Undecided

[razzelflabben]

Don't misunderstand me. I'm not saying that I'm still faithful. I'm not.

I get that

I'm also not claiming that I have evidence of my faith. I don't.

I get that too.

What I am saying is that I experience all the things you mention now and I felt them while I considered myself faithful, religious, or whatever.

awesome, so what about now, how to these things compare to now?

I don't feel any less a person or joyful now that I don't have the same faith I had.

less a person? how did that work into this discussion?

I used to think we had guardian angels, that Jesus was watching over us, that God would deal with the bad guys, that God loved me eternally no matter what, etc. So, I'm guessing that's where my feelings of security used to come from.

okay, what about who Jesus was, what did you think about who Jesus was and what His purpose was/is?

Nowadays, I get this sense of happiness, tranquility, and peace from several places and sources. For instance, I've been through some bad times before but just knowing that I have my health and that life is more than the moment at hand, I know that I can weather just about any problem that comes at me. I also have a supporting and loving family. I have good friends, I work hard for what I earn and try to appreciate even the small and large things that come my way.

now we're back to emotions...so what happens to the emotions, if you get sick?

I don't know... It may be pathological but I'm a generally very happy and relaxed person and I'm very much at peace with myself, my life, and eventual death. And the funny thing is, I'm not even an optimist. I would say I'm more of a realist but I've been called a 'pessimist' from time to time.

don't miss understand, I am a student of human nature to a certain degree and my questions are more about that nature than anything else. and I think it is awesome that you are generally happy and relaxed, that is always easier to get along with...but these things come and go, the things I spoke about as the result of faith, are consistants, they aren't just emotion, which is the point, faith goes outside the emotions of the time.

So short answer: As far as I can tell, I would say my source of tranquility, joy, and love is my own will.

which is why you mention tranquility and happiness and love without explaining what you mean by these things.

 

[sandwiches]

awesome, so what about now, how to these things compare to now?

I still feel them.

less a person? how did that work into this discussion?

I wasn't trying to imply that you called me less of a person or anything like that. I'm sorry if that came out that way. What I meant was that I don't feel... incomplete or like I need or am missing something. I feel whole and fulfilled.

okay, what about who Jesus was, what did you think about who Jesus was and what His purpose was/is?

I thought he had died to save me for all eternity. That he was THE way to eternal life.

now we're back to emotions...so what happens to the emotions, if you get sick?

don't miss understand, I am a student of human nature to a certain degree and my questions are more about that nature than anything else. and I think it is awesome that you are generally happy and relaxed, that is always easier to get along with...but these things come and go, the things I spoke about as the result of faith, are consistants, they aren't just emotion, which is the point, faith goes outside the emotions of the time.

I have to admit that I'm having a hard time understanding why you don't consider 'joy,' 'peace,' and 'love' emotions. I can get sad, angry, agitated, etc. If that's what you're asking. Quite honestly, if what you're implying is that someone who has 'real' faith doesn't feel any of those things in dire times, I don't buy that. I have never met a single Christian who is like that. Now, if the answer to that is maybe I haven't met a single 'real' Christian, then it's possible I could be proven wrong.

which is why you mention tranquility and happiness and love without explaining what you mean by these things.

Tranquility: I feel serene, calm, at peace.
Happiness: I feel exhilarated, excited about the future, content
Love: It's when I feel that people more important than myself. That I'd give up my life for them.

 

[Doveaman]

That is real faith. I use the dictionary definition of 'faith:' "Belief that is not based on proof." Also, the Bible is on my side on this:
"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."

I'm sorry, but Biblical faith is based on proof. In fact, Biblical faith is proof. Your interpretation is way off.

Its' not. Sorry, you're wrong.

Nope.

Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. - Heb 11:1.

Biblical faith (Christian faith) is a real substance that serves as indisputable evidence for the existence of God. I like to call it the sixth sense since it is the means through which we experience God.

Good question. I don't know but I felt like I KNEW for sure. When I finally realized that my feeling of certain knowledge was definitely based on nothing but hopes and beliefs. I started asking myself why I believed the things I did. I couldn't find a reasonable explanation other than fear of hell and wanting to go to heaven. And so began the change that illuminated my whole life in a new light.

To me, to have faith is to have a personal relationship with God, a faith relationship the Bible refers to as being like a marriage relationship between a husband and wife.

For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, His body...Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands...Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave Himself up for her - Eph 5:23-25.

Even though one can have this faith relationship and then lose it, for the atheist, it is not just merely losing this faith relationship; it is that the atheist no longer believes in the God he is supposed to have had this faith relationship with. He claims he was in a faith relationship with God, but now he no longer believes this God ever existed. Which begs the question, who did he have this faith relationship with? And if it was not with God, then can it be truely called Christian faith?

 

[sandwiches]

I'm sorry, but Biblical faith is based on proof. In fact, Biblical faith is proof. Your interpretation is way off.

No, yours is. This is why it's fun to discuss religion. It's all about interpretations. =)

Nope.

Yep. You're definitely wrong.

Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. - Heb 11:1.

Biblical faith (Christian faith) is a real substance that serves as indisputable evidence for the existence of God. I like to call it the sixth sense since it is the means through which we experience God.
To me, to have faith is to have a personal relationship with God, a faith relationship the Bible refers to as being like a marriage relationship between a husband and wife.

For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, His body...Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands...Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave Himself up for her - Eph 5:23-25.

Even though one can have this faith relationship and then lose it, for the atheist, it is not just merely losing this faith relationship; it is that the atheist no longer believes in the God he is supposed to have had this faith relationship with. He claims he was in a faith relationship with God, but now he no longer believes this God ever existed. Which begs the question, who did he have this faith relationship with? And if it was not with God, then can it be truely called Christian faith?

It can. Again, this is why religious discussions are so colorful. I've gotten about five different definitions of 'faith' in this thread alone. But hey! We know YOUR interpretation is the right, am I right?

 

[AV1611VET]

I've gotten about five different definitions of 'faith' in this thread alone.

9

 

[Gracchus]

I'm sorry, but Biblical faith is based on proof. In fact, Biblical faith is proof. Your interpretation is way off.
Nope.

Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. - Heb 11:1.

Dang! You just said one thing and then quoted the Bible contradicting what you just said.

Biblical faith (Christian faith) is a real substance that serves as indisputable evidence for the existence of God. I like to call it the sixth sense since it is the means through which we experience God.

Jesse, a paranoid schizophrenic in a mental hospital where I once worked, had just such faith that he was Jesus of Nazareth.

To me, to have faith is to have a personal relationship with God, a faith relationship the Bible refers to as being like a marriage relationship between a husband and wife.

There is an obvious comment about this that would undoubtedly draw the ire of the mods.

Even though one can have this faith relationship and then lose it, for the atheist, it is not just merely losing this faith relationship; it is that the atheist no longer believes in the God he is supposed to have had this faith relationship with.

Or perhaps he never had it. Jesse, on meds, left the hospital and was able to live on his own. Does that mean he lost his faith?

He claims he was in a faith relationship with God, but now he no longer believes this God ever existed. Which begs the question, who did he have this faith relationship with? And if it was not with God, then can it be truely called Christian faith?

Was Jesse, when he believed himself to be Jesus of Nazareth, a Christian? He certainly had faith in himself at one time. Are anti-psychotic drugs tools of the devil?

 

[solja247]

I believe evolution will [very soon] be disproven by the Lord Jesus Christ when He comes back.

lol. I hope Jesus writes a very good thesis and it doesnt get posted on Answers in Genesis

 

[ranunculus]

Posted by ranculus:

“Are you saying that this quote " never daring to speak..."

No. What you have done is taken part of the quote I posted and attempted to use it to propose I said something I did not. The entire quote is

“Never daring to speak their hateful thoughts around humans.”

My question was simple. If you found this quote as part of a commentary targeted at blacks, or Jews, or Muslims, would your support for the comment be the same? Suppose the overall comment was targeted at Muslims and included the word masque. Would you support it then?

I have not taken apart anything and I didn't put words in your mouth. I simply asked a question. Now, you claim this quote can be used to target blacks, Jews and Muslims. Demonstrate please instead of just asserting.
The blogger you linked to was saying with that quote that it's not OK for people to discriminate against other people on the basis of their sexuality (or ethnicity, religion or nationality for that matter). Everyone is entitled to their opinion but when your actions infringe on the rights of others it's not OK. No one is put in jail for believing women should be killed. Only for acting upon that belief.

“You're contradicting yourself in just one sentence.”

I do not see that. My comment in post number 65 reads

“The atheist propaganda on many of those websites promotes exactly that ideal…”

My use of the term atheist was not and is not inclusive of all atheist, and my use of the term “many” does not include all websites, only many out there. Just look around science blogs, there is even a math guy who routinely rails against creationist. However, my subsequent use of the term atheist is within this context, atheist who promote the agenda of using evolutionary science to denounce Christians and creationist whenever and wherever possible. Happens around here all the time.

There's probably a million Christians who believe in aliens. This says nothing about Christianity but everything about stupidity. Namely that stupidity is everywhere. Even though you claim atheist are "intellectually enlightened and superior", stupidity is everywhere, even among atheists. There isn't a conspiracy going on by atheists to try to eradicate Christianity using evolution. There are more Christians on the planet who believe in evolution that there are atheists period. If you take the 2 billion Christians on the planet and posit that half of them accept evolution. That's a lot more than the 5-10% of the world population who are atheists. And by the way, being atheist doesn't mean you have to accept evolution.

Here is an example from these forums:

Posted by Mike Elphick, post number six, from the thread Is there any evidence for creation?

Quote:

“However, it is basically a variation of the argument from ignorance where lack of knowledge dulls a person's comprehension. However, increasing knowledge of a subject can eventually lead to a proper understanding and eventual acceptance.”

Source: http://www.christianforums.com/t7487660/

Seems he is echoing my point. Increasing knowledge, proper understanding and eventual acceptance? Just another way of saying ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free.

There's good reason someone can use evolution to disprove creation. Because it's possible to use evolution to disprove creationism. There's no good reason someone might use evolution to disprove God. It's not possible.
This quote from Mike you try to make it sound as if he's talking about belief in God. He's not. He's talking about belief in creationism because creationism is an argument from ignorance. And the acceptance he's talking about is of evolution. Not the disbelief in God.

Here is another example of what I am saying, again from these very forums.

Posted by ukgrace, post number one, from the thread entitled Are There Any Creationist Here:

“Are there any creationists here who have a working knowledge of evolution? or are you able to make up your mind about evolution without even knowing what evolution is all about.

Put another way, do you understand what it is that you don't believe?”

And the answer given in post number three as stated by Hespera:

“If they did, they would quit being creationists.”

Source: http://www.christianforums.com/t7482683/

OK I see you've changed the scope of your argument. It's no longer "foul atheism tries to eradicate Christianity" but "foul atheism tries to eradicate creationism". The quotes you posted by ukgrace and hespera only talk about how creationists are unknowledgeable of the theory they are denying. You should watch the ongoing YouTube series "why do people laugh at creationists" and find out just why creationist claims are worthy of ridicule.

Posted by sandwiches:

“So, an article talking about how ERVs are evidence for evolution is the same as an article saying that ERVs disprove religion?”

Taken in the context of where the article was posted and the heading it was posted under, it does not require much of an effort to discern the intent of the article. Besides, the writer did not state that ERVs are evidence of evolution, he stated in the title that they prove evolution.

And your last quote from sandwiches again says NOTHING about how atheism is used to disprove religion. The article about ERVs doesn't talk about God. The blogger who posted the article is just one guy with one opinion. Not representative of atheism at all.

Taken in the context of where the article was posted and the heading it was posted under, it does not require much of an effort to discern the intent of the blogger who posted the article.

Fixed.

 

[razzelflabben]

awesome, so what about now, how to these things compare to now?

I still feel them.


I wasn't trying to imply that you called me less of a person or anything like that. I'm sorry if that came out that way. What I meant was that I don't feel... incomplete or like I need or am missing something. I feel whole and fulfilled.

I think that was obvious that you don't feel incomplete or missing something, but what I can't figure out is how that came up in this discussion....I asked you about your faith, not about your "feeling" right now. What you spiritually believe, is between you and God alone. I'm curious about the "spiritual gifts" I spoke about and how they reveal to us our faith.

I thought he had died to save me for all eternity. That he was THE way to eternal life.

and...is/was He God, and/or man....was He Lord of your life? Who was Jesus to you then?

I have to admit that I'm having a hard time understanding why you don't consider 'joy,' 'peace,' and 'love' emotions.

because they are at least the biblical version, beyond emotions, emotions are included, but they are so much more than emotions. And, as I think back over your reply, I think you must not understand yet that Joy and Happiness are not the same thing.

I can get sad, angry, agitated, etc. If that's what you're asking. Quite honestly, if what you're implying is that someone who has 'real' faith doesn't feel any of those things in dire times, I don't buy that.

not even close to what I'm saying...in fact, I'm not talking about the "opposites" at all.

I have never met a single Christian who is like that. Now, if the answer to that is maybe I haven't met a single 'real' Christian, then it's possible I could be proven wrong.

Let me give you our most recent example...it's one example of many and will bring tears to my eyes as I talk about it, so don't think that it means emotionless, some people confuse the fruit of the spirit with being without emotion as you illude to above, they are NOT the same.

Less than two months ago, our 18 year old son was killed in a swimming accident. We were at a party celebrating a graduation when it happened. Our grief was and still is deep, tears flowed freely and still do. We miss him more than words can say, he was an incredible kid and I don't just say that because he was our son, he really was a neat kid who didn't get into the usual things that draw kids. Anyway, in the midst of that deep grief, we knew joy, a joy that is not happiness, but rather a contentment that he is safe in the arms of our Lord. In fact, that "joy" was and is so complete that through all the sad and painful tears, our steps of grief have been very different than those of the "world" we have never asked why, the answer is too simple, why not...we have never been angry, why should we be? What I am talking about is the supernatural ability to know joy even when the sadness is so deep and consuming that it threatens to envelop you...peace even when all seems lost...hope even when all hope seems gone...these are things that are not driven by emotions, but rather thanks that are driven by the supernatural existence deep within.

Tranquility: I feel serene, calm, at peace.

peace and tranquility are not the same thing either, I experienced this some time ago, when I was drawn into a nothingness type uphoria, but peace is not about nothingness, it's about trust reliance, it's about knowing there is something, or someone that is greater..

Happiness: I feel exhilarated, excited about the future, content

again, happiness and joy are far from the same thing, in fact, one cannot be happy in the midst of sorrow, but one can have joy.

Love: It's when I feel that people more important than myself. That I'd give up my life for them.

Close enough, you come closer to understanding real love than anyone I have talked to on the forums yet about what real love is...bravo to you!

 

[razzelflabben]

No, yours is. This is why it's fun to discuss religion. It's all about interpretations. =)


Yep. You're definitely wrong.



It can. Again, this is why religious discussions are so colorful. I've gotten about five different definitions of 'faith' in this thread alone. But hey! We know YOUR interpretation is the right, am I right?

I'm not sure they are different definitions, as much as different directions, or explorations of that faith.

 

[sandwiches]

peace and tranquility are not the same thing either, I experienced this some time ago, when I was drawn into a nothingness type uphoria, but peace is not about nothingness, it's about trust reliance, it's about knowing there is something, or someone that is greater.. again, happiness and joy are far from the same thing, in fact, one cannot be happy in the midst of sorrow, but one can have joy.Close enough, you come closer to understanding real love than anyone I have talked to on the forums yet about what real love is...bravo to you!

I am truly sorry for your loss and I'm glad you're your faith has helped you get through this.

As far as our discussion, I think we're arguing semantics now. What 'tranquility' is or isn't. What 'love' is or isn't. What 'joy is or isn't. I think we're missing the forest for the trees. My point in this discussion is that I feel as happy, serene, and loving as I ever did while I was considered myself a Chrsitian. Now, if the answer is that perhaps I was never a 'true' Christian. Perhaps. Another possible explanation could be that you don't need to be Christian and have a Christian faith to feel this way.

 

[razzelflabben]

I am truly sorry for your loss and I'm glad you're your faith has helped you get through this.

As far as our discussion, I think we're arguing semantics now. What 'tranquility' is or isn't. What 'love' is or isn't. What 'joy is or isn't. I think we're missing the forest for the trees. My point in this discussion is that I feel as happy, serene, and loving as I ever did while I was considered myself a Chrsitian. Now, if the answer is that perhaps I was never a 'true' Christian. Perhaps. Another possible explanation could be that you don't need to be Christian and have a Christian faith to feel this way.

And my point is that what you are describing is not the same thing that scripture says identifies the faith of a believer. What does that mean? I'm not sure, I was hoping to explore it some with you. From what I can gather in scripture, it is possible to believe and not live in the spirit. I also gather that to live in the spirit means that there are supernatural evidences to His existence. I have witnessed both those who claim Christ but do not live in the evidences and those that claim Christ and live in those evidences. It seems to me that faith is the difference between the two.

If I'm right, then what you describe would be more like belief without faith, turned to lack of belief. I think what we all should determine as some time or other in our lives, is what our faith is in....we can have faith in self, God, others, family, work, government, money, etc. And each of these things, when put into the realm of faith, will produce evidence that they are the authority by which we live. I have a close relative whose faith is in money, he can say all the "right" words, but the "fruit" of his faith is firmly implanted in his life in the form of greed and other things. The HS is no different, if the evidence of that faith in that Spirit is present, it seems that that would be the source or direction maybe a better way to say it, of our faith.

Thus my first question to you...what evidence of faith was present before and how or what has changed about that evidence and faith today? Ah well, I can explore somewhere else...lots of people don't like to be asked question and fewer like the answers they find, as demonstrated this very day on the forums when I made a comment and was told to stop asking questions. Thanks for indulging me to this point.

 

[DontTreadOnMike]

I guess I would call myself a christian. Do I make it every sunday? No, I dont. I actually find myself going less and I know why. Lately I have really been into evolution and other theories that, for some, bring into question some of our beliefs. To me it appears that evolution is on the verge of becoming fact, some scientists already consider it so. I guess what I am asking is, have I heard all the information? Truthfully I have never felt more distant from christianity in my life.

That evolution happens IS a fact. The "theory of evolution" is a theory of WHY it happens. That's how science works. It's a fact that apples fall. The "theory of gravity" is a theory of why apples fall.

Understanding evolution is not mutually exclusive with being a Christian.

 

[sandwiches]

Thus my first question to you...what evidence of faith was present before and how or what has changed about that evidence and faith today? Ah well, I can explore somewhere else...lots of people don't like to be asked question and fewer like the answers they find, as demonstrated this very day on the forums when I made a comment and was told to stop asking questions. Thanks for indulging me to this point.

I don't mind talking about this but I don't like arguing semantics, is all. Now, as far as evidence, I don't think I ever saw any. Otherwise, I probably would've stayed a believer. What kind of evidence is there to validate a faith in something you can't see, hear, touch, taste, or smell?

 

[Gawron]

Posted by ranunculus:

“Now, you claim this quote can be used to target blacks, Jews and Muslims. Demonstrate please instead of just asserting.”

Sidestep. I refuse to accept that you are unable to understand the question I have asked twice now. You apparently just don’t want to answer it.

“The blogger you linked to was saying with that quote that it's not OK for people to discriminate against other people on the basis of their sexuality”

That is not what she was saying with that quote. The overall post by ERV concerned Sally Kern, true, whom ERV hates with as much passion as she hates creationist. However, the portion I quoted had nothing to do with discrimination based on sexuality. It was a manifesto, the atheist dream sequence, the ideal of what ERV would like to see happen, not only to creationist, but also to Christians in general.

“(or ethnicity, religion or nationality for that matter)”

Religion certainly was a target of that quote.

“There's probably a million Christians who believe in aliens.”

It would be hard to quantify that, but ok.

“This says nothing about Christianity but everything about stupidity.”

Really? Christians, or anyone, who believes there may be other life in the universe is stupid? So much for Carl Sagan. I think your analogy is a bit lacking here. Perhaps you should specify Christians who believe that aliens abducted Elvis and took him to their home planet to repopulate their species.

“Namely that stupidity is everywhere.”

Well, there is Jerry Springer.

“Even though you claim atheist are "intellectually enlightened and superior"

I made no such claim, nor would I ever. The sentence those words were taken from began with “if”.

“stupidity is everywhere, even among atheists.”

I think I will let AV1611Vet handle that one.

“There isn't a conspiracy going on by atheists to try to eradicate Christianity using evolution.”

Another claim I did not make. Please re-read my earlier post, my point is made there.

"And by the way, being atheist doesn't mean you have to accept evolution.”

Show me an atheist who does not.

“There's good reason someone can use evolution to disprove creation. Because it's possible to use evolution to disprove creationism.”

Before someone jumps to the default conclusion, I am not promoting creationism. My point was about Christianity. It just so happens that most creationist, as the term is applied in this debate, tend to be Christian. But as for your comment, please feel free to try. Maybe WiccanChild will step in and point out the flaw in your argument.

“There's no good reason someone might use evolution to disprove God.”

Yes, there is. It is called a hatred of God. Ever watch Bill Mahar?

“It's not possible.”

No, but that won’t stop people from trying.

"This quote from Mike you try to make it sound as if he's talking about belief in God. He's not. He's talking about belief in creationism because creationism is an argument from ignorance.”

You keep trying to separate a belief in creationism from a belief in God, or a divine being, as if you can have one without the other. If Christian creationist believe the earth and all life upon it was created, whom do you think they believe created it?

“And the acceptance he's talking about is of evolution. Not the disbelief in God.”

The acceptance of evolution, yes. But within the context of the point I am making, one leads to the other, and many atheist believe exactly that, If only those ignorant comprehensively challenged brain dulled Christians would just study the theory of evolution, they would eventually come to accept that the notion of God is unnecessary and therefore he doesn’t exist.

Not all atheist, because not all atheist care. However, there are those who promote this agenda.

“And your last quote from sandwiches again says NOTHING about how atheism is used to disprove religion.”

Again, I suggest you go back and re-read my earlier post. This is a misrepresentation of what I said.

“The blogger who posted the article is just one guy with one opinion. Not representative of atheism at all.”

Except that it was posted on GodbeGone dot com, an atheist website, under the header of Atheist News. Which of course can only mean that an atheist website posting atheist news is in no way representative of atheism.

Right.

 

[ranunculus]

Posted by ranunculus:

“Now, you claim this quote can be used to target blacks, Jews and Muslims. Demonstrate please instead of just asserting.”

Sidestep. I refuse to accept that you are unable to understand the question I have asked twice now. You apparently just don’t want to answer it.

As I told you the first time you posted this qoute : I don't know what you mean.

I'm not sure I get what you're saying. Are you saying that this quote " never daring to speak..." could be used to quell the rights and freedom of minorities?

 

[ranunculus]

“The blogger you linked to was saying with that quote that it's not OK for people to discriminate against other people on the basis of their sexuality”

That is not what she was saying with that quote. The overall post by ERV concerned Sally Kern, true, whom ERV hates with as much passion as she hates creationist. However, the portion I quoted had nothing to do with discrimination based on sexuality. It was a manifesto, the atheist dream sequence, the ideal of what ERV would like to see happen, not only to creationist, but also to Christians in general.

Manifesto? an atheist manifesto? Now you're just embarrasing yourself.

 

[ranunculus]

“There's probably a million Christians who believe in aliens.”

It would be hard to quantify that, but ok.

“This says nothing about Christianity but everything about stupidity.”

Really? Christians, or anyone, who believes there may be other life in the universe is stupid? So much for Carl Sagan. I think your analogy is a bit lacking here. Perhaps you should specify Christians who believe that aliens abducted Elvis and took him to their home planet to repopulate their species.

If you believe that there are aliens out there, you're nuts. If Carl Sagan claimed he knew there were aliens out there, he was an idiot. There's been no evidence.
Are there aliens out there? Probably. But until this is demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt it's stupid to believe it.

If I lived 3000 years ago and said to my neighbors that the earth revolves around the sun they would have called me nuts and rightly so because there was absolutely no evidence back then that this was true. It doens't matter that we later found out this was the case. If I had believed it back then without any evidence to back it up I'd be foolish.

 

[ranunculus]

“Even though you claim atheist are "intellectually enlightened and superior"

I made no such claim, nor would I ever. The sentence those words were taken from began with “if”.

no it didn't

This is what is amazing about attempting to discuss this issue with atheist. How can you guys be so intellectually enlightened and superior while at the same time incapable of drawing an inference or extrapolating to a conclusion based on compiling evidence all at the same time?

 

[ranunculus]

"And by the way, being atheist doesn't mean you have to accept evolution.”

Show me an atheist who does not.

The raeliens for one.

“There's no good reason someone might use evolution to disprove God.”

Yes, there is. It is called a hatred of God. Ever watch Bill Mahar?

Ok, there's still not a good reason. And you can't hate something you don't believe exists. Do you hate leprachauns?

"This quote from Mike you try to make it sound as if he's talking about belief in God. He's not. He's talking about belief in creationism because creationism is an argument from ignorance.”

You keep trying to separate a belief in creationism from a belief in God, or a divine being, as if you can have one without the other. If Christian creationist believe the earth and all life upon it was created, whom do you think they believe created it?

You can be a god believer and not be creationist.

“And the acceptance he's talking about is of evolution. Not the disbelief in God.”

The acceptance of evolution, yes. But within the context of the point I am making, one leads to the other, and many atheist believe exactly that, If only those ignorant comprehensively challenged brain dulled Christians would just study the theory of evolution, they would eventually come to accept that the notion of God is unnecessary and therefore he doesn’t exist.

Not all atheist, because not all atheist care. However, there are those who promote this agenda.

So you believe in the slippery slope theory that belief in evolution will lead to atheism. Nonsense. And you contradicting yourself again.

Any Christian who would read over a few evolution websites and then claim to be losing his faith in God was having serious trouble with that faith long before he or she read anything about evolution.

Here you clearly imply that a christian who's strong in his faith would not lose said faith in God by studying evolution.

“The blogger who posted the article is just one guy with one opinion. Not representative of atheism at all.”

Except that it was posted on GodbeGone dot com, an atheist website, under the header of Atheist News. Which of course can only mean that an atheist website posting atheist news is in no way representative of atheism.

Right.

Sigh. Do you believe atheism is a religion with central tenants and dogmas? That atheists come together in some sort of mass and worship something or other?
Well, you'd be wrong on that. There's nothing, absolutely nothing any atheist can say or do that is representative of atheism because it's not a club. Atheism is a single position on a single claim. Not accepting the god claim theists make. Anything else that an atheist might believe or do is irrelevant to atheism but solely dependent on the person.