Why does science always upstage God?

[The Grand Nudger]

There are tons of them which can do so, a great many used to be christian, after all. Maybe you just travel in different social circles? At any rate, study after study has confirmed what we experience on the boards every day. Atheists know more about religions than their own adherents do. It's probably an artifact of demographics.

[brewer]

Before you jump on the 'you're just christian bashing' band wagon maybe you should walk a mile in atheist shoes. I doubt you can imagine what it's like to be the 10% living in a 90% society. We get it from both the good and bad christians.

#4, you think we're not well educated on christianity? Don't look now but your ignorance of atheists and agnostics is showing.

I live in a prominently christian area. Most are OK but often unthinking and behave like everyone is a christian and are often offensive without knowing it. Enough of the others become offensive as soon as they know I'm atheist but stupidly believe that they are trying to 'save' me.

Most of the christians I know have a false sense of superiority and entitlement when it comes to atheists. I think you probably fit into this group.

Honestly, I haven't met a garden variety atheist that can accurately articulate a Christian position. There are some apostate Christian scholars that can, but most lay people can't.

Most atheists I meet are aggressive and insulting, but I don't lump you with them.

Which brings me to the the question why would you throw me an insult about superiority and entitlement? I have only been kind. lol

What do you consider 'accurately articulate'? Seems like a pretty nebulous statement and subject to your judgement alone.

If you think most atheists are aggressive and insulting either you haven't encountered enough or that the issue is with how you choose to interact with atheists. You came here with no introduction and no attempt to get to know anything about us before you started preaching (telling us how we are wrong).

It appears that the shoe fits as your other posts indicate. You seem to be in able to accept our nonbelief as valdid but insist we accept yours.

[ayost]

Ok, to the first point I think I get it: you're using the tired argument that since I can't show God to you or prove His existence like I can prove the existence of my puppy, that God doesn't exist. Just like you're claiming Zues is in my living room even though you can't show him to me or prove he exists. Is that where this is going?

-not even in that direction.  Just like suppressing revealed knowledge of a god is both not what accounts for my atheism and is inconsequential to my opinion of your religion - the existence of a god is incosequential to whether or not your claims about people and why they do or don't do x are either true or compelling.  As I said before, assume that god exists, and accept that some of us have never met the guy.  Just like you've never met zues and nothing more than that is required to explain why you don't believe in zues.

I do not pretend to be neutral. I have presuppositions, namely that the God of the Bible exists. And I would say you can't say anything intelligible about the world without God's existence.

You say the existence of God is inconsequential to you, yet here you are on the atheist forums attempting to suppress knowledge about God.

Here again, you may misunderstand other people in ways that ought to be easy to clear up by reference to yourself.  Is that what you're doing here?

I think you and I are in agreement: Presuppositions determine worldview. No one is neutrally seeking truth.

Is that fair?

[The Grand Nudger]

I wonder if reform christianity will ever get around to reforming it's more untenable propositions?

At any rate, sure - I think we have all sorts of cognitive ticks and biases. The belief that others must be suppressing revealed knowledge is one of them, as you demonstrated. I think that might have to do with successful reform movements becoming the thing they initially arise to combat. That a bunch of baggage ends up getting laundered in some new and genuinely valuable revision in the way we see gods.

[brewer]

Would there be any atheists if theists way way back when did not start claiming 'god(s) did it'?

Seems like 'we don't know' would be a more philosophically rational choice but obviously that didn't happen. Christian is just a johnny come lately.

[ayost]

What do you consider 'accurately articulate'? Seems like a pretty nebulous statement and subject to your judgement alone.

If you think most atheists are aggressive and insulting either you haven't encountered enough or that the issue is with how you choose to interact with atheists. You came here with no introduction and no attempt to get to know anything about us before you started preaching (telling us how we are wrong).

It appears that the shoe fits as your other posts indicate. You seem to be in able to accept our nonbelief as valdid but insist we accept yours.

"Accurately articulate" isn't subject to my judgement. I mean you should be able to type true statements about Christianity. Statements can easily be verified.

This is my first time ever on a forum. If there is some etiquette I'm supposed to follow that I didn't, I apologize. I'm trying to understand more and have my beliefs challenged instead of living in a Christian echo chamber. I am looking to challenge atheists as well as be challenged.

I am not hiding my thoughts on atheism. I think atheism is inconsistent and absurd and I think no atheist lives consistently with atheism.

When I say atheism is inconsistent and absurd that isn't an insult to the people, that's a comment on the belief system that is atheism.
When I say no atheist lives consistently with atheism, that is a comment on the people, sort of like your comment on Christians. Not an insult, just an observation.

---

At any rate, sure - I think we have all sorts of cognitive ticks and biases.

Sweet! Common ground!

[The Grand Nudger]

What belief system? Atheism is a single line item about a thing atheists don't believe in.

I guess, with respect to whatever you think that belief system is, your earlier comments would apply. Just because atheists don't act atheist enough, for you..I guess, says nothing about atheism?

So the idea that "atheists don't live this way" so atheism is untrue or unnecessary or whatever the conclusion is doesn't make sense.

---

Sweet! Common ground!

For sure, we'll end up with plenty.  You can really only expect us to differ on one item on account of our various positions on gods.  I'm trying to get you to reach some common ground with yourself, however.

[ayost]

Would there be any atheists if theists way way back when did not start claiming 'god(s) did it'?

Seems like 'we don't know' would be a more philosophically rational choice but obviously that didn't happen. Christian is just a johnny come lately.

Ok, so it feels like your first statement is assuming that there was a time or people or civilization that had no concept of God and then all of the sudden theists started making up gods to explain things. Fine hypothesis, I guess, only I would challenge you to show me the people or culture or time where there was no God and then someone made it up. That's a strong assumption you can't prove. In fact, all of the evidence seems to point in the other direction: that man has always had a relationship with God, even though that relationship can get messed up.

Do you have a materialistic, evolutionary, humanist worldview? (or some combination of those? or none of them?) I'm trying to get a sense of what questions to ask you.

[The Grand Nudger]

Our earliest evidence of people believing in gods might be a massive serpentine temple complex devoted....fittingly, to a snake god. Do you think there's a snake god, or do you think those people made that up? Rinse and repeat with every single god other than your own - an endless parade. Are they all real, or made up?

[Angrboda]

Oh look! It's Excedrin Headache #49, right on schedule!