Atheists as a majority

[variant]

I think I would like to read it myself...it seems a bit convenient. Was the author Christian or atheist? I have a feeling that the "person" is a Christian.

I was born on a farm, but not in the barn.

Lisa

Here you go.
(link contains objectionable language)

http://www.gametalk.com/talk/spirituality/83313846.htm

 

[Smidlee]

There are those who enjoy trolling on the internet just to see if anyone dumb enough to take them serious. Most post on the internet should be taken as a grain of salt. My son had someone over once who enjoy fooling around like this so you never know just how old someone is on the internet.

 

[Lisa0315]

Here you go.
(link contains objectionable language)

http://www.gametalk.com/talk/spirituality/83313846.htm

Thanks! The link was provided earlier, but I really appreciate the warning. That was very nice of you.

I was afraid that the OP of THIS thread was making it up to stir things up, but he has since proven himself to be honorable and truthful. So, no probs!

Lisa

 

[variant]

Thanks! The link was provided earlier, but I really appreciate the warning. That was very nice of you.

I was afraid that the OP of THIS thread was making it up to stir things up, but he has since proven himself to be honorable and truthful. So, no probs!

Lisa

Ok, I didn't see the link posted.

Nevermind then, have a good day.

 

[USincognito]

Atheists stop their attacks on us...

I snipped all the argumenum ad conflatum, and wanted to address this to any Christian reading this thread:

Have I attacked you, or do you feel attacked by me?

Please respond in this thread and not in PM.

 

[Voegelin]

To me the whole attitude looks a lot like typical psychological projection. They know that atheism is not iself fundamentalist . . .

But it is. "There is no God" is a catagorical statement on the nature of existence.

Btw....playing the Freud card, claiming opponents are mentally off ("psychological projection") is pseduo-science. One most notably and viciously used by some marxist atheists in the 20th century to silence their critics. Very popular in America in the 1960s and early 1970s by the various segements of the New Left.

It is a worn out tactic.

 

[TeddyKGB]

But it is. "There is no God" is a catagorical statement on the nature of existence.

What about "I don't believe in God"?

 

[Donkeytron]

But it is. "There is no God" is a catagorical statement on the nature of existence.

Btw....playing the Freud card, claiming opponents are mentally off ("psychological projection") is pseduo-science. One most notably and viciously used by some marxist atheists in the 20th century to silence their critics. Very popular in America in the 1960s and early 1970s by the various segements of the New Left.

It is a worn out tactic.

No, its not. "No god" is the default position.

 

[Alarum]

No, its not. "No god" is the default position.

The default position is 'not enough evidence.' That's the position you start at when you begin evaluating anything. Claims to the contrary ignore the reality of how science and examination work.

 

[Lisa0315]

I snipped all the argumenum ad conflatum, and wanted to address this to any Christian reading this thread:

Have I attacked you, or do you feel attacked by me?

Please respond in this thread and not in PM.

No, you have been supportive even when I was not acting as Christian as I should have been.

Lisa

 

[TeddyKGB]

The default position is 'not enough evidence.' That's the position you start at when you begin evaluating anything. Claims to the contrary ignore the reality of how science and examination work.

Actually that's backwards. In formal logic, asserting the soundness of a deductive conclusion when one or more premises involves the lack of contradicting information is known as argumentum ad ignorantiam, and it applies whether asserting truth or falsity.

In actuality, most of our investigative procedures - including science - rely on induction. We dismiss the notion of sentient teapots orbiting Jupiter out of absurdity and lack of evidence even though we cannot prove that no such things exist.

 

[cerad]

The OP was just plain silly. Wear a black robe to a cross burning? No No No. A nice pale green or a soft yellow is the way to go.

 

[Voegelin]

Daniel Larison made some good points at Eunomia recently

. . . Atheists are great ones for posing what they think are really baffling conundrums for believers, but their acquaintance with history, as far as religion is concerned, is typically with the black marks and scandals. There was religious fanaticism! Well, yes, and there was far, far worse atheist fanaticism, so which would you rather see dominating society? They seem uninterested to query why it is that every organised society from the earliest tribes to the most technically sophisticated civilisations have had one form or another of propitiating, worshipping and otherwise interacting with the supernatural and divine. If they do ask the question, they have ready-made answers handy: ignorance, fear of death, fear of the unknown, opiate of the masses, etc . . .

Perhaps the most stunning thing about atheism is the sheer presumption of it. I don’t mean simply the presumption against God, which would be enough in itself, but the presumption that you and a few other adventurous souls have figured out something that the vast majority of mankind has never known about a subject for which the atheist can obviously have no empirical evidence one way or the other . . .

http://larison.org/2007/01/17/dont-know-much-about-history/

He goes on to ask, what if atheists were the majority? What if society were atheistic?

As I've mentioned above, I believe the 20th century gave us ample evidence of what would happen. And so it happens does Larison:

If man does not flourish in a godless regime, and if godless regimes have a record of unusually great barbarity and human cruelty, it does at the very least suggest that religion aids in human flourishing and probably has some moderating effect on the use of political power . . .

Before we saw the Holodomor, before the Terror of the French Revolution, Ben Franklin saw where society might go if God were pushed aside. Writing to Thomas Paine regarding a book he had given him a draft to read, Franklin wrote:

I would advise you, therefore, not to attempt unchaining the tiger, but to burn this piece before it is seen by any other person; whereby you will save yourself a great deal of mortification by the enemies it may raise against you, and perhaps a good deal of regret and repentance. If men are so wicked with religion, what would they be if without it . . .

http://www.wallbuilders.com/resources/search/detail.php?ResourceID=93

 

[USincognito]

He goes on to ask, what if atheists were the majority? What if society were atheistic?

As I've mentioned above, I believe the 20th century gave us ample evidence of what would happen.

Again with the conflation. Is it impossible for you to differentiate between a corrupt totalitarian political system and a liberal democracy with a majority of atheists? Why is that so hard for you to get?

You remind me of this guy over on Yahoo message boards who insisted I was a communist because I was an atheist. These were the same Yahoo message boards where I checked my stocks and oooh'd and aah'd at how high my Lucent* was going and how nicely my growth fund mutual was doing. It was just impossible for him to fathom that an atheist wouldn't be a communist.

* Yes, this was in 1998-99 before my $80/share fortune shrunk to a $2/share afterthought.

 

[Maxwell511]

Again with the conflation. Is it impossible for you to differentiate between a corrupt totalitarian political system and a liberal democracy with a majority of atheists? Why is that so hard for you to get?

Some men have no philosophy that is their own. In some their philosophy is defined by what they oppose and hate and not what they support and love.

 

[Voegelin]

The OP was just plain silly. Wear a black robe to a cross burning? No No No. A nice pale green or a soft yellow is the way to go.

Yes, we can make a joke about it. But what some atheists have done and are doing right now are facts. An account of atheists persecuting Christians as we speak:

. . . at least 17 underground bishops have disappeared, been arrested or are detained in isolation; 20 priests have been arrested. The latest arrest took place on December 27th in Hebei. Of the 9 priests arrested, 5 remain in prison, 4 have been released.

Some official bishops confirm that there has been a hardening in AP ideology in recent years. It is due above all to the fact that “the most part of secretaries are not Catholic, but atheist, among the most radical members of the Party whose scope is to destroy all religions or at least closely control them . . .”

http://www.asianews.it/index.php?l=en&art=8286&size=A

Tell us where in the world today Christians are tossing atheists in prison for their beliefs. Inform us of what prominent atheists in America are doing and saying to halt persecution of believers by atheists anywhere in the world. I don't hear any speaking up. I don't see atheists of good will (and there are many I'm sure) correcting other atheists as Christians correct Christians. Most of what I see in America is proseltyzing and attacks on the free speech of believers.

Also common to see atheists congragulating themselves on how tolerant, open minded and what intellects they are and how intolerant and ignornant Christians are. Yet the history of atheistic mass movements in the 20th century and actions by atheists in China today contradict that conceit.

 

[Sycophant]

Vogelin, that is not a product of atheism, but an authoritian political ideology.

Also what is being expressed in those actions, isn't atheism, but anti-theism.

Atheism != Communism

 

[USincognito]

Yes, we can make a joke about it. But what some atheists have done and are doing right now are facts. An account of atheists persecuting Christians as we speak:{snip}

Gee, a totalitarian state doesn't allow people to operate outside what it considers acceptable. Shocking! We saw the same in Calvin's Geneva (Christian), and modern Iran (Muslim) and Saddam's Iraq (secular). Seems to me that atheism has nothing to do with the exercise of brutal totalitarian statist power. Shocking!

How are you being attacked by atheists Voeglin? You've been asked this before, why won't you answer a simple question rather than go off on tangents about China or the now defunt Soviet Union?

 

[USincognito]

Also what is being expressed in those actions, isn't atheism, but anti-theism.

I wouldn't even quite go that far. It's about exercising totalitarian statist power. The state determines what is acceptable and if you don't color within the lines they arrest and even kill you. That applies to speech, commerce and politics, not just religion.

And while Voeglin is chastizing atheists in the West I suppose for not speaking out about the oppression by "atheists" in China, I wonder why he doesn't similarly chastize Dell, Sony, Wal-Mart, etc. etc. for facillitating the massive influx of dollars from the U.S. that's facilitating the Chinese political machine and it's rapidly modernizing army.

 

[SallyNow]

Vogelin, that is not a product of atheism, but an authoritian political ideology.

Also what is being expressed in those actions, isn't atheism, but anti-theism.

Atheism != Communism

To be fair, there are extremists on one side saying that atheists are murderers, and extremists on the other side that say Christians are ignorant, that they cause wars, that they are anti-science, unreasonable, etc. Both assumptions are, of course, lies, but nevertheless they exist.

It is suprising how some want to lump all Christians together, but then vehmently oppose lumping all atheists together. Neither is correct! You can not lump all Christians together, and you can not lump all atheists together. There are extremists on all sides of the debate, but they do not represent the majority. I'm sure there are even extremist agnostics out there...

Sychophant, I know you are neither an extremist nor a lumper, but I think it needed to be said and your post was a good jumping-off point.