Religion Ask a Christian - Continued in Part 2

[Chief]

Continued in Part Two:

https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/ask-a-christian-part-2.1295001/unread

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Finally, neither I or anyone else, theist belief or otherwise, owe you an obliagtion of proof.

True. People are free to spout whatever horseschitte they choose.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

No, as you well know, that wasn't the basis of my initial post yesterday morning.
The current discussion emerged following a quip from you about "old atheism as religion", to which I responded by referencing the related definition in anti-discrimination legislation.

Well that was one hell of an example of free speech in action, wasn't it? The freedom to waste everyone's time with red herrings.

Now, about these accusations of "transference". Are you going to own them too, or can we expect more of your serpentine constructs?

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Do atheists have a belief system regarding on how existence came about? Eg If you don’t believe it was a created by a creator with a purpose in mind by default does a atheist then have a belief that it was all an accident without any purpose or they just believe matter always existed ?
Are atheists devoid of the ability to believe ?
Or as fellow “human beings “ you are just stuck in this conundrum inside a riddle and belief is just part of the show ?

This is why you should start you start your own thread and stop mooching on Christianity .
It would be fascinating to get to know the mind of the Atheists. I mean do you like Art ? Do you go out to discos and dance etc .

So, belief in insisting on scientific proof of claims is just another belief system?

(Like "atheism is just another religion"? LOL.)

The problem here is that the word "belief" has always had some very important functional roles in our language.

The Enlightenment came along and for the first time in human history, we had provable alternatives to the religious explanations of the functioning of the universe.

Religion, unable to counter such an assault based on logic, responded by elevating the notion of capital-B Belief™ undeservedly, up to the same level as words with an unimpeachable status like "fact" and "truth" and "proof".

Increasingly, it has been so important to respect everyone's Beliefs. (Just for the record, I agree, but it is important for us to all be very aware of how this is constantly used as an intellectual figleaf by religion.)

But the earlier, important functional role of the word "belief" didn't go away. We still use it every day.

Hence I believe we must insist on scientific proof of claims. But it's not Belief™.

So trying to get some mileage out of a similarity between "belief" and Belief™, (a similarity brought about by religions' chicanery in response to overwhelming evidence against their explanation of the world!) is mere cuteness.

And no, just for the record, a belief that claims must be backed by scientific proof is no impediment to appreciating or creating art, and even great art.

 

[Boston tiger]

So, belief in insisting on scientific proof of claims is just another belief system?

(Like "atheism is just another religion"? LOL.)

The problem here is that the word "belief" has always had some very important functional roles in our language.

The Enlightenment came along and for the first time in human history, we had provable alternatives to the religious explanations of the functioning of the universe.

Religion, unable to counter such an assault based on logic, responded by elevating the notion of capital-B Belief[emoji769] undeservedly, up to the same level as words with an unimpeachable status like "fact" and "truth" and "proof".

Increasingly, it has been so important to respect everyone's Beliefs. (Just for the record, I agree, but it is important for us to all be very aware of how this is constantly used as an intellectual figleaf by religion.)

But the earlier, important functional role of the word "belief" didn't go away. We still use it every day.

Hence I believe we must insist on scientific proof of claims. But it's not Belief[emoji769].

So trying to get some mileage out of a similarity between "belief" and Belief[emoji769], (a similarity brought about by religions' chicanery in response to overwhelming evidence against their explanation of the world!) is mere cuteness.

And no, just for the record, a belief that claims must be backed by scientific proof is no impediment to appreciating or creating art, and even great art.

Enlightenment is born out of Christianity. Science born out of Christianity etc etc. Remember no fundamentalism pre reformation.

Anywho .. Does an atheist then have to believe due to the heebee geebee space that we occupy that humans are just as important as space dust …We are nothing but a bunch of random atoms of no importance no purpose. Opposed to a free willing, In God’s imagine , super motivated , super loved Christians.
I’m just making the case that atheist are an evil sect and half of them don’t even know it .

So basically 2 questions for the Atheists . Do you think you are evil and can you survive without a Christian fundamentalists in your life ?

Footnote fact . If you are a devout Catholic woman it’s all most impossible to commit suicide .

Ps is being woke the atheists attempt at getting a shot at heaven ?

 

[Roylion]

Enlightenment is born out of Christianity. Science born out of Christianity etc etc. Remember no fundamentalism pre reformation.

Been reading Fr. Stanley Jaki have we?

The Enlightenment was largely born out of Renaissance humanism, which was largely derived from classical antiquity.

In reality though, the Christian scholars of medieval Europe owed much of their science to the work their Indian, Persian, and Greek forebears incorporated and expanded upon.

Anywho .. Does an atheist then have to believe due to the heebee geebee space that we occupy that humans are just as important as space dust …We are nothing but a bunch of random atoms of no importance no purpose.

Athiests don't have to believe anything without supporting evidence.

I’m just making the case that atheist are an evil sect

I doubt atheists much care about what you define as 'evil'. The notion of 'evil' is a human construct and varies throughout time and across space. What is regarded as 'evil' in one society or by one group of people is not seen as such in other societies or other groups of people.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Enlightenment is born out of Christianity. Science born out of Christianity etc etc. Remember no fundamentalism pre reformation.

Anywho .. Does an atheist then have to believe due to the heebee geebee space that we occupy that humans are just as important as space dust …We are nothing but a bunch of random atoms of no importance no purpose. Opposed to a free willing, In God’s imagine , super motivated , super loved Christians.
I’m just making the case that atheist are an evil sect and half of them don’t even know it .

So basically 2 questions for the Atheists . Do you think you are evil and can you survive without a Christian fundamentalists in your life ?

Footnote fact . If you are a devout Catholic woman it’s all most impossible to commit suicide .

Ps is being woke the atheists attempt at getting a shot at heaven ?

Thanks for your reply. Busy day today so I won’t be able to do it justice right away.

But for starters, can you please define “woke”? I’ve yet to see a satisfactory definition.

 

[Opine]

True. People are free to spout whatever horseschitte they choose.

Provided you stay within confines under which that freedom of speech is afforded: most certainly, you can talk nonsense if you like. That’s a pillar off western civilisation. Does that freedom scare you?

 

[Opine]

Well that was one hell of an example of free speech in action, wasn't it? The freedom to waste everyone's time with red herrings.

Now, about these accusations of "transference". Are you going to own them too, or can we expect more of your serpentine constructs?

What is a serpentine construct?

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Provided you stay within confines under which that freedom of speech is afforded: most certainly, you can talk nonsense if you like. That’s a pillar off western civilisation. Does that freedom scare you?

Doesn't scare me at all. In fact I'm pointing out that quite a lot of garbage has been spouted in the last day or two, and what a glowing recommendation that is for those of us who believe in freedom of speech.

Freedom of speech is so wonderful isn't it? Every single one of us is free to spout anything, including risible horseshit and no-one has any right to demand that they back it up with facts and truth.

Wonderful world we've made for ourselves.

 

[Opine]

Doesn't scare me at all. In fact I'm pointing out that quite a lot of garbage has been spouted in the last day or two, and what a glowing recommendation that is for those of us who believe in freedom of speech.

Freedom of speech is so wonderful isn't it? Every single one of us is free to spout anything, including risible horseshit and no-one has any right to demand that they back it up with facts and truth.

Wonderful world we've made for ourselves.

Yesterday, I proposed that evidence could also be derived from the effects of theist belief on western civilisation, it’s norms and institutions. Is that not an acceptable form of gathering fact?

 

[Evolved1]

Enlightenment is born out of Christianity. Science born out of Christianity etc etc. Remember no fundamentalism pre reformation.

Anywho .. Does an atheist then have to believe due to the heebee geebee space that we occupy that humans are just as important as space dust …We are nothing but a bunch of random atoms of no importance no purpose. Opposed to a free willing, In God’s imagine , super motivated , super loved Christians.
I’m just making the case that atheist are an evil sect and half of them don’t even know it .

So basically 2 questions for the Atheists . Do you think you are evil and can you survive without a Christian fundamentalists in your life ?

Footnote fact . If you are a devout Catholic woman it’s all most impossible to commit suicide .

Ps is being woke the atheists attempt at getting a shot at heaven ?

An atheist doesn't have to believe anything, and they're free to believe in anything other than deities. Some atheists believe in stupid shit like horoscopes and Essendon premierships.

To answer your questions,
1) No I do not believe I'm evil. Why would anyone consider themselves evil on the basis of their unbelief in imaginary beings? I'm of the view that your association with the Catholic church is a better fit for my idea of evil than atheism could possibly be.
2) Christian fundamentalists are like mosquitos. I derive a certain satisfaction from squashing mosquitos. Regardless, I wouldn't miss them if they were raptured away.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Yesterday, I proposed that evidence could also be derived from the effects of theist belief on western civilisation, it’s norms and institutions. Is that not an acceptable form of gathering fact?

Absolutely. There is much to be gained from examining the positives and negatives of religion's contributions to humanity.

So long as it is done from a strictly secular, fact-based approach.

Otherwise, we all too easily degenerate into "don't knock it if you haven't tried it" or "you obviously just didn't believe hard enough" or other similarly useless, undisprovable tosh.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

1) No I do not believe I'm evil. Why would anyone consider themselves evil on the basis of their unbelief in imaginary beings? I'm of the view that your association with the Catholic church is a better fit for my idea of evil than atheism could possibly be.

Yep. Let's not forget, Christianity invented Satan.

 

[Opine]

Absolutely. There is much to be gained from examining the positives and negatives of religion's contributions to humanity.

So long as it is done from a strictly secular, fact-based approach.

Otherwise, we all too easily degenerate into "don't knock it if you haven't tried it" or "you obviously just didn't believe hard enough" or other similarly useless, undisprovable tosh.

You’re transferring again. Not everyone’s version or experience of Christianity is the way you’ve presented.
I believe in objectivity just as I believe in creating and relating.

 

[Evolved1]

Yep. Let's not forget, Christianity invented Satan.

He's good guy, right?

While the church was spreading lies about widespread Satanic ritual child sex abuse, they were the ones actually doing it and protecting the predators. If that's not evil, I don't know what is.

 

[Evolved1]

You’re transferring again. Not everyone’s version or experience of Christianity is the way you’ve presented.
I believe in objectivity just as I believe in creating and relating.

An objective view would recognise that atheism is a religious position rather than a religion.

If you were to survey 1000 random people about the AFL team they support, you'd have an option for each of the 18 teams and a 19th option for 'none'. Atheism would be the 'none' option in a survey of theistic religion. There are non-theistic religions like Buddhism so we know that atheists can be religious.

In and of itself, atheism is not a religion. It is only comparable to religion and treated as such by governments because its a religious position. That necessitates the same protections against discrimination that religious people have. Otherwise you'd have the situation whereby Christians could discriminate against atheists while atheists couldn't discriminate against Christians.

 

[Opine]

Yep. Let's not forget, Christianity invented Satan.

So what. At worse it was representation from which objectivity can and did evolve.

 

[Opine]

An objective view would recognise that atheism is a religious position rather than a religion.

If you were to survey 1000 random people about the AFL team they support, you'd have an option for each of the 18 teams and a 19th option for 'none'. Atheism would be the 'none' option in a survey of theistic religion. There are non-theistic religions like Buddhism so we know that atheists can be religious.

In and of itself, atheism is not a religion. It is only comparable to religion and treated as such by governments because its a religious position. That necessitates the same protections against discrimination that religious people have. Otherwise you'd have the situation whereby Christians could discriminate against atheists while atheists couldn't discriminate against Christians.

An objective view would comprehend that legislation can mandatorily impose methods of dealing with and expressing belief, theist or otherwise, in an attemlt to overcome some sort of mischief or bring about some sort of purpose.

 

[Opine]

An objective view would recognise that atheism is a religious position rather than a religion…. That necessitates the same protections against discrimination that religious people have. Otherwise you'd have the situation whereby Christians could discriminate against atheists while atheists couldn't discriminate against Christians.

These two reasons of themselves cannot be the primary purpose for introducing that Bill, comprising that definition, because the same effect could be derived without that piece of legislation. It stands to logical reason that the purpose, must also include protection of theist belief which does not currently exist at Commonwealth level.

 

[Opine]

Of Christian fundamentalists you said this: “I derive a certain satisfaction from squashing mosquitos. Regardless, I wouldn't miss them if they were raptured away.”

You must really hate them?

 

[Opine]

An atheist doesn't have to believe anything, and they're free to believe in anything other than deities. Some atheists believe in stupid sh*t like horoscopes and Essendon premierships.

To answer your questions,
1) No I do not believe I'm evil. Why would anyone consider themselves evil on the basis of their unbelief in imaginary beings? I'm of the view that your association with the Catholic church is a better fit for my idea of evil than atheism could possibly be.
2) Christian fundamentalists are like mosquitos. I derive a certain satisfaction from squashing mosquitos. Regardless, I wouldn't miss them if they were raptured away.

Gethelred what did you find funny about that post?

 

[Gethelred]

Gethelred what did you find funny about that post?

The idea of believing in an Essendon premiership.

 

[Opine]

The idea of believing in an Essendon premiership.

Well, that is funny I guess, actually it’s bloody hilarious

 

[Evolved1]

You must really hate them?

They're not quite as bad as Carlton supporters.

 

[Evolved1]

These two reasons of themselves cannot be the primary purpose for introducing that Bill, comprising that definition, because the same effect could be derived without that piece of legislation. It stands to logical reason that the purpose, must also include protection of theist belief which does not currently exist at Commonwealth level.

I'm not aware of the details and differences in legislation. I'm interested in hearing more if you want to elaborate.