Guest Post by The Zman
A useful way to think about faith and belief is to imagine a scale where at one end you have fanaticism and at the other end you have extreme skepticism. The Muslim wearing a suicide vest is down at the fanatic end, while H.L. Mencken was down at the other end with the extreme skeptics. Disbelief is not the opposite of belief. Skepticism is the opposite of belief. The believer is willing to accept, without evidence, the truth of some statement, while the skeptic is unwilling to accept statements without proof.
It is my sincere desire to provide readers of this site with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can't do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. [Burning Platform LLC - PO Box 1520 Kulpsville, PA 19443] or Paypal
-----------------------------------------------------
To donate via Stripe, click here.
-----------------------------------------------------
Use promo code ILMF2, and save up to 66% on all MyPillow purchases. (The Burning Platform benefits when you use this promo code.)
Atheists will argue that atheism is the opposite of religious belief, but that’s what is called a gratuitous assertion. The atheist believes there is no superior being. They have no proof of this as there can be no proof. In that regard, atheism is illogical as it is something that can never be proved. Christianity, in contrast, can be proved. Christ could show up and confirm the tenets of the faith. The same is true of Islam or Judaism. In other words, even though there is no proof now, there could be proof. That’s not possible with atheism.
My general impression has always been that atheists are a) mugging for attention, b) mostly opposed to Christianity in a subversive way and/or c) not well versed in religion or the role of religion. Bill Maher is a famous atheist because it makes him safely edgy. He gets to be controversial without any risk of controversy. A Penn Jillette, on the other hand, is just angry that his mother died and his prayers were not answered the way he wanted them answered. He’s also arguing from a position of ignorance. He’s just not that smart.
It’s why I don’t find atheists or atheism all that interesting. Most of it is just a pose from people who demand the right to say controversial things, but have nothing controversial to say. They are meta-rebels. These are people who talk about being rebellious and subversive, but never dare color outside the lines. Entertainers are fond of this style of edginess as it safely allows them to flatter their audience’s own egotistic need to see themselves as an avant-garde. Every modern TV comic falls into this category.
The other day I saw on twitter that Richard Dawkins went somewhere to insult Christians and was so proud of his efforts he was tweeting about it. Dawkins is more famous for being a public douche bag now, than he is for his book The Selfish Gene. I chalk this up mostly to the madness that results from trying to square the prevailing orthodoxy with the realities of biology. Dawkins wants to be a beloved public intellectual and an honest man of science. Instead he is an obnoxious provocateur and a public nuisance.
Dawkins claims to be a militant atheist, not just an anti-Christian bigot, but it’s hard to find any evidence to support his claims. He’s careful not to say bad things about Muslims, probably because he enjoys having his head attached to his neck. Similarly, he has been very careful not to upset the Jews. Christians, on the other hand, get no breaks and he seems to go out of his way to offend them. This is true of all atheists. Whether it is because Christians are a soft target or just anti-Christian animus is debatable.
The other day, someone asked me about this clip from the Joe Rogan Show that Cernovich was promoting. The point was to solicit an opinion from me on Cernovich. My reply was “I will not be shocked if one day we learn that Sam Harris has been strangling hookers and burying them in the desert.” I’ve never found Harris very interesting, so I never bothered to watch him. In that ten minute clip, I got the impression that Harris has a lot of demons. I was also reminded that atheist are almost always joyless dickheads.
I was also reminded that Vox Day used to give Sam Harris the business. I no longer remember the details, but I think a few of the alt-right people have taken shots at Harris, who in addition to being an atheist, is a hooting Progressive and an anti-Trumper. That’s a feature of atheism that goes unremarked. Most are Progressives and usually the hard thumping variety. They may not believe in God, but they are bubbling over with belief in the One True Faith. This suggests that maybe atheism is just another facet of Progressivism.
The Prog impulse to root around in the private lives of strangers, imposing their values on everyone, comes from public Protestantism. This is the general belief that societies are judged as a whole, so the faithful have a duty to root out sin and lift up sinners. In the same way, atheists seem to think that their sacred duty is to stamp out Christianity, as if it is a sin preventing mankind from reaching the singularity. It is excessive belief, manifesting as a hostility toward the more conventional expressions of belief.
To be clear, I’m not a believer. I’m down on the end of the scale with Mencken. I don’t know if the Christians are right about a God in heaven, but I don’t know they are wrong either. I don’t know. I can’t know. For all I know we could be a science experiment for some extra-dimensional species. That said, if religious faith brings you happiness, I’m happy for you and wish you the best with it, just as long as you don’t make a nuisance of yourself. In other words, indifference is my preferred position on your religiosity.
I do know I’d never want to live in a world ruled by atheists.
Want true happiness and contentment? explore your spiritual side, you feel you are missing something, money? it will never be enough etc. Pray to God to forgive your sins and fill you with his Holy spirit and guide your life in Jesus name I pray amen. Try it I dare you but be sincere. There are unseen forces of good and evil battling for control of the souls of this world.
#SettledScience
[/img]
[img
“The atheist believes there is no superior being……. Christ could show up and confirm the tenets of the faith. The same is true of Islam or Judaism. In other words, even though there is no proof now, there could be proof.”
Could here, Could there – Are you sure you aren’t writing about GloBull Warming.
The Milky Way galaxy COULD decide to leave the universe. All it would take is for Obama and the media to constantly bombard us with ‘The Milky Way galaxy leaving the known universe is the biggest threat to our national security’ and you would immediately have 50% of the population with a new belief.
Atheists amuse me.
Likewise.
There are a number of classes of problems. In some cases, X can be proven but not disproven. Another class consists of cases where X can be disproven but not proven. Of course, in some cases X can be proven or disproven.
Anyway, this presents an absurdity.
Namely, it is possible for someone to always support X in case A, always oppose X in case B and avoid case C. In that case, all of his assertions will either be correct or unverifiable.
Furthermore, since the only “event” that can occur is our hero being proven right, again, he’ll produce a track record of only “success”.
Obviously, as a rationalist, a defense mechanism is needed. The idea that “if X can’t be disproven then it is true.” is ridiculous on the face of it.
Which is to say, it must be possible to take positions without proof. Fortunately, even if the question itself can not be proven one way or another, the logic of any given position can be verified.
As an atheist, I do not, exactly, claim that god does not exist. Specifically, I claim that god’s existence is no more logical than any other explanation, of which there are an arbitrarily large number. In other words, the rationality of ‘god’ is arbitrarily low. Any specific religion is geometrically worse, since they not only assert the existence of their specific god, but they also exclude all others.
Furthermore, since no evidence has been collected for or against god, any form of specifics is just fantasy. The idea that human logic, that human justice, applies to god, is completely unsubstantiated. Therefore, a god that sends people to heaven for doing good deeds, should be equally as likely as a god who sends people to heaven for doing evil deeds. Or one that only rewards covfefe.
Now, a lot of people would argue that rationalism itself is the problem here. That religion makes people feel good, or avoid bad habits or something. I would counter, that it is not possible to take invalid positions into your logical framework and have it affect you only in controlled, predictable manners. In other words, once you believe in god, you will use that belief offensively, even if that’s not your intent.
And the worst part, is that it’s not the direct element that causes the most damage. When you fry your brain with religious optimism, you start imagining things like “life is sacred” or “all humans are created equal”. You can’t just take off the rose colored glasses.
To put it in another manner, as long as Christians are voting, as long as Christianity is important to them, as long as it effects who they vote for, Christianity is my concern. And, of course, I do target Christians specifically. There a lot more of them around me than say, Muslims. I totally support keeping the Muslims where they are, where they can’t vote in our elections, but besides that, they’re not a concern to me.
“I was also reminded that atheist are almost always joyless dickheads.”
Thanks, Arcayer for illustrating perfectly with your overly verbose comment the author’s line , you joyless dickhead mongoloid.
Up vote for “mongoloid”. Confederacy of Dunces fan?
Iska, of course I am. What thinking man isn’t, at least after reading it once.
Therefore you are indifferent to the group of Coptic Christians in Egypt, riding a bus to a prayer retreat, who were summarily slaughtered by Islamic terrorists. Worse yet, you may agree with the terrorists; there’s now a few less irritating Christians in the world. Apparently, they were all ordered to deny their faith or be shot, and they all refused, including children. They just couldn’t remove their “rose-colored glasses.”
You would be encouraged to know that Christians are by far the most persecuted religious group in the world now. Be patient: the easy life for Christians in America is inexorably coming to an end. In your best scenario, they may not even be allowed to vote (more likely, they won’t be allowed to run for office).
Maybe you can enlighten us. Describe a group of atheists who got together and, in the name of this philosophy, created anything that has brought good to the world.
There are several logical errors here. First off, you’re trying to make Christians look good by pointing out that they’re superior to X very evil group. However, utility is not relative. It’s perfectly possible for evil people to kill less evil people and thereby do good in the world.
This leads to a further fallacy, which I would sum up as- even Hitler likes dogs.
Agreeing with terrorists doesn’t make you wrong. Terrorists like breathing as much as the rest of us.
Utility gets even more troublesome once you realize that “virtue” in the pursuit of evil is evil. In other words, the terrorists are empowered by their Christian neighbors, who, in the depths of their rose colored world, pay taxes, trade with, raise families alongside and generally, become a supporting pillar of the Islamic world. Without Christian support, Muslims are just savages.
So, being persecuted doesn’t automatically make you the good guy. In reality, Christians allow themselves to be persecuted. They hate taking responsibility for their decisions, and find solace in letting anyone with a little blood lust make their decisions for them. While they may not come at you with guns and machetes, they’re happy to finance and support those who will.
Now, the primary reason I don’t care much about Islam, but I speak out against Christians, is that in the larger scheme, Egypt doesn’t matter. Its economy is nothing, and left to its own devices it’ll crumble under its own weight, eventually. To put it another way, Egypt has almost no chance to colonize Mars.
Furthermore, if I were to advocate humanitarian wars against evil losers, I’d start with North Korea. After them, there are plenty of evil Africans, and a decent supply of evil Asians. Until we’ve dealt with the countless countries much worse than Egypt it is ridiculous to whine about the Egyptians.
However, the countries that CAN deal with these sorts of things are limited. Those same countries can also fight threats much eviler than Islamic rule, like cancer. So, a group that threatens America, matters more than an evil loser.
It’s not good enough to say, Christians are self destructive so they can be ignored. They’re bringing America down with them. If America falls, we could lose centuries of progress. This is a very high priority.
Actually, I’m pretty sure America can’t be saved. But, its destruction can be delayed, and while it still has some of its worth, it can continue to spread seeds for the next generations.
So, we reach the final point. When have atheists ever accomplished anything. And, we run into an issue- by what standard? Of course, a pure atheist group has never existed, or, if they have, the sample size is too small. Atheists have always been forced to tolerate and work under religious rule. However, I hold that while atheism has never had total power, there exist gradations in religiosity. Importantly, people used to be way more religious. Religious influence fell precipitously during the industrial revolution, and has continued a slow fall since then. The 1900s are not as perfect, and a lot of bad ideas pop up during them. However, I actually hold that the modern age is impressively moral. Above all else, our technology is amazing. Furthermore, the amount of resources wasted in war has plummeted. I don’t believe the idea that technology is built on strokes of genius. It’s built on industry. Industry that was finally able to thrive, largely because we became less religious and stopped destroying it in war. In so far as our modern ideologies have bred fallacy, it’s largely because we can finally afford to do so, because we’re right in narrow fields that are extremely important. It’s ridiculous to point to some hunter gather who makes only perfect decisions because he instantly dies if he goes off his rails, and call him the pinnacle of morality.
There is more than just this meat world (I have had experiences that defy rational explanations). However, I don’t think the spirit realm is controlled by a grumpy old storm god who made a pact with some of the most vile people on the planet.
Maybe it’s your understanding and not the truth of God that is involved here.
You seem to prefer a heart full of hatred being justified to recognizing a creator of the universe who has a plan for it and everyone and everything within it (even the simple sparrow and its fate is mentioned in the scriptures).
Experiences that defy explanation sets (which are ever growing) don’t give any power to irrational\supernatural explanations.
“This is true of all atheists.”
Lost your own argument right there.
I see no problem not believing in god.
I believe atheism has been hi-jacked by the left, by radicals. This is the ffr.org – Freedom From Religion. These assholes want to ban any mention of God, Jesus, etc from everything. They are leftists – similar to the nuts that are still protesting Trump.
As usual our ‘government’ folds every time the atheists complain about a cross on public property. In reality, the US Constitution says “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” this really means that the US shall not have an official state religion – like England has.
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion”
Just as a side note, the First Amendment makes a point that “CONGRESS may not”, etc. The various States were perfectly free to establish a state religion, and some of them did. Of course that was a long time ago… Some have argued that the 14th Amendment extends that restriction to the States, and many (most?) states have since incorporated language into their State Constitutions which restrict establishment of state churches. Still, just as a point of historical interest, the 1st Amendment does not prevent state supported (your tax dollars at work!) churches.
True, Jason. In that context, the word ‘respecting’ can be taken to mean “in regard to”, which tends to make the passage read a little more coherently to me.
What’s wrong with agnosticism? If something can’t be proved or disproved, why bother? After seeing the hypocrisy and cruelty of the Catholic church as a young boy I decided to lead a decent life-the golden rule works well here-and leave behind all the praying and hosanna’s. So, when I die if nothing is out there, no harm done. I lived the life I wanted to live. If there is some accounting of my life then I should be fine. Unless of course not paying sufficient homage to some mythical being is truly a sin worthy of eternity in hell. That makes no sense to me. It turns heaven into North Korea with everyone constantly sucking up to the Dear Leader. Can some superior being really be interested in how many rosaries I mumbled? I just don’t buy it. On the other hand I see no gain for torturing those that are believers. We all have to contemplate that dark hole in the ground at the end of this ride. Deal with it however you wish. Whatever gives you comfort I’m fine with as long as you keep it to yourself and those with like minds.
Yeah, if there was a god – why would he allow the Catholic church to be turned into a pedophile club, of massive proportions. Just sayin’
It’s well known on the streets of Rome that the church hierarchy is infested with perverts. Disgusting.
Yeah, me too, CC. I think that a man can choose his own road and walk on it perfectly well without telling others that their road is all fucked up, or that it ain’t a road at all. Being an atheist, or a Christian, or whatever appeals to you gives nobody the standing to tell somebody else that their choice is retarded.
Well, the problem with sitting on thought experiment fences around the cemetery of the gods is the pass accorded to the often mandatory – or else – fencing in of everybody by this or that cattlechism. Even the ones who mind their own business, don’t force-proselytize, are guilty by association, complicit, if they are members of such a gang.
I have a bro, back in the SC. He got himself saved & reborn – by association with another dude who did the same. But I know both of them. I know bro’s motives. & would place a sizeable bet on the other one’s motives – he was a SOB back in his 1st birth days, one of those glandular cases who had 40lbs on all his peers, & liked nothing more than to throw that weight around. He also used to like to drive around with similar rednecks, taking pellet gun potshots at blacks…among who knows what other things. I think he did something too far, freaked himself out, became a compensatory bible thumper.
Anyway, all preface to this: bro informed me the word is faith, not deeds. Faith is toted up in the accounting, & if it’s wanting, all the good deeds in the world ain’t gonna’ keep the frying bacon you smell from being yours. Pascal’s wager only makes sense – *some* sense – if people like bro are right – but “right” from them is reference to bible stories – their particular bible – even while the religious world & history is replete with bibles.
As said, I know his motives: Baptist catechism palliated his PTSD, eventually eradicated (he says) the nightmares. Red reality pills or blue opiate ones. Pain is a desperate-making thing. & nobody’s immune, or above it. But blue opiate pills only work for many, or most – not all. What’s undeniable is pain pills have nasty side effects, even if from sufferer’s perspective those are the lesser of two evils. Also undeniable, given the graveyard of the gods – all nods to Mencken – genetic affinity for addiction to blue pill pain reduction is wired in far & wide (alcoholism is but a drop in the bottle, comparatively).
Believers are already tortured. That’s why they are believers. After that comes projection (not in every individual case, but in more than enough cases), & the tortured become torturers.
Z sez a world ruled by atheists would be worse. He needn’t worry about a counterfactual that never was & will probably never be. But he ought to think some on how rule, itself, is religion. I, personally, don’t pledge allegiance to the rag, or any other deus ex machina argument from authority. And even if the full of very bad stuff good book, hereabouts, were – against all odds – completely true, I’d have to flip it the bird, & a smile, just on general principle. Pharaoh on earth, pharaoh in the sky – I get, & can take, the joke, so phuck ‘em both (as they continuously make their ways to Mencken’s graveyard).
http://nowscape.com/atheism/dead_gods.htm
I agree CC.
“Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones. I am not afraid. ”
Marcus Aurelius
Different un. fyi
The Zman uses a clever formal debating trick by redefining terms to suit his agenda. He argues that Atheism and skepticism are different. They aren’t. They’re the same because Atheism is NOT a belief; it is lack of belief.
This is how Atheism.org defines Atheism
“Atheism is one thing: A lack of belief in gods.
“Atheism is not an affirmative belief that there is no god … It is simply a rejection of the assertion that there are gods. Atheism is too often defined incorrectly as a belief system. To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.”
That older dictionaries define Atheism as belief betrays the massive (mono)theistic influence on our culture and an attempt by believers to discredit Atheism.
If atheism is a religion, then NOT collecting stamps is a hobby.
After studying numerous religions for more than half a century, I’m convinced that belief is for fools and gullible old women.
It makes them feel good.
Hitchen’s razor (see Hanlon’s too):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitchens%27s_razor
Christopher Hitchens offers an example of this approach in Letters to a Young Contrarian (2001), in which he writes: “I’m not even an atheist so much as I am an antitheist; I not only maintain that all religions are versions of the same untruth, but I hold that the influence of churches, and the effect of religious belief, is positively harmful.”[4]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antitheism
Safer to be agnostic?
A friend once said “Thank God I’m an atheist.”
Neither agnostic nor atheism muster up. Agnosticism, to not know, is an impossibility, because how would you know you don’t know? Ignorance, on the other hand is the absence of knowledge, which is corrected by education. If the teaching is rejected, then whose fault is it?
Atheism is a religion by any other name. Athiests are humanists, everyone is a god, which is worshiping that which was created, rather than the creator. Athiests are not far removed from satanists or sorcerers. Yes, it’s a slippery slope when one divides themselves from the truth. So is moral relativism, where then anything can be justified.
It matters little how Athiests prefer to define themselves. Everyone believes something on faith. A supposition which cannot be proven. Taken at face value, since one cannot prove either the existence or the non-existence of the spirit kingdom, to believe something doesn’t exist is a belief, period.
So, if everyone has faith, then everyone will be held accountable for what they believe, which is a verb and connotes action. Lack of accountability seems to be the source of a lot of the world’s problems, and it would seem, as well, and based on Gerold’s post, athiests would prefer to avoid accountability for their belief there is no god.
“Everyone believes something on faith.” Sounds like a faithful utterance to me.
If there’s some accountant in the sky toting up the faith beans, then it is that beancounter that is accountable for the faith factioning. But there’s not. There’s only factions on the ground, building strawgod immortality projects (see Ernest Becker) to which they can “hedge away” their own accountability – to mortality (among other things).
I recently had a conversation with an atheist and asked him to describe the god he didn’t believe in. I expected him to answer with “God is a sky elf” or “A giant man on a throne” or something like that. Instead, he said, “I can’t describe something that does not exist.” I told him, “Of course you can! I don’t believe in unicorns, but I can describe them. They are like a horse only they have a single horn coming out of their head. Tell me what you don’t believe in!” He refused…absolutely refused to answer. I still find that very odd.
Any atheist out there, please describe what it is you believe does not exist. I am curious.
Go ahead and describe the god in which you believe.
That.
Me? Who says I believe in a god? I do believe that there is some creative force in the universe, some reason why there is something rather than nothing, some principle that makes the laws of physics what they are instead of something else. Whatever that thing is, I think maybe it has something to do with consciousness as well… maybe. Most people, theists or atheists, don’t seem to think that qualifies as a god but it is as far as I have gotten.
Your turn. What’s your idea of what god isn’t?
As far as I’m concerned, god isn’t anything. How to describe nothing?
I mean, it is impossible to not bring one’s lifetime of cultural experience to the discussion whereby god is often depicted as an elderly but robust looking man in flowing robes and all. Is that what you’re driving at?
Hey Rdawg! “I mean, it is impossible to not bring one’s lifetime of cultural experience to the discussion whereby god is often depicted as an elderly but robust looking man in flowing robes and all. Is that what you’re driving at?”
Actually, I am kind of driving in wandering circles, but what you say gives me some better direction. The guy on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel really IS the image that a lot of people (both believers and atheists) have in mind when they profess what they think. Honestly, I find it difficult to imagine how any thinking person (no insult meant to anyone, I am just being honest) can have a true belief in that Sistine God, a giant with human shape but infinite power, knowledge, compassion, and a determination to torture dead spirits for eternity. It just doesn’t make any kind of sense to me to combine all those attributes. But of course God is much more difficult to pin down to other people. If someone tells me that God is Infinite Love, or is the Will to Be, or is the Unmoved Mover — well, that is hard to respond to because those things are so much beyond human experience that I have no way to relate to them. Those things are all so poorly defined that I have no way to claim either a belief or a disbelief in them. Let’s take a made up word like “whetfromal”. Do you believe in whetfromal? As long as no one can describe what “whetfromal” is, how can anyone say whether it is real? Do I believe in God? Tell me what we are talking about and maybe I can give you an answer yes or no. Do I disbelieve in God? Same thing… Unless I understand what we are talking about I logically MUST stay on the fence of agnosticism. “Hey, I would love to give you an answer, but that question is beyond my pay grade!”
Generally speaking, when I see people arguing about “God”, I think of two giraffes arguing about Differential Calculus, when neither of them can explain what Differential Calculus is or does. They literally do not have the biological wiring to comprehend the subject. Does God exist? If it is a God small enough for us to comprehend, then no, almost certainly not. If God is something beyond our comprehension, then I have nothing to make a decision on. To me, Richard Dawkins (with his certainty) is the same sort of jerk as the “Repent Now” enthusiast handing out pamphlets on the street corner — call them the yin and yang of strong belief uncoupled from functional knowledge. (By the way, Dawkins’ book, “The Blind Watchmaker” is really good. At least back then he was a bit more understanding toward the religious.)
Anyway, Rdawg… that’s my take on it. Atheist? Devout theist? Not much difference between them, they are just grabbing two ends of the same sharp stick. As for myself, all I can see is that there is unexpected beauty and order in the universe, and I have no explanation of where it comes from, only a profound admiration and great joy that it is there. Is that God? Is that just physics? Dunno… above my pay grade.
I Love Your comments, Jason. Basically the same place I am today.
Cheers
A way out of your mortality (does not exist). Fictions can’t change the stubborn facts.
I believe in “The Almighty”, it’s crooked ass, money grubbing, gay /lesbian loving organized religions I can’t abide.
I’m good with the Ten Suggestions……formerly known as The Ten Commandments. Banks/governments are exempt from the (Thou Shalt Not Steal) clause. The MSM is exempt from the (Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness/Lying) clause and the MIC/Presidents/Multinational Corps. are exempt from the (Thou Shalt Not Kill) clause. They must all be atheists.
Dawkins has, in fact, criticized Islam on many occasions, so the person who wrote this article is very, very wrong and is twisting truth to fit his assumptions.
Examples:
“I left when [Mr. Ahmed] said Muhammad rode a winged horse. A non-timewasting journalist needs at least SOME grasp of reality,” Mr. Dawkins tweeted Sunday to his 1.32 million followers. “Ridiculing belief in a winged horse is not ‘bigotry’, not ‘Islamophobia’, not ‘racism’. It’s sober, decent, gentle, scientific realism.
“If you believe you’re Napoleon or a poached egg, you’re in an asylum. If you believe in winged horses you’re a New Statesman journalist,” he added.
Haven’t read Koran so couldn’t quote chapter & verse like I can for Bible. But often say Islam greatest force for evil today
— Richard Dawkins (@RichardDawkins)
For me, the horror of Hitler is matched by bafflement at the ovine stupidity of his followers. Increasingly feel the same about Islamism.
Dawkins has taken shots at all major religions, but Islam has become the particular focus of his recent ire. “I have an anxiety about beheadings, stoning, setting people on fire,” he said. “No other group in the world at the moment does that. Isn’t that clear?” The emergence of the New Atheists was not accidental: their books were published shortly after 9/11, and Islamic fundamentalism remains one of their major preoccupations. After the Charlie Hebdo attacks in Paris in January this year, Dawkins took to Twitter (“No, all religions are NOT equally violent”) and blamed the actions of the terrorists exclusively on their faith, dismissing any socio-political theorising as to why two brothers might shoot 12 people at a satirical magazine.
“I detest any tendency to treat a person on the basis of a group to which they belong.” The notion that Muslims might see their faith as an inseparable part of their identity is absurd to him: “That’s their problem and they need to grow up.”
After a series of rows following similar statements (“Of course you can have an opinion about Islam without having read Qu’ran. You don’t have to read Mein Kampf to have an opinion about nazism”), Dawkins has come to believe he is targeted by hysterical, politically correct critics, who refuse to see he is attacking a religion, not a race. But his public praise for the work of professional anti-Islam controversialists, such as the far-right Dutch politician Geert Wilders, have not helped his case. He has also attracted some unsavoury cheerleaders, such as Tommy Robinson, the former head of the English Defence League, who supported Dawkins’s statement that Islam was “one of the great evils in the world”.
In conclusion, if the article-writer can not get his (simple) facts straight, then it is likely that the rest of article is a similar emotions-driven nonsense as well.
Atheism is illogical because it cannot be proven. You cannot prove there is no god. In a way that makes it even more irrational than our butchered pagan sun god religions.
Atheism is disbelief in god; not an assertion that god does not exist.
Hey, dawg, if somebody’s belief is atheism and they just kinda drop it and don’t give a shit anymore, does it become athewasm?
I don’t know. I never heard of “athewasm”; is it related to insouciance?
Anyway, as a non-believer I never know if I am atheist or agnostic; and I sure don’t give a fuck. Nor do I care about the believers in: Christ, Allah, Yahweh, Odin, Buddha, Shiva or whatever.
If they’re happy to stay outta my business, I am happy to stay outta theirs.
The whole thing is frankly boring, and everyone eventually has to find their own way.
Well being a believer this tripe Zedman wrote doesn’t apply to me. Nope. No Sir!
Talking to God the other day. He tells me this is all bullshit. Tells me too many have strayed from the word. Following false idols from the deserts of the Middle East. He is also fed up that men grovel on their knees rather then standing on their own two feet.
Time to return to the fold.
The Great Oak Door Awaits!
[img
[/img]
Yours in Odin,
RiNS
Rob, what if some preacher tells you that God told him that he’s tired of your shit and is fixin to fuck you up would you panic? Me neither.
Which God are you talking about. I am a bit confused. Wouldnt panic as I am not worried either way. Odin is lookin’ out for me.
Failing that he told me to hurl insults by farting in the general direction of the non-believers a la John Cleese.
[img
[/img]
Oh hell ,Mad Dog is on the war path . Tinker Bell is not far behind.
God ,at least the Christian God is Spirit.The Trinity existing in 3 persons within the Godhead all co – equal and co – eternal . Expressing the Godhead as The Father ,Son and Holy Spirit.
Here is what’s wrong with you… even if our Gospel is veiled ,it is veiled to those who are perishing ,whose mind the God of this age has blinded…1 Corinthians 4: 3-4
BB- How can anyone look at the beauty and wonders of the natural world and NOT believe in God?
BL – I ask myself the same question regularly. Especially on the days when I have had enough of driving into the city to go to work. Spend enough time in a big city and you can begin to understand why people quit thinking about God. Or philosophy/religion/ethics in general for that matter. It sucks the soul out of you.
If I had my way I’d sell it all and pack it up and head back into the interior and the only people I’d ever see or speak to again outside of the big G man himself would be the fine folks on TBP. But Mrs. Marion is redoing the kitchen. So. Hi ho, hi ho, off to work I go…
FM- In the not too distant future I will chuck it all to live somewhat remote. Been working on areas for gold prospecting in my retirement, I don’t really accept that I am old. Nature blows me away, everyone should get out of the city to partake.
God/nature is good.
You mean, how can you look at a parasitic wasp laying an egg inside a caterpillar which will eat the caterpillar alive from the inside.. And not believe there’s a god?
@Hb
Even outnumbered 3 to 1 my God beats your God.
Eight days a week!
He ain’t no pussy.
He’s one bad muthafucka!
@BL
Couldn’t agree more!
Praise Odin!
He rid the world of Ice Giants.
[img
[/img]
If only he could do something with the Hildabeast. I understand the dilemma. Even he a badass like him doesn’t want to have anything to do with that cunt.
RiNS- Great Spirit/Odin….whatever each person calls God, makes no difference to me.
Great I will save you seat at table at Valhalla.
You’ll love it.
Songs, women and beer for enternity.
And best part is Nickleback is banned!
[img
?w=635[/img]
Zman: Sorry, you’re full of shit.
I’m an atheist – been that way ever since I discovered priests and nuns were liers, hypocrites and passed bodily wastes just I did.
I don’t give a rats ass what you believe (except that believing in any religion makes you vulnerable to immediate dead end thinking, not to mention wishful thinking)
Just don’t try and convert me to whatever brand of supernatural belief you are peddling and we’ll get along fine. Unfortunately when you try to prove your point by using a religious source, belief or quote, your reasoning is immediately blown out, loosing all credibility and I will immediately stop reading or listening because your argument dissolved into make-believe.
God bless. (that’s sarcasm)
I’m guessing you didn’t read it all the way to the end, did you?
Dawg did you get to how post includes. What other conclusion should Ole Muck choose but offense.
Zedman concludes with..
I do know I’d never want to live in a world ruled by atheists.
I was referring to the part where OM was railing against being converted, even though Z said he was a non-believer. Maybe OM was speaking generally.
I think he was. Zedman started with a flawed premise. No surprise that he concludes with one as well.
I believe Elvis Presley is still alive. Prove me wrong. Kind of the same argument people make about religion. Zman, you wouldn’t last 3 seconds in a debate with Sam Harris. Your full of nonsense.
“I do know I’d never want to live in a world run by atheists.”
How do you know you haven’t been…?
Seriously, what makes you think heads of state, or anyone else “running” things, are actually particularly religious? They just have to pretend to be. I’d bet half the people in any church, temple, what-have-you.. are pretending.
“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.”
Lucius Annaeus Seneca
Seneca was a fairly smart man when it came to observing the effective tools used for control. It is a shame he never talked to the Norse God during his life. It would have made him wise as well.
I’m sure he is regretting his ways now. Seeing as he is sitting in the 700 section seats at Valhalla.
Eating old hot dogs.
Chewing stale pretzels.
Slurping warm left over beer.
For an eternity.
Poor Seneca!
[img
[/img]
Folks don’t be Seneca!
Yours in Odin,
RiNS
It appears fairly obvious (at least to me) that God created us with self-awareness and a sense of right and wrong, and turns each of us loose in an imperfect world densely saturated with evil and temptations. God is our advisor and guiding spirit, but only if we turn to him for support. It is up to us to make the choices and decisions that shape and affect our lives and the world. By doing so, we prove our worthiness (or lack thereof) to commune spiritually with God after our corporeal existence is finished.
I find this belief particularly comforting when confronting the age-old question “Why did God allow this to happen”? The answer is because God gave us dominion over the world, and we are judged by what we do with that charge. Similarly, nothing is ‘all part of God’s plan” even though we don’t understand. There is no “God’s plan”. Whatever happens, well it just happens — it is up to us to prevent bad things from happening, make good things happen, and deal with the reality our actions create. Yes the baby died – God did not kill the baby as a part of some larger plan. That would cast doubt on God as a heartless monster. The baby died despite our best efforts to prevent it. End of story. And yes, WW II happened. It was our fault, not God’s. ETC., ETC., ETC.
May God bless you all, and watch your butts!