Are all Christians blindly hypocritical?

Originally posted by Malcher
My own opinion is that most atheists are actually agnostic to begin with anyway. You know atheism and agnosticism are two different things and agnosticism is not listed so that gives me some reservations as to the validity of the poll, amongst other things.

Um, did you miss that sizable "Nones" category in there? I presume that would be the logical place for agnostics to appear. These are self-identified categories, so anyone who picked "atheist" believed that they were raised as an atheist, not as an agnostic, but no longer held a disbelief in God at the time of the survey.

I hope there is no such thing as "bringing up in an Atheist family" in the future because that just as bad as bringing up in a religious family. Most of us are Atheist because we came from a religious family and started noticing flaws and cop outs.

As an AgAtheist (i think most atheist are agnostic atheist anyway), i will tell my kids about all the religion and the fact that it is just a belief, created by men in old ages and i will let them make up their mind on finding which path... I will tell them about al the religion, including Abrahamic kind and the eastern kind.

what i would encourage my kids would be Meditation, Yoga, Tai-Chi and the likes.

reply to post by adjensen

The failure of that dilemma is that it presupposes the true nature of God and reality, neither of which are known. It's akin to a child crying over the pain of an immunization, because they're ignorant of the greater good that is being done in that moment.

Sorry, but that's bullcrap. How many times have I had a Christian tell me that "God" is omniscient and omnipotent? If not the Christians, where does that even come from?

For a god to hate evil and still create it, is stupid. For that god to then continue hating evil and still allow it to exist, is utterly asinine. That's the point Epicurus is trying to make. Maybe those members of ATS who spend half of their time looking up Bible quotes to prove their illogical points should spare a few moment to see if there is any truth to what I'm saying. Don't just look up contrary scripture, see if there is scripture that DOES agree with me.

If you set out to prove someone wrong, you will never find out if they are right.

Originally posted by flexy123

Originally posted by Cabalis
enraging the other side.

Problem right there:

"The other side".

The same BS as in politics. Black/White, Red/Blue. This is how people think. Opinion A against opinion B.

How about if people start to think for themselves? Because, then, at some point, you will find out that this polarized thinking is stupid, only LIMITS yourself! As in terms for religion, there might be good points in Christianity and good points in Atheism, or Buddhism or X or Y or Z. HINT: None of them was given the "real truth" at birth, they are just prisoners in their own belief systems and indoctrinations.

There is no rule forbidding you to start to see beyond those limitations. TRUE spirituality and "knowing the truth" can be anywhere, between, or a knowledge which is entirely new. The fact what religion someone "belongs to" is as meaningful as a sack of rice in China. Stop thinking in two "sides" which contradict each other, or "feeling" you belong to one side which needs to be defended against "the other" opinion.

edit on 11-12-2012 by flexy123 because: (no reason given)

It sounds like a good idea but for one problem. I think with the other conflicts (red/blue, black/white) there is the possibility of finding "common ground". I do not think that is possible with the theist/atheist argument. I think each side holds their belief at their very core and actually cannot comprehend the other side's view. That is the basic reason that I believe the conflict is impossible to resolve.

reply to post by micmerci


I think there is a middle ground. I think that middle ground is "I Don't Know"... And most Atheist would agree with this, until something comes along to prove them in order for them to say "I Know".

Currently its a war between People of "There is" and People of "I Don't Know".. In my option, Atheist has been waiting in the middle ground for ages now, the religious are the ones who are adamant at defending their "it does exist" instead of joining the "its possible but i don't know"

reply to post by Dynamike


I would ask the same question of the political left. Do you guys ever get tired of being so blatantly hypocritical? The way you preach about tolerances, yet all you ever do is demonize white people, Republicans and Christians. You prattle on about keeping Christian morals out of our lives, yet you use the government to force your moral values on the entire country. You make thread after thread complaining about "faux news", yet you have nothing to say about the Democrat MSM, Hollywood and general control over the entertainment industry the left has.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by adjensen

 

The failure of that dilemma is that it presupposes the true nature of God and reality, neither of which are known. It's akin to a child crying over the pain of an immunization, because they're ignorant of the greater good that is being done in that moment.

Sorry, but that's bullcrap. How many times have I had a Christian tell me that "God" is omniscient and omnipotent? If not the Christians, where does that even come from?

For a god to hate evil and still create it, is stupid. For that god to then continue hating evil and still allow it to exist, is utterly asinine. That's the point Epicurus is trying to make. Maybe those members of ATS who spend half of their time looking up Bible quotes to prove their illogical points should spare a few moment to see if there is any truth to what I'm saying. Don't just look up contrary scripture, see if there is scripture that DOES agree with me.

If you set out to prove someone wrong, you will never find out if they are right.

I can see your point but I can also see the point of the person you quoted. Isn't it possible that God created evil for a reason that is above our understanding? If He is in fact higher than we, shouldn't this exist as a possibility. The quoter was giving an example in the simplest of terms. Why discount it as bullcrap? As a parent, have we encouraged progression in our children (i.e. walking, bicycle riding, etc.) knowing full well the dangers that exist as a result?

If all Christians are blind hypocrites, all atheists are amoral heathens, all liberals worship Lenin, all conservatives worship Hitler, all black people are thieves, all Mexicans are illegal, and all white people are racist bigots.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by ManBehindTheMask

 

I feel compelled to defend one particular argument of Epicurus that has not been answered even once when I brought it to light. And I have posted it several times.

"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" - Epicurus

I have looked over his philosophies, and a great many of them leave me scratching my head. But the above is the diamond in the rough, the questions that I have not had answered for the duration of my time spent here. So let's not generalize here. If we are to call his theories hogwash, then let us prove they are hogwash, starting with his words quoted above.

I must say, it is quote relevant to the actual topic of this thread. For if "God" can be proven to be flawed as shown in that theory, then the Christians who emulate him must also follow therein.

I just debunked these circular logical fallacies of a rambling and senile man in my post above! And yes, it is painfully obvious that Epicurus doesn't have even a cursory grasp of religion. If he had, he wouldn't have embarrassed and shamed his name by publishing such nonsense!

I haven't the time to explain everything to you in detail, so you can do the homework. But, look into the concept of "Original sin" and God's gift of self-determination. God's Kingdom is NOT here on Earth - this is for His children and He has granted them the gift to choose between good and evil.

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by ManBehindTheMask

 

I feel compelled to defend one particular argument of Epicurus that has not been answered even once when I brought it to light. And I have posted it several times.

The failure of that dilemma is that it presupposes the true nature of God and reality, neither of which are known. It's akin to a child crying over the pain of an immunization, because they're ignorant of the greater good that is being done in that moment.

The problem of suffering is one that philosophers and theologians have debated for centuries, and the solution isn't going to be bundled up in some loaded paragraph.

I agree with this wholeheartedly! What doesn't kill us makes us stronger. Whether you believe in evolution of creation, dealing adversity has been the crowning success of humanity.

The basic need for shelter against the elements has led man to surpass mundane survival and go on to build massively impressive architecture that has allowed our societies to thrive.

Without illness how could we learn compassion? Would we be impelled to study the sciences and reach for the stars if everything was always peachy keen?

The Utopian dream that Epicurus envisioned as God's responsibility, doesn't define or limit the purpose of life and has no place in the real world, but it can be pondered in the fantasies of the atheist and the religious alike.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
For a god to hate evil and still create it, is stupid.

What makes you think that God creates evil? Most things that people consider to be evil are done by human beings, intentionally, and the rest, stuff like earthquakes, is morally ambiguous.

Don't just look up contrary scripture, see if there is scripture that DOES agree with me.

As you are quite aware, I don't argue from scripture. This is also off-topic for this thread, might I suggest that you create another, and I'm sure that the scripture citing ATS members will be happy to provide you with what you want.

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by Malcher
My own opinion is that most atheists are actually agnostic to begin with anyway. You know atheism and agnosticism are two different things and agnosticism is not listed so that gives me some reservations as to the validity of the poll, amongst other things.

Um, did you miss that sizable "Nones" category in there? I presume that would be the logical place for agnostics to appear. These are self-identified categories, so anyone who picked "atheist" believed that they were raised as an atheist, not as an agnostic, but no longer held a disbelief in God at the time of the survey.

"Nones" wth does that mean? Even "nothing in particular" in parenthesis, which i did miss does not help, I never heard "Nones" before. I am basically an agnostic, some days more theistic. Never heard "Nones" in this context, can you point out some examples of it used this way before.

Originally posted by luciddream
reply to post by micmerci

 

I think there is a middle ground. I think that middle ground is "I Don't Know"... And most Atheist would agree with this, until something comes along to prove them in order for them to say "I Know".

Currently its a war between People of "There is" and People of "I Don't Know".. In my option, Atheist has been waiting in the middle ground for ages now, the religious are the ones who are adamant at defending their "it does exist" instead of joining the "its possible but i don't know"

Only thing is "I don't know" is not an atheist or a theist by definition it is agnostic. So IMO that eliminates that middle ground.

One thing the atheists do have right is that theists are slaves. We are called to be servants of Christ (speaking for the Christian faith ) and in doing so we cannot compromise. It is a basic tenet that is at the very core of our being. That is where the line is drawn.

Why do everybody have to believe in something? Why don't concentrate on what we know?

When it comes to the blaming game, atheists are no better than any other believers. Throwing "I believe that.." back and forth gets us nowhere. Who cares if christians believes there is a god, atheists BELIEVES there ain't. NO ONE KNOWS g.damn it!

I kind of in a way have less respect for atheists, because every other belief don't claim they only look to science and what we know. At least they dare to be honest and call it faith even thou they insist they "know" it's true.

Summary: Whether you believe there is a god or not, it's still belief simply because we don't frigging know.

Originally posted by luciddream
reply to post by micmerci

 

I think there is a middle ground. I think that middle ground is "I Don't Know"... And most Atheist would agree with this, until something comes along to prove them in order for them to say "I Know".

Currently its a war between People of "There is" and People of "I Don't Know".. In my option, Atheist has been waiting in the middle ground for ages now, the religious are the ones who are adamant at defending their "it does exist" instead of joining the "its possible but i don't know"

I don't see why you would assume that most atheists would find "I don't know" to be agreeable? There is no evidence for the existence of gods, so when someone says they have to pray to gods, I never think, "Hmmm... It's possible!". No, I think it's like someone saying that have to pray to a hoax. I am honestly atheist, I'm not agnostic. Did I misunderstand you?

reply to post by ShadowBase

Why do everybody have to believe in something? Why don't concentrate on what we know?

You have to believe in something or you'll fall for anything. And given the amount of stuff we don't KNOW, there's a lot we could fall for.

reply to post by AfterInfinity

What do you mean?

reply to post by trysts


I do not think anyone can be an 100% Atheist(even 100% is impossible) because, we lack belief, not close minded, so Atheist do have an open mind for the possiblility.

We cannot be absolute and say not possible that god exist. Best we can go is "its not there but its is possible"...

So in reality, we all are Agnostic Atheist. Not absolute Atheist.

Also don't forget that the term "god" was already introduced to us, we cannot forget that word or the idea behind it... meaning, we have to take that into account, which we cannot prove or disproves, but we do not believe in it(atheist), but its a possibility because its already introduced to us(agnostic).

Now if we restart this world, without anyone mentioning gods, then we could say that the default = Atheism.

At this current moment, our default, if best would an Agnostic Atheist aka "It is not there but i cannot prove it, thus its possible".

Not sure if that make sense lol.

reply to post by Malcher


I'm not sure what part of "None" I can explain to you, it seems pretty self explanatory, and I don't understand why you're up in arms about agnostics and other people who aren't religious being lumped into a category called "None".

reply to post by luciddream

Atheism is not knowing there is no god. It's believing there ain't.