Are all atheists this ill-informed about religion?

[Jackalope]

No.   My issue is that vicarious redemption and scapegoating (whether voluntary or not) are evil and unjust...

Why?  I would be particularly curious of your answer, if you hold to a  subjective view of evil (morality) and justice, which seems to be prevalent here.

I would note also, that this can be a complex subject, if you want to delve into it.   There are different views on atonement and a number of passages to be taken into consideration.  They are also not all mutually exclusive.  For instance I don't believe that my Greek Orthodox friends are incorrect in promoting Christus Victor theory of atonement, but I don't think it removes the scriptures which talk about penal substitution either.

Just some things to keep in mind.... if you are thinking about this.

Jesus is the one who judges.
As God, Jesus is also the one offended against.
Jesus had to become man, and fulfill the requirements for High Priest, in order to stand for us and offer payment. 
Also my personal belief (although I have not vetted with others yet or seen commentary in this way) is that this is why Christ also needs to be our  Lord and King in order to represent us.
Baptism is presented as us dying and being raised with Christ.   (Romans 6 for instance, although this can be seen throughout the new testament).

And I'm sure there are other things I am missing, but if you are interested in discussing it, I am happy to do so.

I would not be interested in discussing it further, actually. Feel free to search for any of the dozens of threads we've had on the subject. Frankly, I don't have the patience for it any more.

[Esquilax]

Why?  I would be particularly curious of your answer, if you hold to a  subjective view of evil (morality) and justice, which seems to be prevalent here.

Because it's arbitrary and ineffective at the stated goals of justice. The point of any form of penal system is threefold: it's a deterrent against other crime, it's a measure of retribution for the harm caused, and it's a means of removing a contentious individual from the opportunity to cause more harm. Substitutionary atonement not only fails to deliver on all three prongs, it also actively encourages crime by removing personal consequences.

If you have a husband in court for assault in a spousal abuse case and you used the biblical conception of atonement, then Jesus takes the jail time for the husband. What good has this done? The husband has faced no consequences for his actions, has not been removed from further harming his wife, and sets an example where you can commit assault and get away with it for others. Nothing good has been accomplished, and conversely, an innocent man is in prison. The sum total of the Jesus method of justice is nothing but bad results.

Just some things to keep in mind.... if you are thinking about this.

Jesus is the one who judges.
As God, Jesus is also the one offended against.

First of all, you could stand to complete the damn thought: "As god, Jesus is also the one offended against, based on arbitrary, self serving laws that Jesus put into place." Secondly, he's the judge in his own case? Conflict of interest much?

So what you're saying is, your "perfectly just system," entails that a judge creates his own law that nobody can ever offend him personally, takes it upon himself to judge every single case of this law being broken, while also listing himself as the injured party in those cases... and you find this to be a fair trial?

[Qwest]

So what if some atheists make bad arguments? Not all arguments against religion are good. That doesn't mean there aren't good arguments.

What exactly are we meant to do about it? We're not the atheist police.

If there's a problem with a particular argument, rather than vague slurs, then please be specific.

When you say religion, you mean Christianity I suppose. How familiar are you with every other religion I wonder?

"In God We Trust" MUST mean Christianity, right? There is no other religion in the world and ALL of the founding fathers were Christians (NOT).

[vorlon13]

USA
Are you smarter than an atheist? A religious quiz
Quiz results
Your score Average reader score
31
Correct
1
Wrong
97%

You answered 31 of 32 questions correctly for a total score of 97%.


Missed the goddam Billy Graham one.

ALMOST flubbed two Mormon questions. From the Mormon viewpoint, Mormonism goes back to the time of Christ, and since if he were alive today and showed up at a Mormon church, Joe Smith would be excommunicated on the spot, so old Horny Joe isn't really a Mormon anymore.

[JesusHChrist]

Your score Average reader score
32 Correct
0 Wrong
100%
You answered 32 of 32 questions correctly for a total score of 100%.

Puttin' the lie to the OP, post by post.

[jenny1972]

I suppose any theist who has read this part of the forum has to chuckle at how terrible atheist critiques of theism are.

But when the laughter dies down, you're left with a troubling realization: There actually is a huge pool of people on this planet who call themselves atheists and post on the internet, but are less familiar with theism than toddlers with the inside of a quantum mechanics textbook.

Where does one go for actually informed atheistic critiques of religion? I'm feeling my brain atrophy after reading some of the threads here.

i have done a critique of the christian claim that jesus was God id love your input on my thread about jesus not being God(its in 'Religion') , please explain where you think this idea comes from since your entire religion is based on it .

[Rhondazvous]

I suppose any theist who has read this part of the forum has to chuckle at how terrible atheist critiques of theism are.

But when the laughter dies down, you're left with a troubling realization: There actually is a huge pool of people on this planet who call themselves atheists and post on the internet, but are less familiar with theism than toddlers with the inside of a quantum mechanics textbook.

Where does one go for actually informed atheistic critiques of religion? I'm feeling my brain atrophy after reading some of the threads here.

Is that what theists come here to do—laugh at atheists?

If I recall correctly, the man told you that if people don't want to hear what you have to day, you should shake the dust from your feet and move on. If you and the other theist here were about obeying your lord, you would not be here at all.

Laughing at atheists? Well done, good and faithful servant.

[TheRealJoeFish]

Ah, I get it... "Delicate"... and the avatar is a flower... Delicate Flower... whomp whomp

[Ravenshire]

I got a hunnert too. Although I admit I took a 50/50 on the Maimonides question, I forgot.

Well, I missed four. One about faith vs. works and three about where I couldn't tell the difference between Hindus and Buddhists. So sue me.

Still scored above average which means better than most faithers who've taken the test.

[Rhondazvous]

Totally disappointed that that didn't mean "argument by a cunt."  

That would be argumentum per cuni.

Yes, "cunt" is a Latin word.

My classical education was not complete until I learned how to say cunt in Latin. Keep hanging around you guys and I'll graduate some cum louder