Hey theists! I am an atheist. But I am not your enemy.

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: Prezbo369
Ho, hum. I would go to the trouble of making up a diary entry which presents the atheist view so forthrightly?

But you see it doesn't, thus my doubts...

Only a few people are actively doubting the validity of Christianity

lol

But it's not worth debating, so I won't bother any more.

You have, though, succeeded in illustrating the OP's point that some modern atheists have an attitude problem.

Doubting you does not by itself give me nor anyone else an 'attitude'.....throwing out such accusations is usually (and in this case definitely) a smokescreen.

You were still unable to address the main point that I was making, that causing people to doubt their preconceived notions or beliefs is not in any way unethical and that indulging people in their superstitions absolutely is.

a reply to: HarbingerOfShadows

I appreciate it, you are a moderate atheist, which is only one step away from an agnostic.
What I will call radical atheists, need post troll every religious thread, and make weekly youtube video's against God and religion. They are preaching atheism.

A more interesting debate has arisen lately is if radical liberal atheists will condemn Islam on equal terms with Christianity based on how it treats people around the world in 2014 ? Bill Maher who is a radical atheist says he doesn't see it happening.

Are they scared ?
Because if that is what is keeping them from speaking out, it's interesting it's only the Christians they are going after because ideologically it's just so much easier to throw them to the lions, and not ever have to worry about repercussions.

In western countries if a Christian or Muslim decide to become an atheist that is ok, if a Muslim wants to become an atheist in Saudi Arabia it's the death penalty. So it really surprises me that radical atheism doesn't condemn this more.

OP what are your thoughts as an atheist ?

a reply to: Prezbo369

Indulging people in their delusions and encouraging others is completely unethical imho.

Can you can do the impossible and prove a negative.
I would love to see you try.

It's funny that you have become the mirror image of the Banshee on your avatar.

a reply to: Blue_Jay33

You don't want to hear my thoughts on that.

originally posted by: Prezbo369

You're the author of the threads:

I thank God for hell.

and

Are there bigger HYPOCRITES on this planet then atheists???

are you not?...

Yes I am the author of those threads.
One that is irrelevant to atheists as they dont believe in the topic at all so can be dismissed, if they want to.
Yes I thank God for hell, should I hate God for hell?

and the other
"Are there bigger HYPOCRITES on this planet then atheists???"
Was a parody of another thread titled "are there bigger hypocrites on this planet then Christians."
See I just copied the title name, inverted a few statements and re posted an atheists whole OP of another thread, to show how we both can view the others argument from a selfish position if we are so inclined.

a reply to: Josephus

I do agree.
But I think the crux of the issue is a appeal to numbers.
They want anti-theist to become popularly viewed as being what an atheist is.

Some of us beg to differ obviously.
But the loud angry ones tend to drown us out.

a reply to: borntowatch

I agree with Ben Affleck and not Maher or Harris.



Also, notice the two who are taking that stance?
Remember their other stances?
And one particular movie?

Long story short.
I think it WAY past time that far more numerous moderates stand up to the idiotic and loud minority of their particular grouping.
And tell them, "You do not speak for me. And I refuse to allow you to plunge this world into further chaos and conflict just because you cannot stand for others to disagree with you."
It's something everyone needs to do Atheists, Christians, Muslims, etc etc etc.
And that is exactly what I am trying to do.

originally posted by: HarbingerOfShadows
Long story short.
I think it WAY past time that far more numerous moderates stand up to the idiotic and loud minority of their particular grouping.
And tell them, "You do not speak for me. And I refuse to allow you to plunge this world into further chaos and conflict just because you cannot stand for others to disagree with you."
It's something everyone needs to do Atheists, Christians, Muslims, etc etc etc.
And that is exactly what I am trying to do.

And to that end, I say kudos to you. I consider myself more of an agnostic with a heavy atheistic leaning. I don't believe per se but I'm not arrogant enough to insist I'm definitely correct and open minded enough to be willing to entertain any hard evidence if it were to present itself. I've just entered my 4th decade on this fine planet and have yet to see anything as yet to convince me of some divine, omnipotent or omniscient creator and as a result of my anthropology background I seem to spend far more time defending myself against religious fundamentalists who decree that my degree and consequent belief in evolution makes me their enemy which is just ridiculous. I'm simply seeking knowledge, wherever that search takes me. It, to their chagrin, has not taken me to their view of the universe and somehow that makes me the enemy. Highly ironic in my opinion coming from a religion that is supposed to preach love, tolerance and forgiveness.

originally posted by: HarbingerOfShadows
Long story short.
I think it WAY past time that far more numerous moderates stand up to the idiotic and loud minority of their particular grouping.

In your OP....

Personally, this atheist believes in freedom.
The right to speak and act in accordance with your own views so long as it does not infringe upon the rights of others.
Or physically harms another.

So is it the case that you only believe this when the person in question agrees with you?......and is that what 'moderates do? throw out ad hominems in such circumstances?

And I thought you were aware that there is no 'grouping' when it comes to atheists....you're a jumble of contradictions.

And tell them, "You do not speak for me. And I refuse to allow you to plunge this world into further chaos and conflict just because you cannot stand for others to disagree with you."

Who on earth is claiming to speak for you? why would anyone want to speak for you? them?

And wtf "chaos and conflict"? which atheist is doing that? are you sure you're not a theist?

And who in this instance is it that actually 'cannot stand for others to disagree with you' and is calling for a call to arms?....

I think it's time you got down off your high horse and realised that not everybody has the same opinion you have on this whole issue and that other just might disagree with you.

That is if you truly believe in freedom....

originally posted by: HarbingerOfShadows
Atheism is a unbrella term.
Just like it's mirror opposite, theism.

originally posted by: HarbingerOfShadows
Long story short.
I think it WAY past time that far more numerous moderates stand up to the idiotic and loud minority of their particular grouping.
And tell them, "You do not speak for me. And I refuse to allow you to plunge this world into further chaos and conflict just because you cannot stand for others to disagree with you."
It's something everyone needs to do Atheists, Christians, Muslims, etc etc etc.
And that is exactly what I am trying to do.

Atheism is a position nothing more. It should not be treated like a religion or a political party. That is only going to fuel the misconceptions about it.

originally posted by: HarbingerOfShadows
Can you can do the impossible and prove a negative.
I would love to see you try.

Maybe you'll find this interesting, maybe not.

Why the Christian God is Impossible

It is taken for granted by Christians, as well as many atheists, that a universal negative cannot be proven. In this case, that universal negative is the statement that the Christian God does not exist. One would have to have omniscience, they say, in order to prove that anything does not exist. I disagree with this position, however, because omniscience is not needed in order to prove that a thing whose nature is a self-contradiction cannot, and therefore does not exist.

I do not need a complete knowledge of the universe to prove to you that cubic spheres do not exist. Such objects have mutually-exclusive attributes which would render their existence impossible. For example, a cube, by definition, has 8 corners, while a sphere has none. These properties are completely incompatible: they cannot be held simultaneously by the same object. It is my intent to show that the supposed properties of the Christian God Yahweh, like those of a cubic sphere, are incompatible, and by so doing, to show Yahweh's existence to be an impossibility.

Make of it what you will.

a reply to: WakeUpBeer

Honestly?
It's really the same old crap.
It proves nothing.

And you do realize that the concept of a god(s) does encompass more than just the Christian's Yahweh right?

a reply to: Prezbo369

Oh this rant is nice and irrational.

So is it the case that you only believe this when the person in question agrees with you?......and is that what 'moderates do? throw out ad hominems in such circumstances?

Nice non-sequitor............

And I thought you were aware that there is no 'grouping' when it comes to atheists....you're a jumble of contradictions.

Also not what I said.
I said it was an umbrella term.
You want to calm down then go read what I said again.

The rest is pretty much the same.

And this would be exactly why I made the comment that has pissed you off.
About the similarity between yourself and the "God Warrior" ala Wife Swap.

a reply to: Blue_Jay33

No I condemn Muslim Extremists.
Not Islam it's self.
Every "Holybook" is a mess of contradictions with calls to peace and brotherly love and calls for monstrous acts of murder.
Just like the people wrote them.

To condemn Islam in it's entirety fixes nothing and causes more problems then it's worth.

a reply to: HarbingerOfShadows

Of course I realize the concept of a god(s) encompasses more than just the Christian God... There is a difference between not being able to prove a God exists or does not exist, and having evidences (I'm not referring to that link but a multitude of things from various fields of study) to suggest that this or that claimed God/Goddess are anything but. The Christian God is one of them.

originally posted by: HarbingerOfShadows
Every "Holybook" is a mess of contradictions with calls to peace and brotherly love and calls for monstrous acts of murder.
Just like the people wrote them.

I'm not sure how this is not a red flag that something is amiss, in the case of Christianity anyway. But hey, that's just my two cents. To each their own.

If you don't mind me asking, what made you decide you were an Atheist?

a reply to: WakeUpBeer

I wouldn't call it evidence though.
I would call it proof that what some people believe about what we would call a god is kind of nutty.
Which tracks with what we know of humanity.
It does not disqualify the possibility of a entity we could call a god though.

Lets presuppose that an entity that calls it's self Yahweh did or does exist.
And in ancient times made it's self known to the ancient Hebrews.
Why isn't it reasonable supposition that the fact of that existence and revelation has been garbled with a few thousand years of basically a game of telephone?
We've done it with everything else in our history. Why not this?

I'm going to give you the long form too much information version here.
I was raised Southern Baptist.
With a few times of going to church with my raised as a Catholic mother thrown in.
I believed, largely because I was told to.
Then when I realized that was the only reason I believed.
I labelled myself an agnostic.
Because I neither believe nor do I disbelieve.
It's a concept I consider.
I am withholding judgment.
Which I feel is the only logically justified position.

And basically, I didn't want to be associated with antitheistic New Atheists and their rhetoric.

Then I had it pointed out to me that all atheism denotes is a lack of belief, by definition.
And I realised my weariness to claim atheism was mostly emotional and reactive in nature.

originally posted by: HarbingerOfShadows
Lets presuppose that an entity that calls it's self Yahweh did or does exist.
And in ancient times made it's self known to the ancient Hebrews.
Why isn't it reasonable supposition that the fact of that existence and revelation has been garbled with a few thousand years of basically a game of telephone?
We've done it with everything else in our history. Why not this?

This is essentially the premise of my own Old Testament threads.
I premise that he found them immersed in the way of thinking they had picked up from current culture, and took a long, long time training them up in his own way of thinking. The result being that everything in the OT, such as the social laws (on which I did a series of threads) has a mixed origin, and our task is to separate them out.
It's a median course between "it all comes from God" and "it all comes from man".

originally posted by: HarbingerOfShadows
Why isn't it reasonable supposition that the fact of that existence and revelation has been garbled with a few thousand years of basically a game of telephone?
We've done it with everything else in our history. Why not this?

Fair enough question. One I have pondered many times as well. Maybe if you trace the Bible back far enough because a lot of it is based on earlier stories/mythologies (e.g. Great Deluge). I personally don't see this as the case though. Either way. What comes out of the tail end of the telephone is still not true to the original statement and thus is a false statement.