(July 14, 2015 at 12:53 am)Huggy74 Wrote: Let me ask you something, do you consider the concept of "vicarious redemption" as you guys put it, to be immoral?

*Sigh*

Since you clearly didn't get it the first time, the real issue is that I don't find your comparison with modern medicine to be remotely valid. And how could I? The two aren't even a little comparable.

Wait!

In what world is Jesus being sacrificed to cure sin, and animals being sacrificed to cure disease NOT comparable? Keep in mind, you guys don't even believe Jesus even existed....

It would be nice if Huggy actually linked to/quoted this 'vicarious redemption' thing he's harping on. His anti-science rant was in response to something else entirely, and I don't have the patience to look through 27 previous pages in this thread or scour the rest of the forum if it's not here.

(July 14, 2015 at 1:15 am)KevinM1 Wrote: It would be nice if Huggy actually linked to/quoted this 'vicarious redemption' thing he's harping on.  His anti-science rant was in response to something else entirely, and I don't have the patience to look through 27 previous pages in this thread or scour the rest of the forum if it's not here.

Oh NOW you want me to "quote mine"...

How convenient.

(July 14, 2015 at 12:32 am)Esquilax Wrote:

(July 13, 2015 at 9:14 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: There are some angry people here. Some are angry at Christians like me who say things they don't like hearing. Others are angry at their parents or a former pastor who mistreated them or threatened them, etc. Some are just angry because of all the bad stuff which they attribute to religion rightly or wrongly. And some are angry at God because they know He has called them and they do not want to answer.

I'm not going to discuss it further because it makes you angry. But I did think her OP was poorly stated. That's all. Out.

I'm not angry, dude, I'm just perplexed, and I suspect that you can't answer the question I'm actually asking you, which is why you're being so remarkably evasive over it. I asked you how you know there are people here who are angry at god, and your response, where it addresses that question at all, is simply a restatement: "Some are angry at god." How do you know that?

Do I KNOW with 100% certitude? Heck no. But I read what they write, and they sound pretty pissed off to me - not just the tone or the language...there is some real deep hate in some folks, I think, and it comes across in their posts. That's not normal, is it? Cause I don't hate anybody or anything.

Let's use one of y'all favorite images. Suppose a person who believed in unicorns showed up in the forum like I did, and started posting arguments for the existence of unicorns. Do you think that person would be the recipient of the vile memes, videos, language and blasphemy that were and are thrown at me on a daily basis?

Nope. Because no one is mad at unicorns, and they aren't mad at unicornists. But they ARE mad at Theos and theists, aren't they?

There are people here who can't even bring themselves to type the word "Bible" - it has to be "buy-bull". And it's not God - it's "sky-daddy". And those are the family-friendly examples. Or look at the subjects of some of the threads that have been started in the forum in the past few days. Do these sound like the kinds of things that healthy, happy and well-balanced people normally say? The kind of rage that causes people to go out to YouTube and look for some of the sick, twisted stuff that is posted here is something I cannot fathom. But I know its source. And you know what I mean.

Quote:Honestly, it's a simple question, and I asked it for a reason, which is that a lot of the time, these common theistic talking points about atheists don't have a lot behind them. Every time I ask one of you guys about this it seems like it's difficult for you to properly vocalize your thinking on this point; if you actually have a reason for believing that then great, that seems like something worth talking about that's in keeping with the purpose of this thread. If you don't, then it'd be nice if you'd just admit it, because watching you so obviously avoiding the question just makes you look increasingly shifty and frankly, there's no reason to bring up an argument based on nothing but fantasy when there's real conversations that could be had instead.

Why do you think this is a common talking point among Christians about atheists? Personally, I've never spoken to another Christian about this subject, so you must be getting that from somewhere else.

(July 14, 2015 at 1:16 am)Huggy74 Wrote:

(July 14, 2015 at 1:15 am)KevinM1 Wrote: It would be nice if Huggy actually linked to/quoted this 'vicarious redemption' thing he's harping on.  His anti-science rant was in response to something else entirely, and I don't have the patience to look through 27 previous pages in this thread or scour the rest of the forum if it's not here.

Oh NOW you want me to "quote mine"...

How convenient.

Fucking-a, man, this isn't rocket science. If you're railing against something, it'd be nice for those of us who aren't following every thread with rapt attention to know what you're referring to. In fact, a link to the post in question would be preferable to a quote because it takes less space and allows me to see the context.

Vicarious redemption is a term coined by Hitchens I believe (could be wrong), I assumed most members here were familiar with the terminology.

(September 26, 2014 at 10:36 am)Rhythm Wrote: You already know my thoughts on the matter.  Vicarious redemption is immoral.  I've explained why I hold this position (multiple times).  You can dispute my position anytime you like, using any of the examples I've given (or any of your own devising, which I will respond to...as I have to every example offered).  

You've already stated that you would help me keep jesus off the cross, all that's left (for me, anyway) is to figure out why you've accepted the ill gotten gains of an act that you would prevent.

Are you in the habit of accepting stolen merchandise?
Are you the kind of person that would rummage through a dead mans wallet?
Would you accept an award for the work that another has done?
Would you let another serve a term for a crime you've committed?

I'm off to bed...

(July 13, 2015 at 11:41 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:

---

Look here you mental midget, as long as you don't live in Iran, you're free to take part in whatever debauchery you want. Religion doesn't affect you at all and don't even TRY to make that case, because we have a thread about a certain country with a state religion, which you atheists claim has no influence in any way over it's citizens...

If you're really against genocide then where is the outrage against the atrocities committed by science? Ever heard about African-American men being injected with syphilis to see what happens when it goes untreated?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_s...experiment

Quote:The Tuskegee syphilis experiment (/tʌsˈkiːɡiː/)[1] was an infamous clinical study conducted between 1932 and 1972 by the U.S. Public Health Service to study the natural progression of untreated syphilis in rural African-American men in Alabama. They were told that they were receiving free health care from the U.S. government.

This was just 42 years ago but you hypocrites aren't interested in that, you're concerned about indentured servitude that happened 5000 years ago.

What about all the animal sacrifice conducted by science? If you believe "vicarious redemption" to be immoral, then why isn't sacrificing animals in the place of humans via scientific testing immoral?



The above actually does affect you, because you benefit from medicine derived from human/animal experiments

How many forums have you joined to protest atrocities committed by science? A big fat zero.....
Hypocrites

Like I said, there is something that draws your little narrow atheist behind to rail against God, like a moth to a flame.

---

I could respond point by point and tell you how wrong you are, but then, you'd still argue. How can I actually reason with someone who jumps to conclude what my position is on atrocities (any atrocity) before even asking for it? Who acknowledges himself that his own religion has committed them but in the same breath religion doesn't affect me or my society in the slightest (lel) and has the audacity to brand me the hypocrite after responding with the supposed damage that science has caused?

The amount of mental gymnastics you need to pull that off is astounding.

Meh, don't think I'll bother. The sad thing is, I don't actually think you're that stupid, but you're obviously content on being willfully ignorant and confirming your own biases. Have fun doing that, it's gotten a bit too boring for me.

(July 14, 2015 at 1:18 am)Randy Carson Wrote: Let's use one of y'all favorite images. Suppose a person who believed in unicorns showed up in the forum like I did, and started posting arguments for the existence of unicorns. Do you think that person would be the recipient of the vile memes, videos, language and blasphemy that were and are thrown at me on a daily basis?

Yes! Of course yes! Are you really that deep in your fucking persecution complex that you seriously believe we would not ridicule any ideas other than yours?

Jesud fuck, get over yourself Randy. Maybe you'd have more respectful responses if you stopped being so insufferable all the time.

(July 13, 2015 at 9:02 pm)Godschild Wrote:

(July 13, 2015 at 5:46 am)Neimenovic Wrote: Just refer to what I already said, four times. or don't. it's not like I give a shit.

you're just mad at reality and in denial. so fuck off.

My turn to act childish, told you so.

GC

Uhhh.....thanks for proving my point for me, I guess?