Why do atheists hate God?

[Dingbat]

Recently, I have had a lot of conversations with atheists. Many
express a strong hatred of God. I have been at a loss to explain this.
How can you hate someone you don’t believe in? Why the hostility? If
God does not exist, shouldn’t atheists just relax and seek a good time
before they become plant food? Why should it matter if people believe
in God? Nothing matters if atheism is true.

Aldous Huxley (1894–1963), the brother of the atheistic evolutionist
Sir Julian Huxley, advocated a drug-fuelled utopia. He gave the reason
for his anti-Christian stance: “I had motive for not wanting the world
to have a meaning … the philosophy of meaninglessness was essentially
an instrument of liberation, sexual and political.”

Like Huxley, some people don’t like God because they don’t like moral
constraints—you can make up your own rules, or have none at all, if
God does not exist. They hate God and Christians because they are
actually not confident that God does not exist and seeing Christians
may remind them that they are ‘suppressing the truth’ (Romans 1:18).

What about atheists who had a church/religious upbringing? Some of
them hate God because of evil things done to them by teachers in
religious schools or by church leaders—people who on the face of it
represented God. Antipathy towards God is an understandable reaction,
sadly (although illogical).

It is strange that people hate God, who loves so much.

Some atheists complain of Christian ‘intolerance’ in speaking about
hell. But if those who spurn God’s forgiveness will suffer God’s
wrath, shouldn’t we Christians be warning everyone about the danger
and how they can be saved? How is that ‘intolerant’? It would be
extremely unloving not to tell others of this.

http://creation.com/atheist-god-hate

[Answer_42]

On Monday, May 27, 2013 2:08:33 PM UTC-4, Dingbat wrote:

Recently, I have had a lot of conversations with atheists. Many
express a strong hatred of God.

He/She is wrong. Expressing disbelief is often wrongly perceived as hate on the believer's part.
 

I have been at a loss to explain this.
How can you hate someone you don’t believe in?

There isn't any.
 

Why the hostility?

The hostility is usually directed at morons who fail to grasp that disbelief is not hate, or at other morons who want to force their beliefs down other people's throat through various encroachment on human right and constitutional rights.
.

<snipped rest of stupid ignorant argumentation>

[LL]

How can anyone hate an entity that has never been shown to exist? What
are atheists saying that would lead anyone to think that they "express
a strong hatred for god"?

Here's a question for you. Do you hate all of the gods that have been
believed in throughout history? If not, why not? Your position on the
existence of those gods is exactly the same as ours on your god. So,
are you hating them?

LL.

[Dingbat]

On May 27, 3:01 pm, LL <llpens3...@gmail.com> wrote:
> How can anyone hate an entity that has never been shown to exist? What
> are atheists saying that would lead anyone to think that they "express
> a strong hatred for god"?
>
> Here's a question for you. Do you hate all of  the gods that have been
> believed in throughout history? If not, why not?  Your position on the
> existence of those gods is exactly the same as ours on your god. So,
> are you hating them?
>

Send Don Batten an "I hate the Spaggheti monster" T-shirt:-)

[Loopflanger]

On Monday, May 27, 2013 12:01:13 PM UTC-7, LL wrote:

How can anyone hate an entity that has never been shown to exist? What
are atheists saying that would lead anyone to think that they "express
a strong hatred for god"?

They're confusing hating the IDEA of god with hatred OF god. Nobody who doesn't believe in god hates god as if god exists. That's the fallacy operating there.



 

Here's a question for you. Do you hate all of  the gods that have been
believed in throughout history? If not, why not?

There's one supernatural being that Christians hate, (that is, the Christians that believe that such a being exists), & that would be the devil. (Now, why would god, who does only good stuff allegedly, create the devil, allow the devil to exist, or allow the devil to have influence?)  

[Alan Wostenberg]

Ll, one possible indicator they "have strong hated for God" is the inability of Internet atheists to type the name God. They can type Zeus or Hitler but not God. Why? Two theories.

It appears they think it gives reverence to type the Name of He Who Shall Not Be Named, like a pious Jew, or a character out of a Harry Potter novel. Is it piety or hatred?

[Alan Wostenberg]

Good distinction LF between hating the idea of X vs hating X. I hate the idea of the Borg race from Star Trek. If they existed I would hate them and do away with them if I could. Tell me you don't think of God that way.

[Bob T.]

On Monday, May 27, 2013 3:07:02 PM UTC-7, Alan Wostenberg wrote:

Ll, one possible indicator they "have strong hated for God" is the inability of Internet atheists to type the name God.

 

 

What are you talking about?  God God God.

 

 

They can type Zeus or Hitler but not God. Why? Two theories.

It appears they think it gives reverence to type the Name of He Who Shall Not Be Named, like a pious Jew, or a character out of a Harry Potter novel. Is it piety or hatred?

 

 

God!  Are you on God-damned drugs, Alan?  What in God's name are you talking about?  God God goddity God God God.

 

- Bob T 

[Dingbat]

On May 27, 6:07 pm, Alan Wostenberg <awo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ll, one possible indicator they "have strong hated for God" is the inability of Internet atheists to type the name God. They can type Zeus or Hitler but not God. Why?
>

A captial letter is used when referring to your god by a name (eg.
Yahweh); "your god" refers to a specific god since you have only one
god - only if you had multiple gods would you have occasion to get
confused about which one is referred to.

>
> Two theories.
>
> It appears they think it gives reverence to type the Name of He Who Shall Not Be Named, like a pious Jew, or a character out of a Harry Potter novel. Is it piety or hatred?
>

Jews who don't write their god's name use "adonai" or "hashem" instead
- sometimes in lower case:
>
Jerusalem lyrics
http://kashlyrics.com/lyrics/daliah_lavi/jerusalem
Barouh ata adonai

[Alan Wostenberg]

Ranjit that post is not calculated to win friends influence enemies now is it! Here is how atheist Thomas Nagel put it:

"I want atheism to be true and am made uneasy by the fact that some of the most intelligent and well-informed people I know are religious believers. It isn't just that I don't believe in God. It is that I hope there is no God! I don't want the world to be like that"

[Timbo]

On Monday, May 27, 2013 2:08:33 PM UTC-4, Dingbat wrote:

I'm an Atheist who in fact hates God because of what he is: A social psychological miss-function caused by imperial repetitive will to control fellow man.

 I hate God more than the worst disability. This ongoing social psychological mess that gets by as something related to nature, causes people the mental license to be irrational about a million other everyday things.

This ongoing social psychological mess, causes a false excuse to make jihad for thousands of unemployed Islamic youth who see no future for themselves.

This ongoing social psychological mess, causes tiny religious difference war that gives arms manufacturers the false right to escalate them into killing and displacing millions of innocent hard working humans for the all mighty dollar.

This ongoing social psychological mess, causes societies false moral hope, if it were not present, we would have been forced to actually learn morality instead of moral justice going through the motions of being moral to get along.

This ongoing social psychological mess called God, leaves humanity in an embarrassing situation, claiming to be the only rational animal on the planet. Dogs are only mans best friend because they feel sorry for our inherent dishonesty caused by two thousand years of knowing we could get by with it. We are the only dishonest animal on the planet, thanks to this ongoing social psychological bullshit called God.

God, this ongoing social psychological mess. I hate!

[Dingbat]

On May 27, 6:39 pm, Alan Wostenberg <awo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ranjit that post is not calculated to win friends influence enemies now is it!

Is currying favor the objective of posting? Does Thomas Nagel curry
favor?
http://www.focusinsights.org/article/science-and-technology/when-atheists-break-ranks
Thomas Nagel is an atheist. So when he wrote a recent book called Mind
and Cosmos, with the provocative subtitle Why the Materialist Neo-
Darwinian Conception of Nature Is Almost Certainly False, many secular
commentators got upset. Nagel doesn’t enjoy the name recognition of
"angry" atheists like Dawkins or Hitchens. There are reasons for that.
For one, Nagel’s not terribly angry. He avoids the shrill tone his
more famous colleagues use to get attention. He takes a cool, even-
handed approach, giving respect to those with whom he disagrees. In
brief, he argues that the prevailing materialist assumptions of modern
science cannot account for how life began from non-life, leave alone
how it proliferated into today's vast variety. Moreover, he argues
that consciousness and the ability to think, reason and value cannot
be explained or reduced to mere physical and chemical processes. These
are arguments theist philosophers, scientists and theologians have
been making all along. Therein lies the main reason Nagel and his book
have caused such a ruckus among the secular intelligentsia.

> Here  is how atheist Thomas Nagel put it:
> "I want atheism to be true and am made uneasy by the fact that some of the most intelligent and well-informed people I know are religious believers. It isn't just that I don't believe in God. It is that I hope there is no God! I don't want the world to be like that"

In more detail:
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Thomas_Nagel
In speaking of the fear of religion, I don’t mean to refer to the
entirely reasonable hostility toward certain established religions and
religious institutions, in virtue of their objectionable moral
doctrines, social policies, and political influence. Nor am I
referring to the association of many religious beliefs with
superstition and the acceptance of evident empirical falsehoods. I am
talking about something much deeper–namely, the fear of religion
itself. I speak from experience, being strongly subject to this fear
myself: I want atheism to be true and am made uneasy by the fact that

some of the most intelligent and well-informed people I know are

religious believers. It isn’t just that I don’t believe in God and,
naturally, hope that I’m right in my belief. It’s that I hope there is
no God! I don’t want there to be a God; I don’t want the universe to
be like that.
"The Last Word" by Thomas Nagel, Oxford University Press, 1997, pp.
130-131.

[Loopflanger]

On Monday, May 27, 2013 3:21:57 PM UTC-7, Bob T. wrote:

Ll, one possible indicator they "have strong hated for God" is the inability of Internet atheists to type the name God.

 

 

What are you talking about?  God God God.

 

Wostenberg hates it when somebody types "god" instead of "God". He holds his fetish in high regard. 
 

[GT]

Why, is because if there is no evil, then there can only be good.
(There must be evil to allow for freewill). In the same way as there
being the absence of: hot - cold, dark-light etc etc. and of course
a degree of determinism. (Freewill could not exist if it were enforced)
 

[GT]

On Tuesday, May 28, 2013 7:04:17 AM UTC+10, Loopflanger wrote:

On Monday, May 27, 2013 12:01:13 PM UTC-7, LL wrote:

How can anyone hate an entity that has never been shown to exist? What
are atheists saying that would lead anyone to think that they "express
a strong hatred for god"?

They're confusing hating the IDEA of god with hatred OF god. Nobody who doesn't believe in god hates god as if god exists. That's the fallacy operating there.

Where is the fallacy, you're not Naturalists. Feminists hate God &
Jesus, because they're both depicted as male, for example.

 

Here's a question for you. Do you hate all of  the gods that have been
believed in throughout history? If not, why not?

There's one supernatural being that Christians hate, (that is, the Christians that believe that such a being exists), & that would be the devil. (Now, why would god, who does only good stuff allegedly, create the devil, allow the devil to exist, or allow the devil to have influence?)  

Allowing Satan allows us the choice of evil. There not being evil
makes no sense. (Good could not exist with out it's opposite).

[Dingbat]

Does God find free will necessary? In the (new/ resurrected) life of
the world to come*, will there be free will and consequently evil? If
not, why is free will necessary in this life?
>
* The Creed concludes with “I look forward to the resurrection of the
dead and the life of the world to come. Amen.”
http://www.americancatholic.org/Newsletters/IBelieve/preview.aspx

[Loopflanger]

On Monday, May 27, 2013 6:00:35 PM UTC-7, GT wrote:

There's one supernatural being that Christians hate, (that is, the Christians that believe that such a being exists), & that would be the devil. (Now, why would god, who does only good stuff allegedly, create the devil, allow the devil to exist, or allow the devil to have influence?)  

Why, is because if there is no evil, then there can only be good.
(There must be evil to allow for freewill).

The plan is to get good out of people freely choosing good or evil, but the end result is evil along with the good. Since god knew that result beforehand, could have made a conflict free world,  but gets some value out of one in which conflict is guaranteed, god's choosing to do all of that is evil, since he's obviously benefiting from all the collateral damage. (To compound this selfish behavior, god punishes the evil doers he benefits from to eternal damnation, a punishment he deserves more himself.)   But the whole idea of god's plan is ridiculous anyway.  Here's a short explanation:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YkpFMqzOJ0Y



 

(Freewill could not exist if it were enforced)

If god has a plan,  freewill is a charade. 

[Loopflanger]

On Monday, May 27, 2013 6:11:17 PM UTC-7, GT wrote:

On Tuesday, May 28, 2013 7:04:17 AM UTC+10, Loopflanger wrote:

On Monday, May 27, 2013 12:01:13 PM UTC-7, LL wrote:

How can anyone hate an entity that has never been shown to exist? What
are atheists saying that would lead anyone to think that they "express
a strong hatred for god"?

They're confusing hating the IDEA of god with hatred OF god. Nobody who doesn't believe in god hates god as if god exists. That's the fallacy operating there.

Where is the fallacy, you're not Naturalists. Feminists hate God &
Jesus, because they're both depicted as male, for example.

The fallacy is in assuming that hating the possibility of something is the same as hating the actuality of something. You can't assume somebody is or is not a naturalist on the grounds that they uphold atheism or theism. & feminists hate misogyny. A feminist idealist is quite happy to believe in a non-patriarchal deity.

 

Allowing Satan allows us the choice of evil. There not being evil
makes no sense. (Good could not exist with out it's opposite).

Then how do you account for a god that is *all* good? Before god created anything, there was just god.  How can an all-good god exist w/o any opposite if "good could not exit with out it's opposite"?  But allowing the devil is evil. So that demonstrates that god isn't all good, & that solves the dilemma.

[LL]

On May 27, 3:07 pm, Alan Wostenberg <awo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ll, one possible indicator they "have strong hated for God" is the inability of Internet atheists to type the name God. They can type Zeus or Hitler but not God. Why? Two theories.
>
> It appears they think it gives reverence to type the Name of He Who Shall Not Be Named, like a pious Jew, or a character out of a Harry Potter novel. Is it piety or hatred?

I haven't noticed atheists having any trouble writing, typing or
saying the word God. Why should they? It's the name of a non-existent
entity. We don't have any trouble writing, typing or saying Santa
Claus, Easter Bunny, angels, demons, Satan, ghosts, Leprechauns, elves
or fairies, either. They are simply names of fictional characters. We
have no problem at all writing or saying their purported names. What
sort of propaganda are you listening to that would bring you to
swallow such a ridiculous idea?

LL.

[LL]

On May 27, 3:17 pm, Alan Wostenberg <awo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Good distinction LF between hating the idea of X vs hating X. I hate the idea of the Borg race from Star Trek. If they existed I would hate them and do away with them if I could. Tell me you don't think of God that way.

I don't think of God in any way except as a fictional character. I
don't hate fictional characters. I might not like what they are
purported to do or stand for, and I wouldn't like an actual person who
did or stood for those things, but I don't waste much human emotion on
fictional characters. It's disturbing to see that you do and I can
only attribute it to religious indoctrination that claims that anyone
in his right mind can love or hate a nonexistent entity.

LL

[LL]

On May 27, 3:39 pm, Alan Wostenberg <awo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ranjit that post is not calculated to win friends influence enemies now is it!   Here  is how atheist Thomas Nagel put it:
>
> "I want atheism to be true and am made uneasy by the fact that some of the most intelligent and well-informed people I know are religious believers. It isn't just that I don't believe in God. It is that I hope there is no God! I don't want the world to be like that"

Nor do I, nor do most people with any sense or human feeling. Who in
his right mind would want there to be the violent and sadistic god as
described in the bible? He is purported to "love" humankind and is
purported to be all-powerful, yet he allows humankind to be tortured,
even its most innocent creatures. That is not a god I would want to
exist, and anyone who does must be as violent and sadistic as the god
that they revere. No one can revere a violent and sadistic entity
without revering violence and sadism as well. The entity and its
characteristics cannot be separated.

LL.

[LL]

There is no good or bad but in the minds of humans. If evil existed
it would be a supernatural force. Good and bad are simply human
opinions. They are not things that can exist independently of human
minds. You will only drive yourself crazy talking of the "existence"
of good and bad or whether one can "exist" without the other. And any
idea of Satan is even more crazy-making.

LL

[harry k]

If a god existed it would be part of nature and as such, accepted,
possibly hated. for sure the god of the OT deserved hate.

Harry K

[harry k]

Hitler at least existed. as for typing god, I just did.

Harry.

[harry k]

The faithful have a way around it. All the evil is due to Satan.
They somehow wall
the stone fact that it is their god who created him to begin with.
The supposed war between God and Satan therefor could be ended with
one wave of God's hand. Why doesn't that loving, kind god that Alan
believes in do it?

Added to keep Alan from getting a knot in his knickers:

Note the none capitalization of "god" in that last sentence. Why?
because it is the correct English useage in that it is not addressing
any specific one.

Harry K

[GT]

On Tuesday, May 28, 2013 11:18:37 AM UTC+10, Dingbat wrote:

On May 27, 9:00 pm, GT <greg.ne...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 28, 2013 7:04:17 AM UTC+10, Loopflanger wrote:
>
> > There's one supernatural being that Christians hate, (that is, the
> > Christians that believe that such a being exists), & that would be the
> > devil. (Now, why would god, who does only good stuff allegedly, create the
> > devil, allow the devil to exist, or allow the devil to have influence?)
>
> Why, is because if there is no evil, then there can only be good.
> (There must be evil to allow for freewill). In the same way as there
> being the absence of: hot - cold, dark-light etc etc. and of course
> a degree of determinism. (Freewill could not exist if it were enforced)
>
>
Does God find free will necessary?

In the (new/ resurrected) life of
the world to come*, will there be free will and consequently evil?

If not, why is free will necessary in this life?

Yes. But evil would be a consequence of choice, not of freewill itself,
as we could choose not to do evil. (God gave us our freewill, we then
chose to do evil). And why is it me that's telling you this, when I don't
hardly know the first thing about the bible? (obviously I know the first
thing, as we all know about the temptation of Adam & Eve).

[Dingbat]

A specific one can be referred to without using a capital letter.
"Their god" refers to a specific one. "That god" refers to a specific
one too. For grammatical comparison, consider that "their car" and
"that car" refer to a specific car.

[GT]

The faithful do have a way around this, its called logic.
And as there can only be the one God, then 'God' is correct.

[GT]

A conflict free world can be had when we choose not to enter into
conflicts. And if I had 'business' plans for you, this wouldn't mean
you don't have any say in the matter. (It would make a useful test of
the foreknowledge vs free-will argument)? And you don't think the
threat of eternal damnation hasn't done any good over the centuries?
And wouldn't we be choosing to go to hell if that's what happens?

I mean to say that if I weren't going to hell, then I wouldn't feel right
about getting a way with all the things I've done wrong. But the
fire and brimstone thing does appear to be a bit excessive. But I'm
figuring that anyone who is infinitely smarter than myself wouldn't be
burning someone like me for all that long. I sure hope I'm not wrong.
 

 

(Freewill could not exist if it were enforced)

If god has a plan,  freewill is a charade. 

Not if life is like a jigsaw puzzle, where we put the
pieces into place.

[Loopflanger]

On Monday, May 27, 2013 10:55:02 PM UTC-7, GT wrote:

On Tuesday, May 28, 2013 12:17:38 PM UTC+10, Loopflanger wrote:

On Monday, May 27, 2013 6:00:35 PM UTC-7, GT wrote:

There's one supernatural being that Christians hate, (that is, the Christians that believe that such a being exists), & that would be the devil. (Now, why would god, who does only good stuff allegedly, create the devil, allow the devil to exist, or allow the devil to have influence?)  

Why, is because if there is no evil, then there can only be good.
(There must be evil to allow for freewill).

The plan is to get good out of people freely choosing good or evil, but the end result is evil along with the good. Since god knew that result beforehand, could have made a conflict free world,  but gets some value out of one in which conflict is guaranteed, god's choosing to do all of that is evil, since he's obviously benefiting from all the collateral damage. (To compound this selfish behavior, god punishes the evil doers he benefits from to eternal damnation, a punishment he deserves more himself.)   But the whole idea of god's plan is ridiculous anyway.  Here's a short explanation:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YkpFMqzOJ0Y

 

A conflict free world can be had when we choose not to enter into
conflicts.

If you believe that god created the world & has a plan, then it's god's plan to have a conflicted world whether we want it that way or not.

 

 
 

(Freewill could not exist if it were enforced)

If god has a plan,  freewill is a charade. 

 

Not if life is like a jigsaw puzzle

If it's predetermined what pieces you'll pick up & when, then you don't have free will. God's plan implies that everything is predetermined. Your free will is an illusion, not because of foreknowledge but because of god's prearranged plan.

Acts 2:23

New International Version (NIV)

²³ This man was handed over to you by God’s deliberate plan and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men,^[a] put him to death by nailing him to the cross.

Now, don't come back here, like a Gump with your puzzles & box of chocolate,  & claim I said that foreknowledge negates free will. That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that "god's deliberate  plan" negates free will. 

[e_space]

hitler existed ... 'god' has never been proven to exist ... hope that
helps

[e_space]

you hate something that you believe doesn't exist? wow, that's a
trick!

[Timbo]

On Monday, May 27, 2013 6:07:02 PM UTC-4, Alan Wostenberg wrote:

Ll, one possible indicator they "have strong hated for God" is the inability of Internet atheists to type the name God. They can type Zeus or Hitler but not God. Why? Two theories.

It appears they think it gives reverence to type the Name of He Who Shall Not Be Named, like a pious Jew, or a character out of a Harry Potter novel. Is it piety or hatred?

Well allen, :) in electronic communication it has become almost the norm to skip proper grammar and not hit the shift key when writing the same word or name found hundreds of times within multiple threads. It is more about assuming grammar for sloppier speed. Where electronic grammar changed significantly, is going from the size keyboard that you type on, to duel thumbing. The speed of communication was getting faster while the number of digits to type got cut by 80%. It would be interesting to see the average speed of "good" grammar on the small devices. If there is such a thing. LOL

Not making excuses allen, :) I'm sure there are some doing it because it bothers you. Ah, if Henry The VIII was still around, they would likely write henry viii. There is some social psychology there about free people vs. kings. Maybe it is not just your king they wish less acknowledgement, but all kings. Your king so happens to be the popular subject matter here.

One thing for sure, if they know it bugs you and they want to bug you, god.

have a great day, 

timbo

[harry k]

If the faithful ever used logic, there would be no religion.

Harry K

[Timbo]

On Tuesday, May 28, 2013 7:52:59 AM UTC-4, e_space wrote:

you hate something that you believe doesn't exist? wow, that's a
trick!

Yeah e, it is something I started doing a couple of years ago. I became bothered by the fact that people would post up popular dictionary definitions as if they were set in gold. Where in reality, we know that dictionary definitions are not always defining the word used in context. No matter if they should not have used the word as such, I find it wrong to try and change or down-grade there statement. 

Then I thought about just who wrote dictionaries? Umm, it was likely not Atheist in charge. It could be a definition that favors slightly to the right or at the least "Christian culture minded"

Then I thought about the dictionary meaning anti-theism. Well I'm not truly anti-theist. I'm actually anti promotion of all social psychological things that control lives. If one claims "Well I'm really into sports" But then scolds their child for interrupting the sports T.V. program, I'm like dumb-ass is totally in escape mode from social responsibility.  First cause is not what he thinks it is: "really into sports" 

So I came to the conclusion that in reality there is God and what they are claiming it to be is rationally false. Their claiming it to be deity. It would be a deity in its original context because those first using the word were describing a particular deity with particulars. But that is further from reality today. Like I mentioned above, definitions are only worth what the context is saying not any origin. In modern day we ended up with millions of differing ideas about what this biblical God meant. When I lumped it altogether with whole picture observation, I came up with God: a social/psychological brain activity or particular paths caused by quantity of psychological social repetition.

I started claiming that God is real and lives as particular social/psychological paths in the brains of many, instead of deity, which we know cannot possibly exist. It is more of an attempt to cause theist to see what their determinism has inflicted them with. To help them understand when folks say or write particular phrases it evokes the God paths. It is most important to know what God is while dealing with employer/employee relationships within the Babble Built. These God paths can be triggered to decide most undesired consequence about one's employment within this region. It also can highly effect business communication if one does not understand that God paths get accidentally triggered. If one fails to recognize it for what it is, their apt to make a wrong reply or worst yet, wrong business decision. I was lucky to have day to day business communications in person with a highly religious Pentecost family for twenty years. It is a bit of walking on thin ice to have your business transactions to come out not inflicted by God paths. It is like staying aware that your constantly working with separation of church and state. It is less the responsibility of the inflicted than the  one who knows it is an infliction. One comes to understand this discipline better if their lively hood of their business is affected by it.

It causes others to question just WTF does Timbo believe.  I take in account that 95% of this community is speaking about deity and not a repetitive social psychological infliction. Thats just fine because it causes folks to ask about my position and therefore allows the window for me to explain how wrong the definition is to modern day reality.

My other one is: "I'm culturally Christian that so happens to be Atheist."  Here, I try to bring better awareness to the reality of determinism (determined lives). I would be but a fool to say I successfully escaped my Christian culture. My thoughts are in fact to some degree controlled by my determined culture. It is just a bit of realism and whole picture thinking that I try to bring to the table to offset all of the social assumptions that unjustifiably set in place of realities.

My thesis is: As social communication and relationships change to greatly more electronic than the physical, folks need to be aware that we also need to change the way we phrase and word choice. What was assumed to be meant yesteryear while using body language along with tone of voice becomes quite different when limited to text only. Not so much while adding imagery (mostly photo and video). The other great change we are all totally aware of is cross-culture. Social is global, Yeah! Chalk one up for evolution. So far, I give global society an A+ in patients. This is a great sign, showing that humans are eager to be done with tribalism and individualism. We are seeing differences as an asset, rather than hindrance in need of attack. 

[GT]

On Tuesday, May 28, 2013 5:28:23 PM UTC+10, Loopflanger wrote:

On Monday, May 27, 2013 10:55:02 PM UTC-7, GT wrote:

On Tuesday, May 28, 2013 12:17:38 PM UTC+10, Loopflanger wrote:

On Monday, May 27, 2013 6:00:35 PM UTC-7, GT wrote:

There's one supernatural being that Christians hate, (that is, the Christians that believe that such a being exists), & that would be the devil. (Now, why would god, who does only good stuff allegedly, create the devil, allow the devil to exist, or allow the devil to have influence?)  

Why, is because if there is no evil, then there can only be good.
(There must be evil to allow for freewill).

The plan is to get good out of people freely choosing good or evil, but the end result is evil along with the good. Since god knew that result beforehand, could have made a conflict free world,  but gets some value out of one in which conflict is guaranteed, god's choosing to do all of that is evil, since he's obviously benefiting from all the collateral damage. (To compound this selfish behavior, god punishes the evil doers he benefits from to eternal damnation, a punishment he deserves more himself.)   But the whole idea of god's plan is ridiculous anyway.  Here's a short explanation:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YkpFMqzOJ0Y

 

A conflict free world can be had when we choose not to enter into
conflicts.

If you believe that god created the world & has a plan, then it's god's plan to have a conflicted world whether we want it that way or not.

Part of any plan is to take into consideration that things aren't going to go
to plan. (the plan remains intact) So, God having a plan we don't adhere to
doesn't mean he can't be aware of this in advance. And it also doesn't mean
that we won't eventually follow that plan.
 

 

 
 

(Freewill could not exist if it were enforced)

If god has a plan,  freewill is a charade. 

 

Not if life is like a jigsaw puzzle

If it's predetermined what pieces you'll pick up & when, then you don't have free will. God's plan implies that everything is predetermined. Your free will is an illusion, not because of foreknowledge but because of god's prearranged plan.

Acts 2:23

A plan is an outline, not the finished construction itself.
We look at the picture then at the piece and decide whether
or not it fits the puzzle. And the bible does tell us that there
is an alternative picture that we can put together if we choose.
(The very real potential for an Armageddon scenario still exists).

New International Version (NIV)

²³ This man was handed over to you by God’s deliberate plan and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men,^[a] put him to death by nailing him to the cross.

Now, don't come back here, like a Gump with your puzzles & box of chocolate,  & claim I said that foreknowledge negates free will. That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that "god's deliberate  plan" negates free will. 

What you're saying is obvious, and as I've got no problems understanding
even Dave's best efforts, then your presumptuous exposes a flaw in your
own personality, not any faults on my part.

But where you fail is in defining a plan as being more potentially at
odds with our freewill than is foreknowledge.

The bible does tell us that God has a plan, but also that we are free
to chose not to follow that plan. But there would be nothing wrong with
him planning (and acting) to counter our failings. God is not a dictator,
but is instead a benevolent leader. (Nature would be a blind and ruthless
dictator)
 

[GT]

On Tuesday, May 28, 2013 9:52:59 PM UTC+10, e_space wrote:

you hate something that you believe doesn't exist? wow, that's a
trick!

You don't believe that God doesn't exist, you instead non-believe.
Your status is of a person that hasn't yet made up their mind. A
completely illogical position taking into consideration that the only
alternative to God, Nature, would exist in complete contradiction.
 

[Loopflanger]

On Tuesday, May 28, 2013 5:54:38 PM UTC-7, GT wrote:

If you believe that god created the world & has a plan, then it's god's plan to have a conflicted world whether we want it that way or not.

Part of any plan is to take into consideration that things aren't going to go
to plan.

How can an omniscient being not know how to make a plan where things aren't going to go to plan? Whatever happens has to be a part of that plan.



 

But where you fail is in defining a plan as being more potentially at

odds with our freewill than is foreknowledge.

Because a plan implies that things are predetermined.



 

The bible does tell us that God has a plan, but also that we are free
to chose not to follow that plan.

Not following the rules and not following the plan are two different things. IOW, some people disobeying the rules is a part of god's plan.

God is not a dictator,

That's contrary to what's evident in this entire set-up. Your so-called "godded universe" [sic]  is a less than benevolent dictatorship.  

[LL]

On May 27, 3:07 pm, Alan Wostenberg <awo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ll, one possible indicator they "have strong hated for God" is the inability of Internet atheists to type the name God. They can type Zeus or Hitler but not God. Why? Two theories.
>
> It appears they think it gives reverence to type the Name of He Who Shall Not Be Named, like a pious Jew, or a character out of a Harry Potter novel. Is it piety or hatred?

God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God,
God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God,
God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God,
God, God,
God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God,
God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God,
God, God,
God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God,
God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God,God, God, God, God, God,
God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God,
God, God, God, God.

god, god, god, god, god god, god, god, god, god, god, god, god, god
god, god, god, god, god, god, god, god, god god, god, god, god, god,
god, god, god, god god, god, god, god, god, god, god, god, god god,
god, god, god, god, god, god, god, god god, god, god, god, god, god,
god, god, god god, god, god, god, god, god, god, god, god god, god,
god, god, god, god, god, god, god god, god, god, god, god, god, god,
god, god god, god, god, god, god, god, god, god, god god, god, god,
god, god, god, god, god, god god, god, god, god.

GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD,
GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD,
GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD,
GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD,
GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD,
GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD,
GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD.

There ya go Alan.  Every one written by an atheist. And I'm still
alive!

[e_space]

actually, you have NO idea what i believe or disbelieve ... i am not
an atheist, for example, so you can take that opinion of yours and
flush it where it belongs ... i don't believe in the 'god' of your
religion, and am surprised that supposedly intelligent people are so
brainwashed by what they were taught in sunday school ...

imo, one shouldn't 'make up their mind' about such things, or listen
to what anyone else is preaching ... they should internalize and come
to their own conclusion ... which is what i did ...

speaking of 'contradiction' ... your religion is full of it ... first,
it expounds an all-loving 'god', who then sentences all those who
don't 'believe' in
'him' to eternal torture ... this is all-loving? this is rational?
this makes sense?

i could go on -->

[e_space]

why don't you just sit quietly by yourself, and try to come to your
own conclusions ... i don't think you should be the result of the
community you live in ... do you?

[e_space]

lol ... industrious little creature ain't ya?

[Marc]

On Tuesday, 28 May 2013 00:39:05 UTC+2, Alan Wostenberg wrote:

Ranjit that post is not calculated to win friends influence enemies now is it!   Here  is how atheist Thomas Nagel put it:

"I want atheism to be true and am made uneasy by the fact that some of the most intelligent and well-informed people I know are religious believers. It isn't just that I don't believe in God. It is that I hope there is no God! I don't want the world to be like that"

This is one expression of atheism. I would prefer it if we live in a world of fantasy, with magic, Devils, Angels, Demons, and God. In such a setting, as with most Fantasy Literature, Good and Evil exist and the baddies are obvious: Harry is good, Voldemort is bad... Elves are good, orcs are bad... it is obvious because you can literally see with your eyes the baddies. Living a good life is obvious.  

This world is ethically more grey and who the goodies and baddies are is not always clear. All too often people end up doing 'bad' when they set out with the intention of doing the reverse. We are forced to grapple with competing interests from more than two sources wherein all the interests have validity. In this world we are forced to compromise in ways that leave us all feeling unhappy, but in Fantasy settings such compromises never need to be made because who and what is right and wrong is as clear as day.  

 

[e_space]

re: "All too often people end up doing 'bad' when they set out with
the intention of doing the reverse." ... yep ... like priests who
swear to celibacy and preach about not having sex until married, go
ahead and bugger altar boys ... the height of hypocrisy at its flaming
worst ...

[harry k]

You misspelled "Dog"

Harry K

[LL]

Thanks. :)

[Dingbat]

On May 29, 10:47 am, harry k <turn...@q.com> wrote:
> On May 28, 10:25 pm, LL <llpens3...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 27, 3:07 pm, Alan Wostenberg <awo...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > Ll, one possible indicator they "have strong hatred for God" is the inability of Internet atheists to type the name God.

> > God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God,
> > God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God,
> > God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God,
> > God, God,
> > God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God,
> > God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God,
> > God, God,
> > God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God,
> > God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God,God, God, God, God, God,
> > God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God,
> > God, God, God, God.

> > There ya go Alan.  Every one written by an atheist. And I'm still
> > alive!
>
> You misspelled "Dog"
>

She's dyslexic:->

[GT]

On Wednesday, May 29, 2013 11:56:19 AM UTC+10, Loopflanger wrote:

On Tuesday, May 28, 2013 5:54:38 PM UTC-7, GT wrote:

If you believe that god created the world & has a plan, then it's god's plan to have a conflicted world whether we want it that way or not.

Part of any plan is to take into consideration that things aren't going to go
to plan.

How can an omniscient being not know how to make a plan where things aren't going to go to plan? Whatever happens has to be a part of that plan.

 
God's plan accommodates our freewill, his efforts are ongoing. It's

ourselves that are making the mistakes, the plan is just fine.

 

 

But where you fail is in defining a plan as being more potentially at

odds with our freewill than is foreknowledge.

Because a plan implies that things are predetermined.

Certain things are predetermined. If this wasn't the case, then
free-will itself would be 'enforced'. There needs to be a reciprocal
set of values we can reference so as to allow 'choice'.

 

 

The bible does tell us that God has a plan, but also that we are free
to chose not to follow that plan.

Not following the rules and not following the plan are two different things. IOW, some people disobeying the rules is a part of god's plan.

In granting us our free-will God allows us to make mistakes, yes.
 

God is not a dictator,

That's contrary to what's evident in this entire set-up. Your so-called "godded universe" [sic]  is a less than benevolent dictatorship.  

If you care to take a closer look, you will see that the universe panders to us.


 

[Loopflanger]

On Wednesday, May 29, 2013 8:46:10 PM UTC-7, GT wrote:

Part of any plan is to take into consideration that things aren't going to go
to plan.

How can an omniscient being not know how to make a plan where things aren't going to go to plan? Whatever happens has to be a part of that plan.

 
God's plan accommodates our freewill ...

How does freewill go against god's plan? Either whatever we're going to do is part of god's plan because god can anticipate everything or god isn't omniscient. If he anticipates everything we do then evil is a part of his plan because he's allowing it. That demonstrates that he is not all good. It's like if you made a bunch of androids who can act freely but are totally predictable. You know which ones are going to fail but you make them anyway. Then you make a big brouhaha when they do fail & put all the blame on them. This obviously is a dodge of responsibility on the part of the maker.

 

Because a plan implies that things are predetermined.

Certain things are predetermined.

The "certain things" that are predetermined would be everything if everything that is done can only be god's will.  Free will under those circumstances is just an illusion.



 

 

There needs to be a reciprocal
set of values we can reference so as to allow 'choice'.

The only thing we need to reference is objective reality. Our set of values can only be derived from that. In any given situation there is the best choice of action according to whatever goal we're trying to achieve. Those goals are going to be determined by how our society is organized. None of that doesn't have anything to do with any alleged god or gods. Deities are just projections of how we want things to be. Whatever values we think a deity is dictating to us is just us dictating those values to ourselves.

 

 

 

God is not a dictator,

That's contrary to what's evident in this entire set-up. Your so-called "godded universe" [sic]  is a less than benevolent dictatorship.  

If you care to take a closer look, you will see that the universe panders to us.

That's ludicrous. If you take a closer look at what I'm saying, I'm not saying that the universe is actually controlled by a deity. What I'm saying is that a universe that is controlled by a deity is  inherently a dictatorship. In reality, the universe doesn't pander because it is evidently composed of impersonal forces.

 

 

[Loopflanger]

On Wednesday, May 29, 2013 8:46:10 PM UTC-7, GT wrote:

Part of any plan is to take into consideration that things aren't going to go
to plan.

How can an omniscient being not know how to make a plan where things aren't going to go to plan? Whatever happens has to be a part of that plan.

God's plan accommodates our freewill ...

How does freewill go against god's plan? Either whatever we're going to do is part of god's plan because god can anticipate everything or god isn't omniscient. If he anticipates everything we do then evil is a part of his plan because he's allowing it. That demonstrates that he is not all good. It's like if you made a bunch of androids who can act freely but are totally predictable. You know which ones are going to fail but you make them anyway. Then you make a big brouhaha when they do fail & put all the blame on them. This obviously is a dodge of responsibility on the part of the maker.

 

Because a plan implies that things are predetermined.

Certain things are predetermined.

The "certain things" that are predetermined would be everything if everything that is done can only be god's will.  Free will under those circumstances is just an illusion.



 

 

There needs to be a reciprocal

set of values we can reference so as to allow 'choice'.

The only thing we need to reference is objective reality. Our set of values can only be derived from that. In any given situation there is the best choice of action according to whatever goal we're trying to achieve. Those goals are going to be determined by how our society is organized. None of that doesn't have anything to do with any alleged god or gods. Deities are just projections of how we want things to be. Whatever values we think a deity is dictating to us is just us dictating those values to ourselves.

 

 

 

God is not a dictator,

That's contrary to what's evident in this entire set-up. Your so-called "godded universe" [sic]  is a less than benevolent dictatorship.  

If you care to take a closer look, you will see that the universe panders to us.

[Timbo]

On Wednesday, May 29, 2013 3:56:33 AM UTC-4, e_space wrote:

why don't you just sit quietly by yourself, and try to come to your
own conclusions ... i don't think you should be the result of the
community you live in ... do you?

If we all sat quietly and came to are own conclusions, we would never learn anything beyond our own beliefs. The conclusion needs to come from mass input and never from mass agreement. One person could have it right while ten million got it wrong.

[LL]

On May 29, 12:57 am, e_space <espace1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> lol ... industrious little creature ain't ya?
>

Not so industrious, just smart.

L

[LL]

Or Harry is!

LL.

[Ian Betts]

Lets all write God, it still does not make it a real being only an imaginary idea

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to atheism-vs-christ...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to atheism-vs-...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

--
Ian

[e_space]

reminds me of the little ditty i wrote called "the dyslexic dog" ...

On May 29, 10:47 am, harry k <turn...@q.com> wrote:

[e_space]

as far as 'god' is concerned, imo you will never learn about this from
the masses, or any other person ... the masses have already been
brainwashed into becoming religious adherents ... just like the
inanity of "reality" shows and similar TV offerings that the masses
have somehow determined to be worthwhile watching, going with public
opinion can lead to acceptance of worthless information ...

from my experience, the ONLY place to make headway in this quest is
with self ... of course, i don't expect you to accept that, as it
would be going completely against what i am preaching here ...

> ...
>
> read more »

[Steve in Virginia]

In the presence of an omniscient god free will is an illusion.

On May 28, 12:59 am, GT <greg.ne...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 28, 2013 11:18:37 AM UTC+10, Dingbat wrote:
>
> > On May 27, 9:00 pm, GT <greg.ne...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > On Tuesday, May 28, 2013 7:04:17 AM UTC+10, Loopflanger wrote:
>
> > > > There's one supernatural being that Christians hate, (that is, the
> > > > Christians that believe that such a being exists), & that would be the
> > > > devil. (Now, why would god, who does only good stuff allegedly, create
> > the
> > > > devil, allow the devil to exist, or allow the devil to have
> > influence?)
>
> > > Why, is because if there is no evil, then there can only be good.

> > > (There must be evil to allow for freewill). In the same way as there
> > > being the absence of: hot - cold, dark-light etc etc. and of course
> > > a degree of determinism. (Freewill could not exist if it were enforced)
>
> > Does God find free will necessary?
>
> In the (new/ resurrected) life of
>
> > the world to come*, will there be free will and consequently evil?
>
> If not, why is free will necessary in this life?
>
>
>
> Yes. But evil would be a consequence of choice, not of freewill itself,
> as we could choose not to do evil. (God gave us our freewill, we then
> chose to do evil). And why is it me that's telling you this, when I don't
> hardly know the first thing about the bible? (obviously I know the first
> thing, as we all know about the temptation of Adam & Eve).
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > * The Creed concludes with “I look forward to the resurrection of the
> > dead and the life of the world to come. Amen.”
> >http://www.americancatholic.org/Newsletters/IBelieve/preview.aspx

[Steve in Virginia]

I'm dyslexic - I lie awake some nights wondering if there's a Dog out
there.

[Steve in Virginia]

The religious faithful use logic? LMAO...That's a keeper! I going to
use that when someone asks me for an example of an oxymoron.

There is no logical away around Harry's comment about GOD (all
caps...) creating satan (all lowercase to keep the true believers
happy...). God created the universe and Satan is a component of that
universe, like quasars, ring worm, the Ronco Pocket Fisherman, neutron
stars, vending machine coffee, Daffy Duck, catfish or pterodactyls.
He allegedly created all these things...and more, therefore he, or He
(happy now?) is responsible for the evil that exists. Hiding behind
the canard of Free Will, when dealing with an omniscient deity that
knows all past, present and future, simply underscores the
intellectual and logical bankruptcy employed by the religious to prop
up their arguments.

God is like an electrician who wires your house then tells you, " I
wired up everything but I have to tell you that some circuits are good
and will works safely. However, there are others that are dangerous
and could burn the house down or outright kill you. Some circuits
you'll absolutely need to run your home and some are just nice to have
like an extra outlet for your coffee maker, say. Some I'll recommend
you steer clear of; some are okay to use and some I will have nothing
to say on the subject. Essentially, it's a crap shoot and entirely up
to you.

Now I could have made them all safe but that would infringe on your
free will to choose. See it's all part of my wiring plan. Do exactly
what I say and you'll be safe...but you may not have heat in the
winter, or lights in the basement stairwell. Also, there is only one
outlet in the kitchen that will handle your toaster. I know you love
toast but drop in that English Muffin and you might be enjoying those
buttery nooks and crannies in the ICU. As for your kids rooms...well
you tell them to do what they think is best. Is it safe to plug in
that Wii? How about that new tablet you got them for their birthday?
When they recharge their iPad they could be in for a 240 volt "shock"
of their little, and very possibly short lives. It's a mystery. You
like mysteries, don't ya?

Well, I posted a list of 10 Do's and Don't's in the basement - watch
out for that dark stairwell, nyuk, nyuk, nyuk! Anyway, they're kind of
vague but you can interpret them anyway you chose. Just remember if
you choose wrong you'll get your ass fried. Oh, I almost
forgot...you'll be receiving a bill once a week for my services for as
long as you live in the house. If there's any problems drop me an
email or leave a voice mail and I'll get back to you - maybe, maybe
not. That's another part of my wiring plan but you don't need to
worry about it...nyuk, nyuk, nyuk!

Steve

On May 28, 1:14 am, GT <greg.ne...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 28, 2013 2:52:28 PM UTC+10, harry k wrote:
>
> > On May 27, 9:11 pm, LL <llpens3...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > On May 27, 3:39 pm, Alan Wostenberg <awo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Ranjit that post is not calculated to win friends influence enemies
> > now is it!   Here  is how atheist Thomas Nagel put it:
>
> > > > "I want atheism to be true and am made uneasy by the fact that some of
> > the most intelligent and well-informed people I know are religious
> > believers. It isn't just that I don't believe in God. It is that I hope
> > there is no God! I don't want the world to be like that"
>

[harry k]

On May 30, 5:24 am, Steve in Virginia <resurgam...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> The religious faithful use logic?  LMAO...That's a keeper!  I going to
> use that when someone asks me for an example of an oxymoron.
>
> There is no logical away around Harry's comment about GOD (all
> caps...) creating satan (all lowercase to keep the true believers
> happy...). God created the universe and Satan is a component of that
> universe,

<snip>

Thanks. I have oftened wondered why more people don't point out that
obvious point that God had to have created satan and could uncreate
him in an instant when a creationist gets on the subject.

Harry K

[Timbo]

On Thursday, May 30, 2013 6:23:55 AM UTC-4, e_space wrote:

as far as 'god' is concerned, imo you will never learn about this from
the masses, or any other person ... the masses have already been
brainwashed into becoming religious adherents ... just like the
inanity of "reality" shows and similar TV offerings that the masses
have somehow determined to be worthwhile watching, going with public
opinion can lead to acceptance of worthless information ...

from my experience, the ONLY place to make headway in this quest is
with self ... of course, i don't expect you to accept that, as it
would be going completely against what i am preaching here ...

I have no problem with what you preach on this subject matter, as long as you explain the limits and pitfalls to be aware of. 

The mind is a playground with a determined database running in the background to pick and choose and develop thoughts from. The pick & choose is limited by some things already determined but not all things already determined. (limited determinism) 

When I feel the need to try and better understand my self's position on this subject matter, I first make myself describe what I am in comparison to other life forms and non life forms. Starting from the base of: I'm no different than plants growing towards the light, I seek energy. Plants group to better sustain life and so on, making those very basic connections to the basics of first causes of self. Then I move on to animal and do the same. "How am I like what other animals are doing and so on." Then allow other reasoning about self. Except, because it is a playground equipped with a determined data base, every thought about self has to be examined by looking to see what is coming from that data base and why? Is it rational? Is it from a need? By what means did it get there? Is repetition a factor of it's existence? Always being careful to keep note that it is but a playground that can add whatever it desires. Reason comes by means of comparing case by case subject matter. Also, needs/desires stand great chance of having a position. Some of which have a protective mechanism to hide. To unravel them, is not just a jump. It is experience from repeating successful exercises. Something you likely know if having success in what you preach.

We cannot possibly reason blue without a color to compare. We cannot reason pain without absents of pain. We cannot reason levels of pain without different effect. It has been repeated by many "Ninety percent of what we assume is not true" I think this is extremely exaggerated while compared to quantity of assumptions. If it were fact, we could not drive autos, show up fully clothed ...., massive life functions rely on true assumptions. Except repetitive exaggerations are not for loss if it causes the many to more often examine what might be determining. Paintings are not painted on, rather the painter lives within the playground painting it's production from inside out. "Steven King was there " is what was necessary to produce such. That we can, leaves to question how much we do.  Ending it here, because what you preach is to be commended as long as it has the correct checks and balances to keep it truthful in the playground.

[Answer_42]

On Thursday, May 30, 2013 11:42:30 AM UTC-4, harry k wrote:

On May 30, 5:24 am, Steve in Virginia <resurgam...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> The religious faithful use logic?  LMAO...That's a keeper!  I going to
> use that when someone asks me for an example of an oxymoron.
>
> There is no logical away around Harry's comment about GOD (all
> caps...) creating satan (all lowercase to keep the true believers
> happy...). God created the universe and Satan is a component of that
> universe,

I have brought it up in this group, with thea amongst other people.  Care to guess what her reply was? (Note, this is a trick question, unless you know thea fairly well...)

[Steve in Virginia]

I've had several debates with her, and more than once I have sat
starring at my screen dumbfounded at what she's come up with. The
sky's the limit when it comes to one of her wacky response. What did
she say...don't leave me in suspense. This should be good.

Cheers,

Steve

[Timbo]

On Thursday, May 30, 2013 1:44:39 PM UTC-4, Steve in Virginia wrote:

I've had several debates with her, and more than once I have sat
starring at my screen dumbfounded at what she's come up with. The
sky's the limit when it comes to one of her wacky response.  What did
she say...don't leave me in suspense.  This should be good.

Cheers,

Steve

You must not be from around here. I have never been dumbfounded by what she comes up with.  Her responses sound completely normal for folks her age around these parts.

[yarrido@aol.com]

On May 27, 11:30 am, Answer_42 <ipu.belie...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, May 27, 2013 2:08:33 PM UTC-4, Dingbat wrote:
>
> > Recently, I have had a lot of conversations with atheists. Many
> > express a strong hatred of God.
>

> He/She is wrong. Expressing disbelief is often wrongly perceived as hate on
> the believer's part.

>
> > I have been at a loss to explain this.
> > How can you hate someone you don’t believe in?
>

> There isn't any.
>
> > Why the hostility?
>
> The hostility is usually directed at morons who fail to grasp that
> disbelief is not hate, or at other morons who want to force their beliefs
> down other people's throat through various encroachment on human right and
> constitutional rights.

Well, that is interesting. Shouldn't you feel pity toward morons
instead of hostility? I mean, morons don't know any better...do they?
So, why the hostility toward someone who doesn't know any better? Do
you feel the same kind of hostility toward those with a really low
I.Q. who may also not know any better? If not, why not and again why
against those who profess a belief in God?

I ask because it strikes me as a rather unusual response, considering
the situation.

[Answer_42]

Moron =! Low IQ
Low IQ = Handicapped

Morons do not know any better because they refuse to consider alternatives, like bigots, by the way.

I ask because it strikes me as a rather unusual response, considering
the situation.

Feeling concerned, bigot?
 

[LL]

On May 30, 1:19 am, Ian Betts <ianbett...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Lets all write God, it still does not make it a real being only an
> imaginary idea

Yes, but the point of the whole exchange was that Alan said atheists
are afraid to type the word god in any form. It had nothing to do
with whether god is an imaginary ides. That goes without saying,
IMO.

[LL]

On May 30, 3:16 am, e_space <espace1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> reminds me of the little ditty i wrote called "the dyslexic dog" ...
>

Or the joke: Did you hear about the dyslexic with insomnia who stayed
awake all night wondering if there is a dog?


LL

[LL]

On May 30, 4:32 am, Steve in Virginia <resurgam...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> In the presence of an omniscient god free will is an illusion.

It's an illusion whether an omniscient god exists or not. Speaking of
an omniscient god is just an argument that free will and an omniscient
god cannot exist together. But, IMO, free will does not exist,
period. There are better arguments against it than whether it can
exist with an omniscient god.


LL

[LL]

On May 30, 4:43 am, Steve in Virginia <resurgam...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I'm dyslexic - I lie awake some nights wondering if there's a Dog out
> there.

Ok,you beat me to the punch.

LL

[LL]

On May 30, 5:24 am, Steve in Virginia <resurgam...@yahoo.com> wrote:

Good analogy, but "god the electrician" never gave any instructions,
himself. All you have are contradictory instructions from third
parties, all of whom claim to know what "god the electrician's"
specific instructions are. They are also written in a dead language
that needs to be interpreted by "special" people. They all give their
lists of vague dos and don'ts, along with warnings as to what will
happen if their dos and don'ts are not followed to the letter, with an
assurance that theirs came straight from "god the electrician,"
himself. Meanwhile, "god the electrician" is nowhere to be found and
he never says anything to anyone else.

LL.

[e_space]

'spirit' discovery starts with a dollop of desire and a blank
canvas ... one doesn't pencil in any shapes or choose any colors by
which to paint ... my journey of discovery was kicked off by putting
out a welcome mat and an invitation to be 'accosted' by whatever was
out there that had previously been nagging at my conscience ...

> ...
>
> read more »

[e_space]

unfortunately age is not a determining factor in what one believes or
says ... children can be wise, and adults naive, and vice versa

[thea]

stupid is the same, e_space.

stupid is as stupid does.

It you don't have a faith in other than yourself.

Your ground won't produce the crops like it did before, what

changed?  You or the ground you walk on?

[Timbo]

On Wednesday, May 29, 2013 1:25:38 AM UTC-4, LL wrote:

On May 27, 3:07 pm, Alan Wostenberg <awo...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Ll, one possible indicator they "have strong hated for God" is the inability of Internet atheists to type the name God. They can type Zeus or Hitler but not God. Why? Two theories.
>
> It appears they think it gives reverence to type the Name of He Who Shall Not Be Named, like a pious Jew, or a character out of a Harry Potter novel. Is it piety or hatred?

God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God,
God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God,
God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God,
God, God,
God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God,
God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God,
God, God,
God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God,
God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God,God, God, God, God, God,
God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God, God,
God, God, God, God.

god, god, god, god, god god, god, god, god, god, god, god, god, god
god, god, god, god, god, god, god, god, god god, god, god, god, god,
god, god, god, god god, god, god, god, god, god, god, god, god god,
god, god, god, god, god, god, god, god god, god, god, god, god, god,
god, god, god god, god, god, god, god, god, god, god, god god, god,
god, god, god, god, god, god, god god, god, god, god, god, god, god,
god, god god, god, god, god, god, god, god, god, god god, god, god,
god, god, god, god, god, god god, god, god, god.

GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD,
GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD,
GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD,
GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD,
GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD,
GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD,
GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD, GOD.

There ya go Alan.  Every one written by an atheist. And I'm still
alive!

To call upon a deity from the sky. From high in the mountains(the sky) To call on a sky deity.

http://linguistics.stackexchange.com/questions/2229/the-origin-of-the-word-god 

[Ian Betts]

Thea even stupid people can produce crops.You don't need a faith to plant seed and see it grow.

Faith like yours is from a book, other people have faith in seeds and the good earth.

 

--
Ian

[thea]

Sure, Ian, stupid people can produce crops.

But what happens when your crops produce, but your neighbors don't.

Does your neighbor have the right to say that your land belongs to
them, and take your crops without the work, sweat, and toil that went

into getting your crops to grow??

Where do we draw the line?

If your neighbor is starving, are you going to feed him?

[Steve in Virginia]

See what I mean, Timbo?

[Timbo]

On Saturday, June 1, 2013 1:41:44 PM UTC-4, Steve in Virginia wrote:

See what I mean, Timbo?

It is what it is. Have a couple of Turbo Dogs and play the White album backwards. Turbo Dog backwards= God O Brut. 

> > email to atheism-vs-christianity+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

[Eris]

On Monday, May 27, 2013 2:08:33 PM UTC-4, Dingbat wrote:

Recently, I have had a lot of conversations with atheists. Many

Why all the straw man attacks?  How do I hate something I know does not exist. I hate height deprived control freaks who claim the nonexistent God pick them to control me. Jim Jones, Jimmy Swaggart,. Jim Baker, Rex Luther, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, and on and on.

[Ian Betts]

Straight answer to your question is yes, I would help my neighbor.