What is the biggest thing that theist do that annoy you?

[lucent]

15. hates it when Christians influence public policy, supports atheist organizations that influence public policy: Starting to see a trend here..

Religion should have nothing to do with civil society. Religious belief is a private matter, it should not get involved with anything to do with the military or civil services.
Besides, it's not an atheist organisation, it's a secular one. There is a slight difference.

16. doesn't think children should be raised with religion, indoctrinates their own children: pot, meet kettle.

Children should be given the freedom to think for themselves. I believe in a secular up bringing, that way they can decide for themselves whether religion is rational or complete bollocks.

You are a arrogant, ignorant Christian nut job.

I knew one of you was going to try to debunk my entire list.

When retards go around threatening people with eternal damnation and endless punishment in hell, you'll find yourself with many foes.

You just missed the point. I understand that you want to lash out at Christians, but if you want to claim Christians behave badly and act the same way, that makes you a hypocrite.

Many atheists were once Christian. Some were strong believers, so yeah, many atheists would indeed know more seeing as they are no longer afraid to read the whole bible as it's written.

I've rarely met an atheist who even understood the most basic concepts of redemptive history. What they excel at is missing the point.

Aren't they the same thing? Lack of belief - don't believe?

No. To lack belief is to claim you have no position. Not believing is a position.

You can easily believe in fairytale stories and take peoples word for it but many others are not so easily lead. Personal feelings and thoughts are often unreliable. This is why we use science, and verifiable evidence.

Anyone can know Jesus personally, it is just their willingness to seek Him out. It is a truth anyone can verify for themselves directly.

I'm not absolutely sure about anything.

You seem pretty sure of yourself to me.

Science is a method not a religion. It isn't belief based, it's based on evidence.

I suggest you read about natural philosophy, and empiricism, if you believe the workings of science is based solely on evidence. What it is truly based on is a series of unprovable assumptions that produce "data" by testing and observation, which is then interpreted; what that is or what it means depends on the philosophical underpinnings of your worldview.

The information is out there and within reach to all. The question is: Are you willing to listen and learn? I don't think you are, you hold to your religious beliefs too strongly.

I turn this back around on you and challenge you to prove any of those things using scientific evidence.

There is no reason to assume a god did anything if a god has not been demonstrated to exist. A does not prove B if you haven't first proved A.
We should always stick to the obvious and never assume without reason and evidence. We don't know how all this got here, and we'd be fools to think otherwise.

You don't know how all of this got here, it doesn't mean no one else does. This is the point, that if you don't know, then don't presume to say what did or didn't happen.

Thank you for demonstrating your level of ignorance.

Feel free to correct me.

There's never been an 'atheistic regime'. Can't see how you can kill in the name of disbelief. But kill in the name of 'god'? Well history is loaded with that.

There have been several, all with the expressed goal of killing off religion. Death toll from such regimes is at least 100 million.

Sin is just a concept. If you don't believe in sin, how will it affect you and your judgement on anything?

People know what sin is; they have a conscience. It isn't just a concept, it is based on moral absolutes. Those absolutes run our society and civilization, and people know when they are crossing the line. What I am saying is that people will resist giving intellectual assent to anything which curtails their passions.

Last I checked, this is an atheist forum. Besides, just because we make good points don't mean we're preaching. We're simply defending our position, or speaking out to absurdities.

This is not specifically against people here but all atheists, and I have seen many an atheist state that a continual goal is to break someones faith and convert them to atheism.

Religion should have nothing to do with civil society. Religious belief is a private matter, it should not get involved with anything to do with the military or civil services.
Besides, it's not an atheist organisation, it's a secular one. There is a slight difference.

I'm sure you support all of the lawsuits that atheists file. And that's your opinion. We have a civil society because of religion, not in spite of it. Perhaps you haven't noticed but America (and England) was founded on judeo-christian values. Ever since America has started to turn from those values, since the 1960s, there has been a measurable moral decay which is accelerating at a frightening rate.

Children should be given the freedom to think for themselves. I believe in a secular up bringing, that way they can decide for themselves whether religion is rational or complete bollocks.

Children should be taught the truth, and what their parents believe about the world is what they're going to learn, whether you are secular or religious.

You are a arrogant, ignorant Christian nut job.

I love you too.

[KichigaiNeko]

[Zen Badger]

[I've rarely met an atheist who even understood the most basic concepts of redemptive history. What they excel at is missing the point.

Yes, the basic concept is that it is a fairytale and not a very good one at that.

Next.....

[ElDinero]

I don't have to prove anything in this thread. Feel free to prove any of those truths I listed scientifically though. While you're at it, you can tell me all about the origin of life..

Sorry, go again? You want me to prove the truths that YOU listed? Are you sure about that? What is it you're asking me to prove scientifically?

As an example of you misrepresenting the views of atheists, your statement that we say we don't know how life started or how the universe started but say that God didn't do it is completely false. It is usually said that there is no evidence to point to God doing it. This is where you do have to prove something. We don't know everything about those things, and neither do you, or any other believer.

You, like many theists, think that if we don't have the answers to absolutely everything right now, that means there's something wrong. So you put God in there. This is called a God of the Gaps argument. Like how God was assumed to be in charge of lightning, before we discovered how it happens and were able to harness it. As scientific discovery expands, God finds less and less gaps to jump in. Maybe one day there'll come a time when he runs out of all scientific gaps, and then all you'll be able to say is 'I have faith'. Your faith is worthless.

[Ace Otana]

[lucent]

[ElDinero]

When did it say it had a better explanation?

[Ace Otana]

If you don't believe something is true, you are making a claim

I don't believe in Santa either, am I claiming something there to? Think you're confusing the - I don't believe in X with: I know there isn't X.
Demonstrate how it's a claim to not believe in something.

What I've said I will say again. If you pray to Jesus, and say something like "Jesus, if you're real, I want to know about it. If you are God, please come into my life and I will turn it over to you." If you can say those words and mean them, Jesus will reveal Himself to you. If you can't be bothered to take five minutes out of your life to try that, then obviously you're not interested in the truth. Only God can prove His own existence, I can only point towards Him.

Am I also expected to perform rituals in ever other religion just to find out if it's true or not? Even if I was retarded enough to do what you say, I'm pretty sure nothing would happen. I'm firmly with science, not superstitious nonsense. Now, it's your beliefs, you back them up.
I'm not expected to do anything. The burden is not on me.

Then stop claiming I am wrong. You just admitted you don't know that.

I never stated that I knew anything. I think you're wrong, but never claimed to know that. Could you back up your assertion that I did?

Well, what you said is just totally untrue. Data is indeed interpreted. Here is a quick example for you:

What part of publicly verifiable didn't you get? If we have evidence of an object like a ball, something that can be observed, measured and verified then that is evidence that there is in fact ball. Opinion/points of view means fuck all. Though I guess evidence means fuck all to you.

Hah. Perhaps you misunderstood. I am saying those truths are unprovable by science. I am not asking you to do research for me; I've already done the research. I'm saying you don't know what you're talking about if you think that science can explain everything.

I never stated that science can explain everything, care to quote me? I go where the evidence points. Science is a method, a tried and tested method that works. Get over it.

What I've done is undermine this claim by showing you half a dozen kinds of truth that science can say nothing about.

Undermine a claim that was never made. Well done, you want a smiley sticker? A medal perhaps?

So, maybe you should get off your "arse" and start researching because your faith in science is misplaced. Your link leads to ethical naturalism, which isn't science, it is a philosophical discipline. Try again?

Maybe you should re-read previous posts. Plus ethical naturalism is backed by science. Why? Because it's observable, testable!

Again, you can prove it to yourself quite easily. I cannot conclusively prove the existence of God; only God can do that.

Then I'll wait for him to prove himself. I'm not going to hold my breath though.

Doesn't cover origins now does it?

Abiogenises then, other than that I don't know. I'm not afraid to admit not knowing something pal!

The regimes of Stalin,

Stalin was a corrupt dictator and had killed people for reasons other than religion. I hate the guy as much as the next one, however I can't see how that has anything to do with atheism.

Mao

Don't know much about mao apart from the fact he was also a communist. Which both he and stalin were communists.

,

Pol Pot

Another communist.

Hitler was a social darwinist.

Hitler was a Catholic. He in fact went to church regularly. Nazi belts had religious content on them.

My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Saviour as a fighter. It points me to the who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognised these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them.

- Adolf Hitler.
He was actually very obsessed with religion.
Well, all you've named are 3 blood thirsty communists with one Nazi Catholic. That it? Religion had a huge population of evil vile men murdering people for the sickest of reasons. You've named three communist men. Big deal.

No, but I would appreciate it if you took the time to comprehend what I am saying before you go off the cuff.

Make it clearer then. I'm responding to the post at hand.

I never said that cultures universally adhere to those standards, but in general civilizations have followed the same basic rules and that people know when they are violating those rules.

It's called law. Also morality existed long before your religion mate. Morality can easily come from intelligence. Not from some book written by people who knew nothing of the natural world.

The truth. And you don't know if I am wrong or not.

Like I said, your 'truth'. You can call it whatever you want. It don't make you right. Those who profess to be most right are often most wrong.
Calling something the 'Truth' don't make it so. It doesn't make it any more true in anyway.

[lucent]

[5thHorseman]

'but this is how he really felt'

Do not imply you know the thoughts of Hitler. Read Mein Kampf and you'll see different.

You also forget that his soldiers/executioners were almost entirely Roman Catholics and Lutherans.

PEOPLE, Mao and Stalin were not communists, read the Communist Manifesto and you'll see why, they were personality cults, like religion.

---

Mao and Stalin killed many atheists too, they hated any opposition, religious or otherwise.