philosophers like Mary Midgley criticised his metaphorical notion
of a selfish gene. Sauce for the biological goose is sauce for the
atheist gander. There are a lot of very bright and well informed
Christian theologians. We atheists should demand no less."___The atheist Michael Ruse

Writing in The Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2009/nov/02/atheism-dawkins-ruse

Also , ,
There is NOTHING within 21st century Christendom that encourages flying
airplanes into buildings. 21st Century Christendom is peaceful. But THAT
cannot be said for some of the atheist leaders of certain 21st Century nations
like North Korea and China who kill and imprison their own people. Clean up
your own backyard before you quote Christianity-Hater Dawkins against
Christianity.

Richard Dawkins is nothing to be proud of.



``

 

That is almost a British understatement!

Quite, he has again not addressed a single point I made other than to express his feelings. A simple, "sorry I will acknowledge my sources in future" would of sufficed.

Certainly it appears that objecting to discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation is for some christians attacking them. As is asking that only science be taught in science classes.

In the UK I would say the vast majority of Christians do not play the victim, indeed most are very pleasant to talk to even when discussing their religion.

 

False.
That's merely what YOU say . . .
You do not know what is in the minds and hearts of Christendom's
some 2.3 billion believers. Nor do you know what the future holds
by way of how many Christians there will be in the world say 1000
years from now --- or what they will believe about the Bible. You do
NOT know that and you can NOT know that.
Theism is projected to hit 5.7 billion by 2050 and that is going to be
a lot of Theists in the world. There are about 5 billion Theists in the world
right NOW and you do not know what they will end up believing. You
can NOT see into the far future and make accurate predictions
about any spiritual future realities.

JAG

 

Here is a set of love letters sent by religous fundamentalists to Dawkins, sorry about the language but religion does bring out the worst in people! Enjoy.

 

Do you have anything to say to refute the idea the Bible is a story book?

 

Your learning is from reading behind "scholars" who are
anti-Christian and are Christianity-Haters and God-haters.
You read behind people like the liberal Christianity-Hater
Bart Ehrman and I expect you have some of Richard
Dawkins books on hand to ---and some Sam Harris,
and some Daniel Dennett and the late Christopher Hitchens
too.
Based on what you post, its a safe bet that you do NOT get
both sides of the issue --- but just your liberal anti-Christianity
side of the issues. You can shine pretty good here in this
Forum surrounded by your "admiring atheist buddies"
who "cheer you on" and support your claims with
their "Thank you's" and supporting posts.
but I will tell you this: If you had to go "toe to toe"
in front of a live audience for 3 hours up against
say William Lane Craig and Alvin Plantinga you'd
find out right quick that your understanding of
historical Christianity and the historical background
of the Bible is not what you claim it is. They'd "hand
you your head" before those 3 hours were up -- and
you'd be howled out of the room.

JAG

PS
You can pretend that Christendom does not have highly qualified
scholars that have already refuted your false claims, but that does
not make your claims true.


``

 

Why when you have great philosophers like Oppy who debates Craig or Sean Carroll who gives Craig lessons on cosmology.

Why do you not defend your points rather than calling for the help of your "dad"?

As for Ehrman come up with one single quote that suggests he is a Christian Hater

Again you abuse people whilst crying about your feelings.

 

Whadda ya think about the following actual facts?

From The Guardian , , ,
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2009/nov/02/atheism-dawkins-ruse

Sayeth the atheist Michael Ruse , , ,

"But don't worry. In the God Delusion, we have a message
as simplistic as in The Genesis Flood. This too will solve
all of your problems. Peace and prosperity await you in
this world, if not the next.
Forgive me if I don't sign on."___The atheist Michael Ruse


"Fourth and finally, I live in the American South, surrounded by
ardent Christians. I want evolution taught in the schools and I
can think of no way better designed to make that impossible
than to spout on about religion, from ignorance and with
contempt.
And especially to make unsubstantiated arguments that
science refutes religion. I never conceal my nonbelief.
I defend to the death the right of the new atheists to their
views and to their right to propagate them. But that is no
excuse for political stupidity. If, as the new atheists think,
Darwinian evolutionary biology is incompatible with Christianity,
then will they give me a good argument as to why the science
should be taught in schools if it implies the falsity of religion?
The first amendment to the constitution of the United States of
America separates church and state. Why are their beliefs
exempt?"___The atheist Michael Ruse

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2009/nov/02/atheism-dawkins-ruse

JAG

 

What facts, that is an opinion piece?

 

I have to address this point, I explained to you I will debate your arguments not engage in personal comments with you as you like to do to others. I do not care about you just your arguments.

I never called you dishonest but I will now since you have made this dishonest claim, show where I called you dishonest, you will not because you cannot!

 

That's what you say. I can't make accurate predictions? Where did I make any.? You have done just what you say I cannot do.

You cannot see the future. You do not even know if the world will be here in 100 years time. I simply said that the Bible is being revealed as a storybook. Theism is projected to reach...... Who says? Figures mean nothing. Figures I've seen point to a decrease, mainly among the younger groups. Those supposed 5bn theists - many of them believe in a pantheon of gods simply because of their upbringing and culture. There's a possibility that those in the Pantheon were actually members of an advanced civilisation that disappeared for some unknown reason. But that's another subject. Church registers mean nothing. You're really out of touch with the general public. Ask most people and they will say they believe in a god. Ask what god means to them and they have never thought about it. It's just a idea in their mind. And when you part company they will never think of it again.

Islam is religion.
Tomas de Torquemada was a religious Priest. Nothing to boast about. Persecution of Christians in all countries who live according to their feelings. Christianity claims it is the only truth. Islam does the same. So do others. Most religions are started by a person who claims to have received a message from god in some form. Odd how god talks differently to different people.

 

No.
You are.

You don't know that.
That's pure personal opinion.
You have no more idea what "most people" believe about God
than does The Man In The Moon.

Give some serious thought to this:

?I will tell you this: If you had to go "toe to toe"
in front of a live audience for 3 hours up against
say William Lane Craig and Alvin Plantinga you'd
find out right quick that your understanding of
historical Christianity and the historical background
of the Bible is not what you claim it is. They'd "hand
you your head" before those 3 hours were up -- and
you'd be howled out of the room"___JAG


``

 

That is incorrect.
The three Abrahamic religions are:
Christianity
Islam
Judaism
They are all Theists and Theists by definition believe in just one God.

Try to tell me something that is better than that.
i am reading only your posts so make it interesting.

JAG

 

All of the biblical stories illustrate one or more of the real Ten Commandments found in Exodus 34:11-28 or Exodus 34:10, which is the basis for the miracles. Consequently, the stories don't have to make logical sense because they are really just mnemonic devices to quiz the listener or reader which of the Ten Commandments the story is about. The purpose of the stories is to teach complete loyalty and obedience to the Boss (God, the chief priest, the emperor, king, family father).

 

False assumption.
Why would I want to read their bile and venom and hate?
I have read tons of that garbage on the Internet. Its boring
and totally predictable and can be summed up in just a very
few bilious hate-filled sentences. You know what they are
too. All it is, is emotion-based VICIOUS HATRED that falsely
claims to be logical and intellectual. Its intellectualized-HATE
disguised as intellectualism. All ya gotta do is read just a very
few pages of the little puny god Dawkins' The God Delusion
and you've "got it all" There is nothing interesting or intellectual
about bile, venom, loathing, rage, tantrums, hissy fits,
accusations, mockery, ridicule and vicious HATE. Why would
I want to read that garbage over and over again? I do not want
to read it and I will not read that rubbish. I scroll past it. Also I am
pretty sure that this thread has come to an end --- otherwise I would
put all of the "little angry band of atheists" on Ignore and not just on
my Mental Ignore List where I have them now.

JAG

PS

I guess this is "goodbye" , , cool , , , and tooodle dooo , , , and good luck
with the Pope --

I leave you with this thought:

I give you a quote from The Guardian by the atheist Michael Ruse
on Richard Dawkins , , ,

"Second, unlike the new atheists, I take scholarship seriously. I have written
that The God Delusion made me ashamed to be an atheist and I meant it.
Trying to understand how God could need no cause, Christians claim that
God exists necessarily. I have taken the effort to try to understand what that
means. Dawkins and company are ignorant of such claims and positively
contemptuous of those who even try to understand them, let alone believe
them. Thus, like a first-year undergraduate, he can happily go around
asking loudly, "What caused God?" as though he had made some
momentous philosophical discovery. Dawkins was indignant when,
on the grounds that inanimate objects cannot have emotions,
philosophers like Mary Midgley criticised his metaphorical notion
of a selfish gene. Sauce for the biological goose is sauce for the
atheist gander. There are a lot of very bright and well informed
Christian theologians. We atheists should demand no less."___The atheist Michael Ruse

Writing in The Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2009/nov/02/atheism-dawkins-ruse

JAG

``

 

I invite readers to go back over this thread and look at the posts to see where all the hate etc, has come from...........................................................

 

Indeed. I do as well. I hope JAG finds peace of mind one day, even if he finds it by hiding behind his religion. Its rare that I encounter one so insular and passive aggressive.

 

I went ahead and read the article by Michael Ruse that JAG linked us to. I am left wondering if JAG has actually read and thought about what Ruse wrote and if he read the responses to it. Or did JAG just latch onto a random "atheist" who speaks ill of Dawkins, as if that would have impact on us, as if we follow priests of atheism or something rather than thinking for ourselves.

Many of the responses to Ruse's article are well thought out.

Here is one of them:

And another:

These are good points that JAG is hiding from and dismissing as hateful against his God. JAG is hiding from logic and reason.

 

I had a look into Ruse and found an article where he calls Dawkins a genius!

Richard Dawkins is a genius. The Selfish Gene, published in 1976, is one of the truly great books of the 20th century. …

Ok i am being cheeky here in that he goes on to rubbish Dawkins but interestingly gives a reason why he thinks Dawkins fails with the God Delusion.

I have been reading a short autobiography that Dawkins has penned for a book on behavioral biologists, and I think I may have found a clue. It lies in the British system of education. (Or, let me cover myself. It lies in the British system of education that held sway 50 years ago when Dawkins was being educated. I know whereof I speak, for I too went through the system at that time, although in nothing like as distinguished a fashion.)
https://liturgy.co.nz/michael-ruse-richard-dawkins

I went through the same education system all be it a few years later and agree with what Ruse says.

But as you allude in the above that is the great thing about being an atheist, I do not have to agree with other atheists or I may just agree with some of what the say, my world view is totally unique based on what I think and not reliant on any one text. Best of all if I am wrong (which over the years has been quite often) then I do not have to worry about what others think, I can just learn from the experience and adjust my world view. No celestial dictator to answer to.