Yes, that statement needs clarification, which I why i edited that comment to include: 'Spirituality does not attack the beleifs, questions or theories of others. Only Religions do that.' Atheism has no reason to be threatened by spirituality. The perceived threat that the intolerance of the attacks on spirituality by some atheists suggests a doctrine that they seek to protect, similar in foundation to the doctrine that other religions similarly protect by attacking their ideological oponents, including atheism. One would expect an Atheist who rejects the establishment of religious doctrine to behave more tolerantly to ideological differers... but many don't. They behave as if protecting a religious doctrine.
Perhaps the stridency of atheists is a reaction to the institutional hatred and contempt Christianity has for atheism going back to the very beginning of the religion itself. If you care to read about the history of the Christian faith, you will find that not only were pagans and non-believers murdered, tortured, exiled, conquered, raped and targeted for extinction but their own fellow Christians who disagreed with the canon were given similar treatment. This persists today in evangelical circles across our nation in words and sermons, thankfully we have a secular state that forbids the more common historical remedies for those who do not share a belief in the "correct" supernatural world. It has been shown that an open atheist is still the least likely to win any position of power in our government. I find the recent empowerment of atheism to be the cure not the disease. Long live reason, science and the goal of universal justice and equality.
That would be fair, except those Atheists that so zealously attack the spiritual aren't just attacking Christianity or even 'establishment' religion in general; they're attacking and denegrating any beleif in the spiritual or supernatural whatsoever, suggesting the threat is against their own doctrine, not just a defense against the threat of imposition by the doctrine of others.
Who are these Atheists you refer to and where are they....I've never heard of one and I AM an atheists.
The subgroup of Atheists that denegrate anyone with a faith or a beleif in anything that hasn't been tested by science. If you havn't seen or heard of them, then you're either very new to online philosophical/religious discussion, or you are one of them.
Weird....seldom have I noted any Atheist making a fuss about one God or another. Virtually every comment is in reply to a Christian (such as you) making comments that should be corrected or disputed....this is generally referred to as debate and is the reason this forum was created. As with most Christians here, you suffer from persecution complex, guess what dude....when claim are made and inaccurate people say so here.
Here is the problem with your point, the very definition of atheism is a full frontal refutation of religion, it is the defining characteristic of being an atheist. So given that one side believes and the other rejects, the mere existence of an atheist and their explanation of their own position is diametrically opposed by the religious, there is no polite way to spin it therefore every time any atheist publicly explains themselves, it is seen as an attack. I am sorry but you will have to accept further public and social push back if you are devout.
Im not equating 'I dont believe in any gods' to an attack. Im equating 'only ______ people believe in god' (stupid, ignorant, immoral, what have you) to an attack, in precisely the same way that its an attack when a religious person says the same thing about atheists.
I have no issue with religion if the religious can keep it to themselves, out of society otherwise at large and don't abuse children with indoctrination letting them choose when they turn eighteen and are legal adults.
Do you think that position is congruent with the constitutional right to freedom of expression? Many would use that same argument to repress LGBT and other speech/expression they find 'offensive.'
That's a tough question. If the actions of parents upon their children is deemed child abuse, then that action can be sanctioned regardless of the perpetrator's rational for their action. Thus, in many States in the USA, when parents refuse medical treatment for their children and the child dies (and would have not died had medical treatment been provided) they are prosecuted for murder. It doesn't matter that the parents claim they acted based on religious belief...that is not a defense. Now, childhood religious indoctrination by parents is not illegal, but I can imagine some indoctrination that might step over the line (e.g., teaching children to kill non-members of the particular religious tribe, or to spray paint hateful words on other's homes, etc.). Often, solutions in such cases are to remove the children from such a toxic environment. Still, it is quite clear (at least to me) that childhood religious indoctrination (and related peer pressure) is the primary and near-exclusive technique for maintaining membership in religious groups. If that is true, then the cessation of such indoctrination and peer pressure would diminish the membership in the group, perhaps to the point of non-existence.
I cerainly understand your point. But ima call 'slippery slope' on it. Set the precedent that the govt can intercede in spiritual indoctrination and its only a matter of time til its forcing religion on kids instead of protecting them from it.
Government intervention is not necessary to break the cycle of religious indoctrination of children by trusted adults and the subsequent peer pressure to adhere to the dogma. Education can break the cycle. Indeed, the actual evidence reveals the cycle is being broken, or at least interrupted. Statistics show younger people are less religious than their parents. Improved access to reality and related information is part of a young person's education and (it would appear) is responsible for more critical thinking and skepticism and less indoctrination.
"I am fearfully and wonderfully made." - The Holy Bible, 2000 years before modern science discovered this profound truth Ask your personal physician if the human body made itself from single-celled microorganisms and see what he says. I have discussed biochemistry, physiology, and anatomy with many doctors and not one of them professes atheism. They are too well educated and well versed in science to do so. Atheists cannot disagree without being disagreeable to the extent of venomous, destructive hatred which seems to consume their very souls.
Of course the human body didn't "make itself" from a single celled micro-organism. What a fallacious and disenenguous question. Seems you can't quite grasp the idea of a few million year long period within which trillions and trillions of biological processes have taken place. Unless of course you are simply "dumbing it down" for your own edification. I can disagree without being disagreeable, its just that I find it increasingly hard to be gracious to those whose religious faith trumps reason, logic and facts at every turn.
https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/66/Circular-Reasoning Circular Reasoning circulus in demonstrando ...... Description: A type of reasoning in which the proposition is supported by the premises, which is supported by the proposition, creating a Circle in reasoning where NO Useful information is being shared. This Fallacy is often quite Humorous. ...... Example #2: The Bible is the Word of God because God tells us it is... in the Bible. Explanation: This is a very serious circular argument on which many people base their entire lives. This is like getting an e-mail from a Nigerian prince, offering to give you his billion dollar fortune -- but only after you wire him a “good will” offering of $50,000. Of course, you are skeptical until you read the final line in the e-mail that reads “I, prince Nubadola, assure you that this is my message, and it is legitimate. You can trust this e-mail and any others that come from me.” Now you know it is legitimate... because it says so in the e-mail.`
Well if the worst thing an atheist says is that you are stupid it is far better than what we get in return which is eternal damnation and roasting in hell. Sorry bud but atheists are going to piss you off simply by existing. I think you want us to quietly suffer through living in a religious culture. We won't.
I just love it when a preacher says ",this is what the bible says...but what it really means is this." I have a degree in biblical studies and if the bible cannot be taken literally in all aspects it cannot be taken seriously. It is written for man...Inspired by men.
Millions upon millions of cells reproducting and changing over millions of years and yes I can see how we can be created
"Well if the worst thing an atheist says is that you are stupid it is far better than what we get in return which is eternal damnation and roasting in hell." I don't think you'll go to Hell unless you want to. The Bible says that Jesus spent his three days after crucifixion 'preaching to the dead in prison' or imo 'enlightening us after we die.' The only purpose that I can see for this is so that we can understand The Truth in a state free from wordly confusions. If I understand correctly, you and I and everyone will get to choose whether we spend eternity with God (Heaven) or without God (Hell). After all, how Free would our Will be if there was no choice? "Sorry bud but atheists are going to piss you off simply by existing." I would thank you to stop painting me into a box like you know me or something. You don't, and you're wrong. "I think you want us to quietly suffer through living in a religious culture. We won't." Also wrong. I would expect you to tolerate living in a DIVERSE culture along with people who believe in things that you don't, because thats America (assuming ur American, oc). People are just as free to tell you about Jesus and Allah as you are to tell them about science and mortality.
So yet another individual interpretation of the Bible from someone who apparently wants to believe it is all true but is smart enough to realize some of it is pure hogwash so he takes this bit and throws away that bit. Sorry but ever since the beginning of the one true church, apostates and atheists were treated with fates worse than excommunication and the consensus of laity throughout time was that we would endure a judgement day upon death. You can create your own religion out of the mess of the Bible if you want but Christianity is about judgement, that is the whole point of it. As for my point about atheists pissing you off by existing, it seems premature to make this claim as you corrected me, thank you. And yes, we do suffer through living in a religious state, just look at the crap the conservatives are passing in the name of Jesus and their faith.
"So yet another individual interpretation of the Bible from someone who apparently wants to believe it is all true but is smart enough to realize some of it is pure hogwash so he takes this bit and throws away that bit." Some of it is history, some is parable. Some is command, some is suggestion. Some is relevent to the human condition, some was only relevent to ancient culture. The idea that God literally spells out what we are to do and how is the result of spiritual laziness, and taking everything in The Bible literally is intellectual laziness. The Bible is meant to be personally and individually interpreted, as each of us is fundamentally responsible for our own fate. Letting someone else tell you the meaning of Gods Word is akin to ignoring God and worshipping that someone else. The only people I know of that advocate an entirely literal interpretation of The Bible are cults living in shacks in the most secluded, least educated parts of the word... and a large selection of atheists, of course. "Sorry but ever since the beginning of the one true church, apostates and atheists were treated with fates worse than excommunication..." That was hundreds of years ago man, let it go. Most Christians today have rejected the notion of judging a man by the sins of his forefathers... why are you holding on to this OT stuff? Arent you an atheist? "...and the consensus of laity throughout time was that we would endure a judgement day upon death." Agreed. "You can create your own religion out of the mess of the Bible if you want but [Judaism] is about judgement, that is the whole point of it." I fixed it for you. Christianity is about every one of us having been judged as 'Fail,' been forgiven and allowed a pass anyway. One of the most important (and commonly IGNORED) points of Christianity is that we ALL failed God and therefore have no grounds to judge eachother. Ill grant you that many (even most) Christians use The Bible as an excuse to elevate themselves by judging others, but this is not 'Christian'; its is indeed one of the things that makes them (us) all failures to God. "As for my point about atheists pissing you off by existing, it seems premature to make this claim as you corrected me, thank you." Thx. We all get called out when our stereotyping innevitably leads us astray. Owning it is respectable No hard feelings. "And yes, we do suffer through living in a religious state, just look at the crap the conservatives are passing in the name of Jesus and their faith." Like what? I think its more that we are still living in a society where people think they have a right or an obligation to enforce their personal morals on others via laws. While many of the people who operate thusly are Christian, its not merely Christians, or merely even the religious contributing to this problem.
