Re: Evidences of God

On Mon, 6 Oct 2003 22:00:07 +0200, "Chain Smoker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Message ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in alt.atheism;

>"stoney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> On Sat, 4 Oct 2003 23:34:40 +0200, "Chain Smoker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> Message ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in alt.atheism;
>>
>> >"stoney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> On Sat, 4 Oct 2003 00:21:27 +0200, "Chain Smoker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> >> Message ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in alt.atheism;
>>
>> (snip)
>>
>> >> >You may not be insane, but this behavior does seem to fall in line
>with
>> >> >insanity.  Your sad attempt to turn the tables on me fails because I
>do
>> >not
>> >> >exhibit this strange behavior.
>> >>
>> >> (laughing at you)  Grovelling before a bronze age
>> >> 'monster-under-the-bed' has zero to do with rationality.
>> >
>> >As for your apparent posting numerous responses to yourself, I suppose
>you
>> >may be right.  Maybe that's one of the consequences of crossposting an
>> >argument like this one.  One or more of the participants may appear to
>one
>> >or more bystanders to be arguing with himself, depending on what
>newsgroups
>> >the various participants' news servers will post to and which they won't.
>> >It does create an effect, though, that makes the one poster you can see
>seem
>> >looney.
>>
>> You're more than welcome to utilize Google to check what I stated, it
>> won't bother me at all.  The appearance does occur once in awhile and
>> there are times when such is actuality.    I think you're right in
>> stating the more newsgroups the message is going to the increased chance
>> of such a delay occuring.
>
>I won't check Google because I am content to take you at your word on this
>matter.  It just isn't important enough to bother over, and, frankly, I am
>convinced I was mistaken in my original impression.

Thank you. 

>> >About God, you can laugh at me as much as you like.  It makes no
>difference.
>> >He won't become any less real just because you wish He would.
>>
>> I do laugh at theists from time to time-those who project their
>> superstition onto an outside audience.  And you're right, a fantasy will
>> never become reality.
>
>I never made any assertion that a fantasy will never become a reality, nor
>did I make a statement that could be honestly misinterpreted as such.  For
>you to twist my words that way effectively, I'd have had to say that God
>will not become any more real just because you wish He would.  I didn't, and
>your trying to twist my words to your desired effect looks strained as a
>result.

No twisting was intended.    Such was the way your words came across to
me.  Please note, the deity you believe in is a fantasy to those outside
your religion. With your clarification, I see I was mistaken and
withdraw the sentence about fantasy since it does not deal with your
statement.

>> A few other points.
>>
>> 1)  According to the Christian superstition, all are mere actors in a
>> pointless play hitting their marks and spouting their lines as was
>> scripted eons ago.
>
>According to Christianity, on the other hand, we are all free moral agents,
>and choose our own destiny by our life's choices.

Depends on the sect.  The KJV, for one, indicates the opposite.  For
another if your deity is described as omniscient and/or omnipotent then
the statment about actors applies.  Pharoh, Job, and Adam and Eve also
demonstrate such is not the case.

>> 2)  I find it quite interesting many theists can't fathom a lack of
>> belief and insist, like you do, that their theism premises have been
>> objectively supported and non-believers are merely being 'difficult' or
>> some such.
>
>I understand lack of belief.  I just regret it, as I feel the doubter may be
>in for a brutal shock later on.

As to other religions feel towards you and for the same reason.

>> That is not the case.  Further most U.S. based atheists were theists, in
>> the main, members of one  or more xtian sects.  Some, not me, were rabid
>> evangelistic types or looking at a career in the clergy.  Many times
>> people have indicated how painful the process of losing belief was and
>> how hard they struggled to retain it.
>
>I'm not sure how you determined that most U.S. based atheists used to be
>theists.  Every instance of this is tragic, though.

The culture of the time frame from the 40's, 50's and 60's.  There was
heavy indoctrination into various Christian sects.

Tragic?  Hearty disagreement.  Freedom from slavery isn't tragic in my
book.

>> Please keep in mind there has been no suggestion that you lose your
>> theism.  If such brings you comfort then, by all means, retain it.
>
>Thank you, it does.

Then I hope such continues.

>> If you have a question, feel free to inquire.  Most folks here in aa
>> have no axe to grind.  I do warn you people here have the tendency to be
>> brutally honest.
>
>Yes, I have a question.  Pretty much every one of the atheists that I have
>come across refer to all of the world's major religions and religious
>leaders by the same names as followers of that religion do.  For a couple
>examples, they call Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism, and Judaism, Islam,
>Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism, and Judaism, respectively.  Buddha, Confucius,
>Mohammed, and the Dalai Lama, they call Buddha, Confucius, Mohammed, and the
>Dalai Lama.
>
>These lists are not complete by any means.  In fact, this rule extends, in
>my experience, to all religions but one.  Christianity, you often refer to
>as xtianity.  

The spelling xtianity was generated by Christians millenia ago.  The
'x', iirc, is reminiscent of the Greek "CH."

>Jesus, I often see called Jeezuz or Jeezus.  The question,
>then, is this.  What is it about Christ and his followers that warrants
>special attention and disdain from many atheists? 

A partial list and being general throughout the post.
All the discourtesy and disrespect demonstrated (a bit of generality and
not all inclusive) by Christians.  The constant empty threats of 'hell.'
The constant attempts to shove the tenets of the religion into law,
effectively as a state religion which equates to theocracy.  The
daemonization of those who are not in lockstep with the dominant
superstition.

For those posts where you see Jesus misspelled, examine the post the
person is responding to and the tone/verbage/attitude.  The track record
of the author being responded to also comes into play.  It can also
indicate the theist isn't being taken seriously.

As examples you might Google posts by Pastor Frank, Randy Story, and
Melchizedek.  Other Christians have taken them to task, but they do not
listen.

There are theists who are regulars in alt.atheism.  They are treated
with great courtesy (mirror) and are treasured.  Woe be the person,
theist or atheist, who mistreats them.

There are myraid reasons, and those are a few.  In short, generally this
newsgroup makes a pretty good mirror and reflects the courtesy or
discourtesy of the theist.

Sometimes a theist comes in and has a question or two and shows courtesy
and honesty with their question(s).  Their question(s) is/are gently
answered.

I recall twice, but not what the specific questions were, where the
answer to the question could very well have a negative impact on their
faith.  In those instances, I pointed this danger out and asked if they
wanted an answer or to retract the question.  In one case the question
was retracted.  

As I recall, both expressed surprise at my sensitivity to the possible
impact on their faith.  The one person who wanted an answer ended up
asking a couple more to clarify things before thanking us and meandering
out.

Generally folks here greatly wish Christians would realize their
religion applies only to adherants of it and to follow what "Jesus"
states, namely verses 5 and 6.

Matthew 6 (kjv)
1   Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them:
otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven.
2   Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before
thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that
they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their
reward.
3   But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right
hand doeth:
4   That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in
secret himself shall reward thee openly.
5   And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for
they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the
streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have
their reward.
6   But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou
hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy
Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.

/end quote

> It cannot be that we are
>more zealous or aggressive in our faith -- Muslims kill themselves often in
>pursuit of theirs. 

It is the rare Muslim that meanders into alt.atheism.  There are some
that are as obnoxious as most christians and are treated with the same
disdain.

Other Muslims meander in who treat people with courtesy and people here
ask them questions, looking for information and to get some
understanding of that faith.

> It cannot be that we are more interested in gaining
>converts than the others -- again, the Muslims are more aggressive.  It
>cannot be that we are singled out because we are the ones on the other side
>of that particular argument, though I could give that answer partial credit.
>I have seen atheists more than once blame the troubles in the Middle East on
>the three headed monster of "Judaism, Islam, and xtianity" even when none of
>the participants in the discussion were openly discussing religion in that
>thread previous to such comments.

That region is a mess as it contains 'holy sites' of all three.  Whether
religion was being openly discussed or not religion comes heavilly into
play.

In Israel, if an catastrophe happens (like a multi-storey floor
collapsing under a wedding party) rescuers must first get permission
from the priests to work.

>So please tell me why you think atheists hate Christianity most of all the
>major religions, or at least show it the most prominently.

Atheists don't hate Christianity.  A religion cannot do anything.  It's
the actions of the followers that draw reaction.

>> 3)  Let's utilize your above statement and change the 'entity.'  Perhaps
>> you'll see where non-christians and non-theists are coming from.
>>
>> >About God, you can laugh at me as much as you like.  It makes no
>difference.
>> >He won't become any less real just because you wish He would.
>>
>> About Santa Claus, you can laugh at me as much as you like.  It makes no
>> difference.  He won't become any less real just because you wish He
>> would.
>>
>> About the Easter Bunny, you can laugh at me as much as you like.  It
>> makes no difference.  He won't become any less real just because you
>> wish He would.
>>
>> About Tiamat the Dragon, you can laugh at me as much as you like.
>> It makes no difference. She won't become any less real just because you
>> wish She would.

(snip)

>> Continue on with all the other deities and entities you lack belief in.
>> I'm sure you see the point.
>
>All of the above can be said -- an obvious point, since you just "said"
>them.  None of them, not even mine, constitute proof that our beliefs are
>the "true" ones.  That was not my intent in making the statement, as I have
>long been aware of its weakness when used to attempt persuasion.  I was
>merely stating fact.

The text change examples were based on my misunderstanding of your
words.

>> Theists assert their particular
>> deity/deities exist while those outside the brand lack belief in what is
>> being asserted.  *You* are atheist with regard to all other deity
>> constructs but yours.  I, and others, merely lack belief in your as
>> well.  Strangely, the lack of belief in all others doesn't bother
>> theists, but it does when theirs isn't given special treatment.
>
>I don't necessarily doubt that other gods than God exist.  I don't
>necessarily believe it either.  I just don't care whether they exist at all.

As do others concerning yours as well.

>I believe God, the Father of Christ, supercedes any and all other things.
>Christ's teachings seem to me the best thing I've ever encountered.  I
>think, even if a person thought he was not the Son of God, that they should
>appreciate him for those.

The teachings didn't originate with Christianity.

I don't consider the glorification of lies, deceptions, discourtesy,
pride, and malevolence as things to be 'appreciated.'

>> Have a nice day.
>
>And you.

Thank you.
         

   
             Stoney
"Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
               and
          SCAMPERMEISTER!"

When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
/end humour alert

alt.atheism military veteran #11
{so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}