When atheists go too far

dvpower

philologos wrote: »

Indeed, if.

Since you think an eternity of suffering in hell is a just punishment for being an atheist, would you support some kind of punishment for atheists on Earth (if you had your way)?

philologos

^^ No. I would hope that all people seriously thought about Christ. You're presenting it as if it is a me versus you issue, but it really isn't because I'm as deserving of hell in my opinion as anyone else is.

ihateirony

Actually, serious post now, if I'm raised in a country where everyone's atheist and nobody has ever heard of God does that mean we all go to hell when we die? Because if God chose for me to be born there that's a tad harsh

Mark200

philologos wrote: »

He decided to do it the way He did presumably because it was the best way possible. It is considerably clearer to us that our sin had a price and that God forgave us.

Sin had a high price? And who supposedly set that price? Oh yeah, god. It's quite self-evident that god could have simply decided himself that there is no longer a price for sin, or that we would no longer have to pay for it.

philologos wrote: »

I don't see why this is a huge difficulty because it doesn't seem that if God did "just change the rules" that you would believe.

Of course I wouldn't believe, I'm just pointing out just one of the absolute absurdities in the Christian belief. And your justification is equally absurd - 'it must have been the best way because thats how my god did it'.

Antikythera

dvpower wrote: »

He thinks they should turn to God to be saved from hell.

Of course that option isn't open to anyone who has already died. So, for example, if you had an atheist relative die recently, philologos believes that they are destined for an eternity of punishment in hell, and he thinks this is a just punishment. It's all pretty sickening.

I dunno, hell sounds pretty cool! I'd rather be there fornicating and gallivanting than sitting on a cloud playing a fkn harp!

dvpower

ihateirony wrote: »

Actually, serious post now, if I'm raised in a country where everyone's atheist and nobody has ever heard of God does that mean we all go to hell when we die? Because if God chose for me to be born there that's a tad harsh

I think there's a get out of jail card for people who never heard of God. afaik eternal damnation is for those who had some knowledge of God but didn't submit to him.

Mark200

dvpower wrote: »

I think there's a get out of jail card for people who never heard of God. afaik eternal damnation is for those who had some knowledge of God but didn't submit to him.

Ah that's convenient, so if everyone in the world becomes atheist and doesn't tell their children about the history of belief in god(s) then everyone will go to heaven

ihateirony

dvpower wrote: »

I think there's a get out of jail card for people who never heard of God. afaik eternal damnation is for those who had some knowledge of God but didn't submit to him.

But like, where's the line drawn? Like if I hear someone mention it in the streets, but no info on it and keep walking, to I go to hell then? Or what if someone misrepresents God and I reject him based on that? Do I go to hell then?

dvpower

Mark200 wrote: »

Ah that's convenient, so if everyone in the world becomes atheist and doesn't tell their children about the history of belief in god(s) then everyone will go to heaven

If we could just persuade the current generations to take one for the team and never mention God again, then it seems future generation might be saved.
God might throw a spanner in the works 'though.;)

philologos

drkpower wrote: »

You want me, and many of my friends and family, to burn in hell for eternity.

For the umpteenth time that isn't what I want at all. I don't want that for anyone.

Honestly you should be a tabloid writer. You can make anything out of what people say.

Canis Lupus

Mark200 wrote: »

Ah that's convenient, so if everyone in the world becomes atheist and doesn't tell their children about the history of belief in god(s) then everyone will go to heaven

lol, problem solved

ihateirony

philologos wrote: »

For the umpteenth time that isn't what I want at all. I don't want that for anyone.

Honestly you should be a tabloid writer. You can make anything out of what people say.

I think what he's trying to say is your desire is for that to happen if they don't convert, which they're not going to. Is that not true?

drkpower

philologos wrote: »

For the umpteenth time that isn't what I want at all. I don't want that for anyone.

IF I continue to reject god, do you want me to burn for eternity?

dvpower

ihateirony wrote: »

But like, where's the line drawn? Like if I hear someone mention it in the streets, but no info on it and keep walking, to I go to hell then? Or what if someone misrepresents God and I reject him based on that? Do I go to hell then?

The rules are unclear. All you need to know is that God is just and if you do go to hell, you bloody well deserve it.

dvpower

philologos wrote: »

For the umpteenth time that isn't what I want at all. I don't want that for anyone.

For unrepentant atheists that have already died? Do you want them to go to hell?

Mark200

philologos wrote: »

For the umpteenth time that isn't what I want at all. I don't want that for anyone.

Honestly you should be a tabloid writer. You can make anything out of what people say.

First of all, why don't you want them to go to hell?

Second of all, do you agree that your god does want it for some people? (Presumably he wouldn't allow people to go to hell who he felt didn't deserve it).

ihateirony

dvpower wrote: »

The rules are unclear. All you need to know is that God is just and if you do go to hell, you bloody well deserve it.

That's not true. He's not infallible or something, he even admitted after the flood that he shouldn't have done it and promised not to do it again. He makes mistakes and whether his actions are just or not it's not determined by whether he did them or not.

MagicMarker

ihateirony wrote: »

That's not true. He's not infallible or something, he even admitted after the flood that he shouldn't have done it and promised not to do it again. He makes mistakes and whether his actions are just or not it's not determined by whether he did them or not.

Not sure if serious.

Chuck Stone

philologos wrote: »

For the umpteenth time that isn't what I want at all. I don't want that for anyone.

Why do you want your god to kill us with fire?

Do you really unwant us that much?

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_2R7KGeDSKQg/TJ6KKBGzuxI/AAAAAAAAAHs/AEoem_y3wWM/s640/kill-it-with-fire-demotivational-poster-1235695993.jpg

ihateirony

MagicMarker wrote: »

Not sure if serious.

Depends on your definition of serious, but I'm presuming truth in everything those on the God side are saying so I can try to figure out the contradictions reduce them and form a more a more comprehensible understanding of what they actually think. It's easier to argue with people if you help them know what they're talking about.

Cú Giobach

philologos wrote: »

It's not comparable at all with rape. God is Lord over the universe, He has given us standards for our benefit and will punish us if we turn away from Him. Much like other authorities. I can't cry to the judge if I am arrested and claim that the law is unjust.

The only "law" most decent living atheists are breaking is that they do not love god with all their heart, mind and soul. This is why I said earlier the only authorities your god could be compared to are totalitarian regimes, ie, ones where no discontent is allowed.
I must obey the laws of the land but I do not have to love the government.
In Stalin's Russia I could not have stood up and shouted "I hate Stalin", here I can shout from the rooftops "I hate Enda".
If I say "I hate Yahweh" the result would be in a similar vein to the one I would receive from the old NKVD (only much much worse).

philologos

^^ We also fundamentally fail in loving others as ourselves. Something which follows from the first in many cases.

Cú Giobach

philologos wrote: »

^^ We also fundamentally fail in loving others as ourselves. Something which follows from the first in many cases.

Indeed, but this is true for believers and non-believers alike.

philologos

Cú Giobach wrote: »

Indeed, but this is true for believers and non-believers alike.

Indeed, but as Christians would see it it doesn't end there. We need to strive to do this better with God's help. Ultimately that's something I don't see as being such a bad motivation in life.

drkpower

And Jakkass completely ignores 4 or 5 questions on this page alone, because he cannnot admit to himself how disgusting his views are.

drkpower

philologos wrote: »

Ultimately that's something I don't see as being such a bad motivation in life.

Its a great motivation! Because if you dont believe, you will burn for eternity. Sick.

Cú Giobach

philologos wrote: »

Indeed, but as Christians would see it it doesn't end there. We need to strive to do this better with God's help. Ultimately that's something I don't see as being such a bad motivation in life.

It's not just Christians who are striving for a better world, far from it.
Charity and morality are not only the concern of Christians, I need no god to tell me wrong from right and live as best I can, hurting no other living creature, to the best of my abilities. I would be more (though not quite) on the Buddhist side of things.

philologos

I never said that Cú Globach. I was commenting on the fact that we all fail to love our neighbour as ourselves and its not easy. I'm suggesting that we can do with God's help irrespective of who we are.

rower93

First post here. Like all this atheist stuff.

At the end of the day nobody cares what you believe in or do not believe in....
Simples:)

Cú Giobach

philologos wrote: »

I never said that Cú Globach. I was commenting on the fact that we all fail to love our neighbour as ourselves and its not easy. I'm suggesting that we can do with God's help irrespective of who we are.

This is where we differ in absolute terms, humans don't need a god to know wrong from right, it is actually within us.
For me killing is wrong, I don't need a god to make a law prohibiting it for me to know that.
What use is your god to say a Buddhist monk who lives his whole life hurting physically or emotionally no living creature? If this monk lives a perfect life yet never accepts Jehovah as the supreme ruler of the universe he will still suffer eternal torment after his death according to your beliefs, won't he.

philologos

^^ That depends on what the nature of right and wrong is. Is it subjective or objective?

Chuck Stone

rower93 wrote: »

First post here. Like all this atheist stuff.

At the end of the day nobody cares what you believe in or do not believe in....
Simples:)

Well y'all got yourself a li'l problem thar son.

This ol' thread has done gotten itself over 800 posts an 16,500 views in a short space space of time.

So it sure do seems as if folks do care.

johnmcdnl

rower93 wrote: »

First post here. Like all this atheist stuff.

At the end of the day nobody cares what you believe in or do not believe in....
Simples:)

well I care if my children's teachers beliefs that the earth is 6000 years old and my children come home telling me this despite me raising them telling them to belief science and to make your own morals on what you belief is right rather than basing them on a 2000 year old book...

no one cares if you keep your beliefs to yourself but the second they start infringing on someone else's views there's a problem...

I'd also have a problem with a parent telling their children that if they don't go to mass and say their prayers that they're going to burn in hell for all eternity... but I suppose there's nothing I can really do about that only hope the children grow up and see the lies for what it is..

rower93

I think it's that people are afraid that all this indoctrination or ramming down throats of beliefs of a certain majority is set in concrete.

For those worried about their children I think it's silly. It just goes in one ear and out the other. They are more worried about who's on top of the premier league or when the next session is tbh.

Cú Giobach

philologos wrote: »

^^ That depends on what the nature of right and wrong is. Is it subjective or objective?

Well, we could get into quite a long philosophical discussion on that one, but I will say both, to truly understand right from wrong one has to see things from all angles. The word here is empathy.

It seems the basic rule that evolution seems to have given us, because societies across the planet all seem to have this ideal in common is, do no harm and try to improve the life of others.

(Off to bed now, I hope there are no locks overnight, am enjoying this thread)

T2daK

who's god haha

pragmatic1

rower93 wrote: »

I think it's that people are afraid that all this indoctrination or ramming down throats of beliefs of a certain majority is set in concrete.

For those worried about their children I think it's silly. It just goes in one ear and out the other. They are more worried about who's on top of the premier league or when the next session is tbh.

I dont know about that. I remember not being able to sleep one night as a kid because the concept of eternity scared the shyte out of me.

KeithAFC

FTGFOP wrote: »

I knew of him only as a science writer until Creationism started to be taken seriously in the US. I see his current role as an inevitable response to the rise of Creationism.

Why? What does it matter if people believe in that? Its wacko but so what.

Its almost as if people don't like it if you believe in wacko ****.

moneyman

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urlTBBKTO68

The High King

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mmskXXetcg

Turtwig

Somehow stumbled back into this thread. Anyhu, that video is one of the greatest travesties of the internet. Just like most people associate Pascal's Wager as an "achievement" of Pascal's, Dawkins gave one heck of an explanation of his views to that crowd and three entirely different answers to that women. The third one though, is the only one that most people will see.:(
If you want to make an honest critique if Dawkins then you should get your arse on Fora.tv and watch the entire lecture and q and a.

http://fora.tv/2006/10/23/Richard_Dawkins
(q14 - What if you are wrong?)

steddyeddy

As I said its good that some people are combatting the more damaging aspects of religion but I dont think theres a place in society for attacking people who hold personal beliefs who dont harm others.

steddyeddy

Sorry malty just to take you up on your sig if I may

"Scepticism is the scientist's duty, however much the stance may expose us to ridicule."- Colin Patterson.

It has rarley been skepticisim that has been exposed to the most ridicule. The discoverers of a lot of major scientific milestones were ridiculed themselves by the mainstream science.

This relates back to my stance that a scientist should take the position "we simply dont know".

Ellis Dee

steddyeddy wrote: »

As I said its good that some people are combatting the more damaging aspects of religion but I dont think theres a place in society for attacking people who hold personal beliefs who dont harm others.

As I see it, the personal beliefs that people hold do not harm anyone. However, when they try to push those beliefs on others, they become a boring nuisance at best and at worst they (not the personal beliefs as such, but the persons trying to force others to live in accordance with them) can indeed become harmful. There are many ways to oppose them, but I find that making fun of them is better than a lot of other ways. However, making fun of absurd people or those who publicly profess absurd views and thereby invite ridicule is hardly "attacking" them.:rolleyes:

Freddie59

Ellis Dee wrote: »

However, when they try to push those beliefs on others, they become a boring nuisance

Kinda like some Atheists?;)

Canis Lupus

Freddie59 wrote: »

Kinda like some Atheists?;)

We'll never kick you out of bed on a Sunday morning to go to mass.

Shenshen

Freddie59 wrote: »

Kinda like some Atheists?;)

When I see the first atheist physically trying to stop someone from entering a church in this country, I think you might have a point.

At the moment, it's a very uneven playing field indeed.

Ellis Dee

Freddie59 wrote: »

Kinda like some Atheists?;)

Do you know atheists like that? I don't. Thank the sky fairy (joke!).:):) And I've never even heard of atheists who would try to have atheism made a compulsory subject in schools or have a "ding-dong for atheism" on the national broadcaster's radio and TV stations at certain hours of the day. I suppose atheists are far better at not doing anything than at pushing anything on anyone. Essentially, all they mostly want is for the god-bothers to push off and leave them alone.

Ghost Buster

Ellis Dee wrote: »

Do you know atheists like that? I don't. Thank the sky fairy (joke!).:):) And I've never even heard of atheists who would try to have atheism made a compulsory subject in schools or have a "ding-dong for atheism" on the national broadcaster's radio and TV stations at certain hours of the day. I suppose atheists are far better at not doing anything than at pushing anything on anyone. Essentially, all they mostly want is for the god-bothers to push off and leave them alone.

Sure you know atheists like that . They are absolutely everywhere... well by everywhere i mean on Boards.ie in The atheist section and on topics dealing with atheism. Non belief pushing bastards!!!!!!!

Cú Giobach

All those atheists having discussions on a discussion forum, bastards. :mad: