I thought this was so true

[Pray To Jesus]

Made me laugh out loud.

My observation of this group is that they are, by and large, intelligent, and tend towards being good at the natural sciences. Further, they rarely tolerate fools gladly. If they disagree with you, you are not just wrong, you are an idiot. They have no ‘noble opponents’; people who take views they disagree with in this area are stupid, ignorant, or deliberately deceptive. You can’t be smart, educated, and hold views that contradict New Atheism. If you enter into debate with a New Atheist, you need to just accept that is part of the package.
On the ‘important’ questions—the questions that show that you are a paid-up member of the smart set—there is little room for dissent. If the view you offer is one that doesn’t require someone to be intelligent to make it work (like, say, the gospel) then it lacks the attraction of other views that need a certain amount of intelligence to comprehend.
Putting that together means that I think someone needs to think carefully before getting into arguments with New Atheists, especially online.
So much of the argument is really over whether empiricism is the one and only way people come to know things that it gets bogged down in philosophical questions—questions that the New Atheists themselves resent you raising anyway as it is ‘just obvious’ that science is the only way to know anything at all. Unless you find a way to bypass the issue, an awful lot of time gets sucked into debating the merits of empiricism, which leaves little time or enthusiasm for debating the actual substantive issues to do with faith in Christ. Many online discussions rarely get beyond pre-evangelism.

from http://matthiasmedia.com/briefing/2012/06/new-atheism-theres-probably-no-lasting-impact/

 

[disappoint]

What are you doing? Searching for evidence of something? What for? You can just believe anything you want.

 

[klinc]

Sounds like the P&N section

 

[disappoint]

 

[MartyMcFly3]

Lord Jeeeezus it's a fahrrrrr

 

[DrPizza]

Maybe I'm missing the point of the OP. But, most educated people would dismiss people who think that The Flintstones was historically accurate as being idiots.

 

[Red Squirrel]

I've learned that it's best not to bother arguing with atheists. Get the message of God across once or twice then move on. Most are very stubborn and will sadly find out the truth when it's too late. You can't shove the gospel down people's throat.

 

[dank69]

I've learned that it's best not to bother arguing with atheists. Get the message of God across once or twice then move on. Most are very stubborn and will sadly find out the truth when it's too late. You can't shove the gospel down people's throat.

There are plenty of priests that disagree with you. You just need to start shoving when they are still young.

 

[IronWing]

The OP has, through his many, many threads on the topic, demonstrated the well-founded nature of the conceit he has bestowed upon his atheists.

 

[HardcoreRobot]

if man was created in God's image, and God created athiests, does that make God an athiest too?

 

[Pray To Jesus]

The OP has, through his many, many threads on the topic, demonstrated the well-founded nature of the conceit he has bestowed upon his atheists.

possibly

 

[DesiPower]

These are mostly kids, lead by some immature grown up loons living off of trust funds, they do not bother me.

 

[AstroManLuca]

I_Am_Silly!.png

I've learned that it's best not to bother arguing with atheists. Get the message of God across once or twice then move on. Most are very stubborn and will sadly find out the truth when it's too late. You can't shove the gospel down people's throat.

You have shown in numerous past threads that you are extremely intolerant of differing viewpoints. I think you should look in the mirror if you want to find someone who is stubborn. Generalizing all atheists in this way is just as bad as the militant atheists OP disparages. I don't agree with Christianity; I do not and never will believe in God as Christianity has described him, but if other people want to believe that then that's okay. I think it's more important to recognize that religion and science are two completely different domains that do not contradict one another.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

if man was created in God's image, and God created athiests, does that make God an athiest too?

I assure you, there are a significant number of Christians that do not believe actual atheists exist -- that those who identify as atheists are just being naughty because it feels good to be naughty, pretending that God doesn't exist when they secretly know the truth.

Furthermore, is it with regular frequency that I am reminded by Christians that it says right in their holy book that "the fool says in his heart there is no God," so atheists are fools. Nor is it irregular for creationists to malign biologists and other scientists for their acceptance of the fact of human taxonomic proximity to other primates -- "your uncle might be a monkey, but not mine!" as it were.

 

[Pheran]

I've learned that it's best not to bother arguing with atheists. Get the message of God across once or twice then move on. Most are very stubborn and will sadly find out the truth when it's too late. You can't shove the gospel down people's throat.

The sheer irony of this post made me smile.

 

[zerocool84]

Too bad the OP doesn't know one of the main teachings of the person he follows and says everyone should follow, humility.

 

[AstroManLuca]

I assure you, there are a significant number of Christians that do not believe actual atheists exist -- that those who identify as atheists are just being naughty because it feels good to be naughty, pretending that God doesn't exist when they secretly know the truth.

Furthermore, is it with regular frequency that I am reminded by Christians that it says right in their holy book that "the fool says in his heart there is no God," so atheists are fools. Nor is it irregular for creationists to malign biologists and other scientists for their acceptance of the fact of human taxonomic proximity to other primates -- "your uncle might be a monkey, but not mine!" as it were.

I always thought it was strange that some religious people -- and I emphasize, only SOME -- will reject ideas like evolution out of hand because they find them somehow offensive. Yet other scientific ideas they are fine with, and they will even accept that the best way to figure something out is to test it and describe what happens.

Take gravity. For a long time, people simply assumed that two objects with similar air resistance but different mass (say, a ball of nickel and a ball of lead) would fall at different speeds relative to their weight. It took centuries for someone to actually test this, but once they did, they found that, in fact, they fall at the same speed. Even though it makes logical sense that a heavier object would fall faster, that is not the case.

Because the notion of gravity is not religiously controversial, people accepted this truth. They thought one thing, then someone did an experiment that proved it wrong, and they accepted the results of the experiment. I don't think there are many people who today still insist that heavier objects fall faster on religious grounds.

Yet because evolution is a hot-button issue, people will just dismiss it without even considering any evidence.

All modern technology was created thanks to the scientific method. Our cars, computers, phones, even clothing, was a result of trial and error. So why is trial and error not acceptable when it goes against what you previously thought?

The sheer irony of this post made me smile.

Red Squirrel posts something just like this in nearly every religion thread. I can't tell if she's trolling or being serious. But in every case, she posts something like this and then leaves, presumably laughing her ass off at everyone arguing with her.

 

[zinfamous]

Lord Jeeeezus it's a fahrrrrr

I ain't got tiiiiime fuh no bronchitis, no suh!

 

[mmntech]

A serious question for our Christian members. How do you feel about non abrahamic religions. Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, Taoism, Confucianism, Shinto, Sikhism, various folk religions, even Scientology. What exactly makes Yehovah and Jesus any more real than Amaterasu, Shiva, or ever even Xenu?

Looking from the outside in, all these different religions seem to have an equal claim. They all share the same level of faith that theirs is the one true belief, and they all have about the same amount of proof to back it up. So what makes them any less right than Christianity?

You don't really hear Christians take to task other religions as they do Islam and atheism, their chief competition. So I'm wondering what the general attitude is on these different faiths.

 

[BurnItDwn]

I have learned to accept that fact that some theists are intelligent.

 

[GagHalfrunt]

You can't shove the gospel down people's throat.

Of course you can, that's how all you wannabelievers became bible thumpers in the first place. Christianity was spread at the point of a sword, convert or die. And that is why we atheists have such a dim view of the dimwits who believe in Zombie Jesus. You don't even know WHY you believe what you do.

 

[Phanuel]

Of course you can, that's how all you wannabelievers became bible thumpers in the first place. Christianity was spread at the point of a sword, convert or die. And that is why we atheists have such a dim view of the dimwits who believe in Zombie Jesus. You don't even know WHY you believe what you do.

What if we made a pact? I promise to not espouse my beliefs to anyone (atheism) if you promise to not espouse your religious beliefs to anyone (including your children).

Who will win!?

 

[BudAshes]

Of course you can, that's how all you wannabelievers became bible thumpers in the first place. Christianity was spread at the point of a sword, convert or die. And that is why we atheists have such a dim view of the dimwits who believe in Zombie Jesus. You don't even know WHY you believe what you do.

I know atheists who have converted and every time it made sense. They moved somewhere in the south where they were surrounded and it was a "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em" type thing. At some point you realize life is a lot easier if you just pretend god exists and if you pretend long enough you can start to believe it yourself.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Watch it there, Pray - you pat yourself on the back any harder, you might sprain something.

 

[SMOGZINN]

So much of the argument is really over whether empiricism is the one and only way people come to know things that it gets bogged down in philosophical questions—questions that the New Atheists themselves resent you raising anyway as it is ‘just obvious’ that science is the only way to know anything at all.

from http://matthiasmedia.com/briefing/2012/06/new-atheism-theres-probably-no-lasting-impact/

The reason why arguments like this get bogged down in questions about if empiricism is the only way to know something is because no other method has ever any answers to anything.
Yet, religious people keep claiming that they have another method of determining truth. The problem with their method is that every single time it has given any testable answer that answer has turned out to be wrong.

BELIEVE is not the same as KNOW.