Atheists Go to church for their kids
Replies
-
You know an atheist who is angry at G-d? You don't understand the illogic there? Really?
It sounds more like you know a ticked off disgruntled person of faith who really wants to be an atheist, but isn't and can't be. I don't choose to be agnostic, I just am. Somebody who's angry at G-d believes that g-d exists and is mad at him. You can't be angry at something that does not exist. Are you angry with Zeus?
Deep waters these.0 -
You know an atheist who is angry at G-d? You don't understand the illogic there? Really?
Of course I see that, Casper. There are people who have had something horrible happen in their lives and would rather believe there is no God than that the God they once believed in betrayed them by allowing this to happen. So, they become atheist. I can see how that happens. One of my close friends (who died when she was 29) was the victim of incest most of her young life. Her mom never did anything to protect her, but would speak of God and church. She found life to be one cruel joke and decided she was better off not believing there was a God at all.0 -
But you cannot choose to truly believe or disbelieve. Trying is a fool's errand.
Again - it sounds more like you know a ticked off disgruntled person of faith who really wants to be an atheist, but isn't and can't be. I don't choose to be agnostic, I just am. Somebody who's angry at G-d believes that g-d exists and is mad at him - and therefore is not truly an atheist. You can't be angry at something that does not exist. Are you angry with Zeus?
Deep waters these.0 -
But you cannot choose to truly believe or disbelieve.
So, someone can't choose not to believe in God? A person can't be raised believing, but reach a point in his life that he chooses not to believe any longer because of events that have happened? I've even read people on here say IF there is a God, they wouldn't follow Him anyway because of all the horrible things He's allowed to happen.0 -
I tried for 20 years to believe in the G-d my family taught me, and I could not. I successfully pretended, got baptized, professed faith, the whole works. All a sham, never truly believed a word of it. I thought that if I tried hard enough, (and to be honest, LIED hard enough), that someday it would makes sense to me.
No - if someone tells you something that makes no sense to you, like that you have 12 fingers for example, you cannot "choose" to believe it. You have fingers, and you can count.
Your lost friend, (and I am truly sorry to hear of her) is a textbook example. Angry at G-d, so claims not to believe in G-d. But that's logically impossible, you cannot be angry at something that doesn't exist. Are you mad at Superman for not preventing that car wreck? Of course not,there's no such guy and you know it. OTOH, if your friend was angry with G-d then in her heart she believed in his existence, and was therefore not an atheist.0 -
Exactly that. You said you were not going to debate with someone who is going to resort to name calling. What names were you called? I saw some insults about your religion but nothing that I'd call a personal insult. I have seen you dish out just as many, if not more, insults about atheists than I've seen come at you. Pretending you didn't or being oblivious even when it's pointed out numerous times doesn't negate it. If you truly were oblivious as to the insults you've made and truly didn't intend them that way I'd think an "I'm sorry you read it that way. I certainly didn't mean it like that. I can see where it could be misconstrued though and I'll try to word things better." would have been tossed out at least once by now.What are you talking about when you keep saying I dish it out but can't take it? I've continued in every debate and stood on everything I've said. I said I was not going to debate with someone who is going to resort to name calling, immature posters of cartoon characters, and ridicule. I'm all for the debate. Go back and look at some of the ones I've had. I've never backed down, even with people coming at me from all sides.0 -
I tried for 20 years to believe in the G-d my family taught me, and I could not. I successfully pretended, got baptized, professed faith, the whole works. All a sham, never truly believed a word of it. I thought that if I tried hard enough, (and to be honest, LIED hard enough), that someday it would makes sense to me.
No - if someone tells you something that makes no sense to you, like that you have 12 fingers for example, you cannot "choose" to believe it. You have fingers, and you can count.
Okay, so you cannot choose to believe in something that makes sense to you, personally. But why can't a person choose NOT to believe? By the way, Catholicism has many mysteries that make up our religion. I cannot possibly understand all of them. I "choose" to believe because of everything I've studied about it. So, I do believe that some people can choose to believe. But, I totally get that some cannot force themselves to believe in something that makes no sense to them. I do believe that some make the choice NOT to believe, too. I'm not saying this is the case for every atheist, but I don't understand why it's not possible.0 -
I think you meant "make NO sense to you".
""But why can't a person choose NOT to believe?""
Can you choose not to believe that the grass is green? You have eyes, you know your colors. Grass is green, you know it. Can you choose not to believe it? Of course you can't.0 -
Sure they can. But they don't say "God lets horrible things happen so I don't believe in Him anymore." Do you say "The Flying Spaghetti Monster lets bad things happen so I choose not to believe in Him?" Or do you say "It's not that The Flying Spaghetti Monster lets bad things happen. There is no Flying Spaghetti Monster. Something that doesn't exist cannot let good or bad things happen in the first place."But you cannot choose to truly believe or disbelieve.
So, someone can't choose not to believe in God? A person can't be raised believing, but reach a point in his life that he chooses not to believe any longer because of events that have happened? I've even read people on here say IF there is a God, they wouldn't follow Him anyway because of all the horrible things He's allowed to happen.0 -
You've obviously missed the name calling and personal references made toward me.Exactly that. You said you were not going to debate with someone who is going to resort to name calling. What names were you called? I saw some insults about your religion but nothing that I'd call a personal insult
Point out any personal insult I've made. You're taking my opinions about "possible" reasons and saying I feel that way about all atheists.I have seen you dish out just as many, if not more, insults about atheists than I've seen come at you
Are you kidding? I have tried numerous times to explain what I meant by my words. What do you want from me?If you truly were oblivious as to the insults you've made and truly didn't intend them that way I'd think an "I'm sorry you read it that way. I certainly didn't mean it like that. I can see where it could be misconstrued though and I'll try to word things better." would have been tossed out at least once by now.0 -
My grass is brown. Just sayin' :laugh:I think you meant "make NO sense to you".
""But why can't a person choose NOT to believe?""
Can you choose not to believe that the grass is green? You have eyes, you know your colors. Grass is green, you know it. Can you choose not to believe it? Of course you can't.0 -
That's awful B,,, Heheheh... :laugh:0
-
Ya', she has. We're just wrestling with the distributive property.
Are you kidding? I have tried numerous times to explain what I meant by my words. What do you want from me?If you truly were oblivious as to the insults you've made and truly didn't intend them that way I'd think an "I'm sorry you read it that way. I certainly didn't mean it like that. I can see where it could be misconstrued though and I'll try to word things better." would have been tossed out at least once by now.0 -
Yup. Thanks for catching that.I think you meant "make NO sense to you".
But, the grass being green is a fact. It's not something you're taking a leap of faith in by believing. You can choose to believe in God or not believe in God. I get what you're saying about a person saying, "I'm an atheist because I'm mad at God". I get that statement makes no sense. Would you grant that there are people who call them atheists because they got mad at God at some time in their life, though? People can choose to turn against God and reject Him; can't they?Can you choose not to believe that the grass is green? You have eyes, you know your colors. Grass is green, you know it. Can you choose not to believe it? Of course you can't.0 -
Well sure you can turn against, and you can reject. It's what your friend did. But if you are mad the deity then you believe that he is there, and you are NOT an atheist. You might be trying to be one, but you're not. Much like I tried for half my life to be a good southern baptist, and I could not.
Atheism is not an organized group with a roster that you join. It's a belief. Atheists believe that g-d does not exist. If you believe that g-d exists then you're not an atheist, and if you claim that you are, then you are mistaken.
True - the grass being green is a fact. And to me "A talking snake tricked a woman into eating an apple" is unbelievable utter malarkey, and that's a fact. I can't choose to believe that a snake spoke to a woman if I want to, I just can't. I tried. There's that "Leap of faith",,, "who you gonna believe, me or your lying eyes?"0 -
I guess I did miss the insults towards you. How about pointing them out. So far all I've noticed was you insulting atheists and a few people insulting Christianity. I didn't see anything personal. More tit for tat.
You've obviously missed the name calling and personal references made toward me.Exactly that. You said you were not going to debate with someone who is going to resort to name calling. What names were you called? I saw some insults about your religion but nothing that I'd call a personal insult
Point out any personal insult I've made. You're taking my opinions about "possible" reasons and saying I feel that way about all atheists.I have seen you dish out just as many, if not more, insults about atheists than I've seen come at you
Are you kidding? I have tried numerous times to explain what I meant by my words. What do you want from me?If you truly were oblivious as to the insults you've made and truly didn't intend them that way I'd think an "I'm sorry you read it that way. I certainly didn't mean it like that. I can see where it could be misconstrued though and I'll try to word things better." would have been tossed out at least once by now.
How about something like an "I'm sorry you read it that way. I certainly didn't mean it like that. I can see where it could be misconstrued though and I'll try to word things better." with real effort to actually mean it and make changes as necessary in the future? 12 pages, almost 300 posts and instead of apologizing even once for any misunderstanding you continue not only trying to defend and justify your words but continue saying the very statements that people have repeatedly told you were offensive because some supposed "friend" once made a similar comment. Do you want everyone to paint you with the same brush as Fred Phelps? Just because he says "God is glad when soldiers die" does that mean we can say that Christians hate the troops and want them dead? Or would you understand that what one person says doesn't pertain to everyone in that entire group? IF so, then why can you not understand that your "friend" doesn't speak for the approximately 20% of the world population who are non-religious/atheist?0 -
Gotcha.Well sure you can turn against, and you can reject. It's what your friend did. But if you are mad the deity then you believe that he is there, and you are NOT and atheist. You might be trying to be one, but you're not. Much like I tried for half my life to be a good southern baptist, and I could not.
Not all of the bible is intended to be taken literally, Casper.True - the grass being green is a fact. And to me "A talking snake tricked a woman into eating an apple" is unbelievable utter malarkey, and that's a fact. I can't choose to believe that a snake spoke to a woman if I want to, I just can't. I tried.
Ha! My mother, who is a psychologist for drug an alcohol abuse, uses this phrase all the time (not in this context, but you made me think of her)."who you gonna believe, me or your lying eyes?"0 -
Well when I was a kid I didn't get a guidebook of what they said was true was actually true and what was "not to be taken literally". I was raised Southern B, and they hold the bible to be literally true. Every word. 7 days of creation, talking snake, burning bush, bottomless lunchbox, the whole works. I couldn't believe it, but I did and do believe in a higher power - I just don't believe in traditional organized religion.0
-
I'm not going there. If you didn't see any of it in this thread, then it was either deleted or edited, but it was there.i guess I did miss the insults towards you. How about pointing them out. So far all I've noticed was you insulting atheists and a few people insulting Christianity. I didn't see anything personal. More tit for tat.
What statement are you talking about? If you're speaking about the one about atheism having no moral "foundation", we've discussed this and I have explained.How about something like an "I'm sorry you read it that way. I certainly didn't mean it like that. I can see where it could be misconstrued though and I'll try to word things better." with real effort to actually mean it and make changes as necessary in the future? 12 pages, almost 300 posts and instead of apologizing even once for any misunderstanding you continue not only trying to defend and justify your words but continue saying the very statements that people have repeatedly told you were offensive because some supposed "friend" once made a similar comment.
You do realize there are different forms of Christianity, right? I've stated many times that I am a Catholic Christian. Not sure why anyone would associate me with Fred Phelps.Do you want everyone to paint you with the same brush as Fred Phelps? Just because he says "God is glad when soldiers die" does that mean we can say that Christians hate the troops and want them dead? Or would you understand that what one person says doesn't pertain to everyone in that entire group?
I never said "my friend" does speak for all atheists. I was using him as an example because I dialogue with him quite a bit about atheism.why can you not understand that your "friend" doesn't speak for the approximately 20% of the world population who are non-religious/atheist?0 -
Well when I was a kid I didn't get a guidebook of what they said was true was actually true and what was "not to be taken literally". I was raised Southern B, and they hold the bible to be literally true. Every word. 7 days of creation, talking snake, burning bush, bottomless lunchbox, the whole works. I couldn't believe it, but I did and do believe in a higher power - I just don't believe in traditional organized religion
I totally get why someone would doubt some of the stories in the bible if they were told they were literal. I blame the church for losing so many Christians. I believe the church is failing to properly educate its people. I realize not everyone can be a theologian, but we need to do a better job of teaching Christians what the bible means and what it means to be a Christian.0 -
"I'm sorry you read it that way.
By the way, I personally find the above quote an insincere way of clearing up any misunderstanding. It's like me blaming the other person for the way they took it. I try never to use this phrase, ever. I will try explaining my true meaning, maybe pointing out specific words I used, or saying it another way, but I would never use the above. Not because I don't want to apologize for offending someone, but because I find it insincere.0 -
Well if I tell you 8 stories, and 5 of them are obviously BS, what's your best guess on the other 3?
The larger theology didn't make any sense to me either. I don't need to get too deep into it - and I certainly don't want to insult your beliefs, so let's just say that if you steal my apple, I'll be able to forgive you for it without having to get a bunch of Romans to slaughter my kid - in fact, I can't even imagine how that would help anything. Didn't make sense to me at all. Nor did what happened to Job's kids. The higher power that I believe in is loving,
I did my own "proper education", and I'm glad I did. I didn't wind up with the answer my folks wanted me to get though,
0 -
Since this has gone on forever, I would like to know the specific personal attacks I put out there. Not that I really care, I stand by everything I said as well. And as far as these complaints about "You can't hold me accoutnable for all Christians, how would you like to be accountable for all atheists?"
A: If we want to compare Polpot and Stalin to.......every other tyrant in history who believed in a God, I say fine with me. Heck, not only will I let you just defend the christians, I'll let you just defend the catholics.
B: Unless we are talking in historical contexts, I never bring up the crusades or the catholics killing the Incas because in almost every case, it's not as if the people being conquered were pacifists who hadn't also done the same thing.
But it is a valid argument, as "unoriginal" as some may claim, to hammer the CURRENT Pope and Catholics for covering up child rape. When the catholics actually rise up and demand justice for child rape victims, or the Pope takes voluntarily takes of the pointy fancy hats and steps down, I won't bring it up, but as long as Catholics act like sheep, it's fair game.0 -
Oh, and it's great that more and more religious people are now admitting that the some of the myths in the bible are just morality tales. It's just a shame they can't bring themselves to admit the believe in the dumbest parts of the story. The invisible sky hebrew who knocks up young teenage girls.0
-
Well saying that you are going to continue to ridicule Patti and her religion sounds like a personal attack to me. You specifically even went on to say that it wasn't all Christians, just Patti. That combined with the trollish posting of the cartoons etc (which I personally found humorous) that were SOLELY posted JUST to troll Patti and bait her into a fight is what the issue is.
Like the guidelines say, heated debate is fine. Coming out swinging and attacking another poster and ridiculing them specifically is not.0 -
"They" had an issue with you before you said that specific thing because you have said so many similar things. I have no issue with Christianity (I am an agnostic with Christian leanings and grew up Catholic), the church (although that's a pretty broad definition as there are soooo many denominations with soooo many different styles), or God (I pray sometimes). It's YOU. It's the fact that you dish it out (and based on your continued harping on "atheism has no moral foundation" you are either not very bright or you know EXACXTLY what you are doing and it's not very Christian.) but can't handle even a tiny bit being dished back at you. No, you didn't defend the priests. But you do get offended and hair flip when someone says the God of the Bible is an egotistical sadist or some even less harsh things as well even though those claims are true in some cases. Just because Christians have no moral foundation without having to read about it in a book doesn't mean they can't be good people.Patti, I think part of the issue that people are having with your claims is that you are saying that other atheists will back them up, or that other atheists themselves said it. The problem is that just as certain Christians cannot and do not represent the group as a whole, the same can be said for atheists. Just because some of them said something or accepted a claim, doesn't mean that their opinions and beliefs stand for all.
No. They had an issue with me before I ever said that. They have an issue with me because they have an issue with Christianity, the church, or God. They don't like my claims, which happen to be true in some cases. Just as their claims of priests molesting children are true. Notice I've never defended those actions. I find them deplorable. Just because atheism has no moral foundation, does not mean atheists can't be good people. The confusion is when people don't know what that even means.
I'm still wondering which non believers you didn't insult.
Me. I wasnt insulted at all. None of the athiests in my family who were reading over my shoulder were insulted.None of the athiests I know from other sites or IRL were insulted when I asked them what they thought of what she said.0 -
"They" had an issue with you before you said that specific thing because you have said so many similar things. I have no issue with Christianity (I am an agnostic with Christian leanings and grew up Catholic), the church (although that's a pretty broad definition as there are soooo many denominations with soooo many different styles), or God (I pray sometimes). It's YOU. It's the fact that you dish it out (and based on your continued harping on "atheism has no moral foundation" you are either not very bright or you know EXACXTLY what you are doing and it's not very Christian.) but can't handle even a tiny bit being dished back at you. No, you didn't defend the priests. But you do get offended and hair flip when someone says the God of the Bible is an egotistical sadist or some even less harsh things as well even though those claims are true in some cases. Just because Christians have no moral foundation without having to read about it in a book doesn't mean they can't be good people.Patti, I think part of the issue that people are having with your claims is that you are saying that other atheists will back them up, or that other atheists themselves said it. The problem is that just as certain Christians cannot and do not represent the group as a whole, the same can be said for atheists. Just because some of them said something or accepted a claim, doesn't mean that their opinions and beliefs stand for all.
No. They had an issue with me before I ever said that. They have an issue with me because they have an issue with Christianity, the church, or God. They don't like my claims, which happen to be true in some cases. Just as their claims of priests molesting children are true. Notice I've never defended those actions. I find them deplorable. Just because atheism has no moral foundation, does not mean atheists can't be good people. The confusion is when people don't know what that even means.
I'm still wondering which non believers you didn't insult.
Me. I wasnt insulted at all. None of the athiests in my family who were reading over my shoulder were insulted.None of the athiests I know from other sites or IRL were insulted when I asked them what they thought of what she said.
I had 63 atheists at my house over the weekend and they were all offended. Then I sent the post to the United Atheist League and they were also offended.0 -
Well saying that you are going to continue to ridicule Patti and her religion sounds like a personal attack to me. You specifically even went on to say that it wasn't all Christians, just Patti. That combined with the trollish posting of the cartoons etc (which I personally found humorous) that were SOLELY posted JUST to troll Patti and bait her into a fight is what the issue is.
Like the guidelines say, heated debate is fine. Coming out swinging and attacking another poster and ridiculing them specifically is not.
Yes, because blaming all Christians for Patti's remarks would be as ridiculous as what she originally said. Like I said, go back to my original post, not a single inflammatory or rude remark. And I suspect others who are defending her are holding a grudge from another debate topic when I called her on her BS. Sorry, you don't get to call groups of rational logical people impoverished morally or that their children would see through their inadequacies and not get a fight from me.
Any atheist who saw that and did say "WTF" I think is either trying to be PC, spineless, or biased for some other reason. But it really doesn't matter, like it has already been stated before, over and over again, atheists all see a lack of evidence for a god. No rule set, no philosophy, no handbook, so we can all feel however we want about the Pattimeister's statements. I did not like them, therefore I will be here everytime it happens doing exactly what I am doing, and not hiding behind the forum rules. There is no difference between calling the morality of non-believers impoverished or lacking foundation and me saying that her faith is based on the fairy tales of mostly illiterate bronze age goat herders that practiced human sacrifice, rape, genocide and slavery. We are both crapping on the others belief system, I'm just the only one being honest. Like, I for one never said I was "out" like in previous debates only to keep coming back. I didn't say tht I consulted all my friends, had a pow wow after reading the article, wrote a response, all in 29 minutes.0 -
Wow,,, there it is. Cut & dried.Snip
There is no difference between calling the morality of non-believers impoverished or lacking foundation and me saying that her faith is based on the fairy tales of mostly illiterate bronze age goat herders that practiced human sacrifice, rape, genocide and slavery. We are both crapping on the others belief system, I'm just the only one being honest.
Snip0 -
Well saying that you are going to continue to ridicule Patti and her religion sounds like a personal attack to me. You specifically even went on to say that it wasn't all Christians, just Patti. That combined with the trollish posting of the cartoons etc (which I personally found humorous) that were SOLELY posted JUST to troll Patti and bait her into a fight is what the issue is.
Like the guidelines say, heated debate is fine. Coming out swinging and attacking another poster and ridiculing them specifically is not.
Yes, because blaming all Christians for Patti's remarks would be as ridiculous as what she originally said. Like I said, go back to my original post, not a single inflammatory or rude remark. And I suspect others who are defending her are holding a grudge from another debate topic when I called her on her BS. Sorry, you don't get to call groups of rational logical people impoverished morally or that their children would see through their inadequacies and not get a fight from me.
Any atheist who saw that and did say "WTF" I think is either trying to be PC, spineless, or biased for some other reason. But it really doesn't matter, like it has already been stated before, over and over again, atheists all see a lack of evidence for a god. No rule set, no philosophy, no handbook, so we can all feel however we want about the Pattimeister's statements. I did not like them, therefore I will be here everytime it happens doing exactly what I am doing, and not hiding behind the forum rules. There is no difference between calling the morality of non-believers impoverished or lacking foundation and me saying that her faith is based on the fairy tales of mostly illiterate bronze age goat herders that practiced human sacrifice, rape, genocide and slavery. We are both crapping on the others belief system, I'm just the only one being honest. Like, I for one never said I was "out" like in previous debates only to keep coming back. I didn't say tht I consulted all my friends, had a pow wow after reading the article, wrote a response, all in 29 minutes.
If you are refering to me why would I be upset from the other topic,I never saw any BS being called there.
Im defending Patti because I didnt see anything ofensive in what she said.
But then again I dont run around trying to get offended by every little thing. I also belive athiests have no moral foundation,I fail to see what is so offensive about that. All that means to me is we didnt pull our ideas of right and wrong from a book we are not good because someone tells us to be, we do whats right because its the right thing.
Its funny because I agree alot of athiests come off as if they are very angry at religion,they go on and on about the things done in gods name and paint the whole relgion with it. Yes horrible things have happened in the name of religion,people use religion to do horrible things but it is not their religion that leds them to it its just what they use as an excuse for it. I like how you just assume she read the article for the first time when it was posted here,I know I for one had read it before it was linked here.
Infact this quote from the article
"In addition, church may provide a better understanding of morality and ethics" seems to me like its saying athiests have no moral foundation because if we did why would we need church to provide a better understanding of it.
As for the impovershed world views I can understand that as well. Lets say you are a christian,or a muslim or anyone that believes in heaven or an afterlife and you have compleat faith in your heart that when you die you go to this wonderfull place with everyone youve ever loved that went before you,and then there someone who belives that this is it,that this life is all you get and when your done your done if I was the person of faith I would see that as a little impovereshed as well.
So as an athiest I belive we have no moral foundation
and i compleatly understand how our views can seem a little poor
if you are offended by that,we thats more your problem than mine0
This discussion has been closed.