Thread: Atheist vs A Religious

Both of them argue the point very strongly against each other, they both have a deep feeling of hostility to each other (shame on the religious ones who do), but most funnily they both fail to realise that there is one thing they do have in common-they are both as stubborn as one another.

i personally have hostility towards religion, but i have no hostility towards religious followers, just pity and embarrasement for them

Originally Posted by svwillmer

one thing they do have in common-they are both as stubborn as one another.

Let's be clear on this. I am strong willed. You are stubborn. She is pig headed. 8)

Originally Posted by svwillmer

Both of them argue the point very strongly against each other, they both have a deep feeling of hostility to each other (shame on the religious ones who do), but most funnily they both fail to realise that there is one thing they do have in common-they are both as stubborn as one another.

should your title read Atheist vs Religious.
because A-theist and A-Religious are the same thing,
so I'll take it, as a typo.

I thing you'll find in the majority that is, that atheist do not hold any hatred towards the religious, atheist are after all humanist too, they only hold an abhorrence towards the disease that the religious are inflicted with, they are all unwilling victims so can not be held responible, even the priests and preachers are effected by the same virus, they do not understand that they are passing on the disease, the reason atheist counter argue, is in the hope the religious will shake of this illness, and begin to think for themselves again. contradicting what is written in the holy books using the very same book, and using clear thought to put over a point, could help the inflicted, but it is not the goal of the atheist, the only way an inficted person can get cured is by his/her own realization.
the reason most atheist debate the religious is to better understand the disease, no amount of good sense is going to make the theist change his mind, but putting a few doubts in the mind of a thiest can start them on the road to recovery.

Originally Posted by svwillmer

Both of them argue the point very strongly against each other, they both have a deep feeling of hostility to each other (shame on the religious ones who do), but most funnily they both fail to realise that there is one thing they do have in common-they are both as stubborn as one another.

yeah maybe your right...

Originally Posted by Ophiolite

Let's be clear on this. I am strong willed. You are stubborn. She is pig headed. 8)

Your the stubborn one... You don't even want to admit there is a God... And i have proof... When you see a building that means there has to be a builder or that wouldn't be there... and when you see a painting there has to be a painter...So there has to be a builder for us too... so that means we are created by God....

Originally Posted by geezer

Originally Posted by svwillmer

Both of them argue the point very strongly against each other, they both have a deep feeling of hostility to each other (shame on the religious ones who do), but most funnily they both fail to realise that there is one thing they do have in common-they are both as stubborn as one another.

should your title read Atheist vs Religious.
because A-theist and A-Religious are the same thing,
so I'll take it, as a typo.

I thing you'll find in the majority that is, that atheist do not hold any hatred towards the religious, atheist are after all humanist too, they only hold an abhorrence towards the disease that the religious are inflicted with, they are all unwilling victims so can not be held responible, even the priests and preachers are effected by the same virus, they do not understand that they are passing on the disease, the reason atheist counter argue, is in the hope the religious will shake of this illness, and begin to think for themselves again. contradicting what is written in the holy books using the very same book, and using clear thought to put over a point, could help the inflicted, but it is not the goal of the atheist, the only way an inficted person can get cured is by his/her own realization.
the reason most atheist debate the religious is to better understand the disease, no amount of good sense is going to make the theist change his mind, but putting a few doubts in the mind of a thiest can start them on the road to recovery.

Atheist and A-religious are not the same thing.

Originally Posted by scientstphilosophertheist

Atheist and A-religious are not the same thing.

Of course they are the same thing. They are both A-creationist, or in other words they both decline to partake in the man-made concept( I stressed con for a reason ) that we were created by a god, and all the obligations that go with it.

Originally Posted by svwillmer

Both of them argue the point very strongly against each other, they both have a deep feeling of hostility to each other (shame on the religious ones who do), but most funnily they both fail to realise that there is one thing they do have in common-they are both as stubborn as one another.

I am a Christian and I hold no feelings of hostility to atheists in general. In fact I have come to the conclusion that a belief in God is not universally of benefit to all people and that some atheists are of a higher "spiritual" development than some theists.

However there are theists who think the world would be a better place without any atheists and there are atheists who think the world would be a better place without any theists. I do feel a bit of hostility and a lot of contempt for both of these groups.

Originally Posted by scientstphilosophertheist

Atheist and A-religious are not the same thing.

Literally, you’re quite right, they are not quite the same thing, but they are of the same ilk.
The prefix "A" denotes "without" I.e. A-theist without god, A-religious without religion, as there is a huge connection between a belief in god and religion, they do really mean the same thing.
it is really only game of semantics, if we separate them.

Mitchell, I think your wrong here,

there are atheists who think the world would be a better place without any theists.

atheist believe the world would be a better place without the evil cult of religion. I believe that atheist hold no hatred or ill will towards believers, just the evil cults they follow, they cannot be held responsible for there actions, they are brainwashed/infected with a disease.
With the disease eradicated, the world could be healed.

Originally Posted by GhostofMaxwell

Originally Posted by scientstphilosophertheist

Atheist and A-religious are not the same thing.

Of course they are the same thing. They are both A-creationist, or in other words they both decline to partake in the man-made concept( I stressed con for a reason ) that we were created by a god, and all the obligations that go with it.

There are theists who are A-religious. Consider that for a second...you'll eventually figure it out.

Originally Posted by geezer

Literally, you’re quite right, they are not quite the same thing, but they are of the same ilk.
The prefix "A" denotes "without" I.e. A-theist without god, A-religious without religion, as there is a huge connection between a belief in god and religion, they do really mean the same thing.
it is really only game of semantics, if we separate them.

The truth is that an atheist is a-religious, but an a-religious person doesn't have to be atheist. So atheist is just a subset of a-religious.

.....

Originally Posted by scientstphilosophertheist

[
The truth is that an atheist is a-religious, but an a-religious person doesn't have to be atheist. So atheist is just a subset of a-religious.

Grasp at semantics if you like ,but I've never known a theist who isnt religous or vice versa. Therefore the Anti of both terms amount to the same barrel of fish.

hm

Can someone delete this idiots scrolling?

Several of his subsequent posts, with zero semantic content have been removed from this and other threads. The same will happen to anyone else who thinks meaningless one liners are a quick way to raise your post count.
Ophiolite

OK

Originally Posted by geezer

Mitchell,
I think your wrong here,

there are atheists who think the world would be a better place without any theists.

atheist believe the world would be a better place without the evil cult of religion. I believe that atheist hold no hatred or ill will towards believers, just the evil cults they follow, they cannot be held responsible for there actions, they are brainwashed/infected with a disease.
With the disease eradicated, the world could be healed.

"geezer,

I think your wrong here, theists believe the world would be a better place without the evil cult of atheism. I believe that theists hold no hatred or ill will towards non-believers, just the evil cult they follow, they cannot be held responsible for their actions, they are brainwashed/infected with a disease.

With the disease eradicated, the world could be healed."

Yuk! I need to take a bath. How can anyone speak such garbage?

We all remember how Mao Tse Tung and Pol Pot tried to cure the "disease" they called religion. I think it would be very sad if a similar program where carried out upon anti-religion atheists. But it would be poetic justice.

Originally Posted by GhostofMaxwell

Originally Posted by scientstphilosophertheist

[
The truth is that an atheist is a-religious, but an a-religious person doesn't have to be atheist. So atheist is just a subset of a-religious.

Grasp at semantics if you like ,but I've never known a theist who isnt religous or vice versa. Therefore the Anti of both terms amount to the same barrel of fish.

Well I've know several; thus they exist; thus I'm not arguing semantics, but rather a well-established fact.

Originally Posted by mitchellmckain

We all remember how Mao Tse Tung and Pol Pot tried to cure the "disease" they called religion. I think it would be very sad if a similar program where carried out upon atheists. But it would be poetic justice.

Yes, as it would be if all theists were suddenly given education. Oh wait, if you educate them, they're no longer theists!

I don't agree with calling mao and similar types atheists and blaming atheism on the result (or blaming atheism on anything). Atheism isn't a generalize religion. it has no strict methodology, no book to follow, only science and individuality. Because of this it has one weakness: Any lunatic can be so self-absorbed as to deny the existence of a god not on evidence but mere egotism.

Theists like you seem to never grasp this concept vividly enough to comprehend how hilariously off-target such "poetic justice" would be. You cannot attack a "religion" that isn't a religion. You can only attack a bunch of different people with vastly different viewpoints. Which wouldn't be too effective now would it, you generalizing bastage? :P

Originally Posted by Jeremyhfht

Originally Posted by mitchellmckain

We all remember how Mao Tse Tung and Pol Pot tried to cure the "disease" they called religion. I think it would be very sad if a similar program where carried out upon atheists. But it would be poetic justice.

Theists like you seem to never grasp this concept vividly enough to comprehend how hilariously off-target such "poetic justice" would be. You cannot attack a "religion" that isn't a religion. You can only attack a bunch of different people with vastly different viewpoints. Which wouldn't be too effective now would it, you generalizing bastage? :P

Anti-religion atheists never seem to grasp that there is no such thing as religion apart from people and that religion is a part of being human and you cannot "cure" it without destroying humanity. I may disagree with the idea that the world would be a better place without atheists, but a world without the irrational hatreds towards other groups of people (regardless of whether they try to dehumanize, rationalize and excuse their hatred by saying its the religion and not the people), would indeed be a better place. I am just not so foolish as the atheists here to think or even imagine that this can be accomplished. The freedom to love and the freedom to hate go hand and hand. So we will just have to put up with the people who hate no matter how much they turn the world into excrement.

I have hostility towards the religious right, which has nothing to really do with religion - and pity for those who are short sighted enough to believe they are the greatest thing in existence. Basically, my problem is with the human race regardless of their stance on God.

ahuh...

Originally Posted by Amaya

I have hostility towards the religious right, which has nothing to really do with religion - and pity for those who are short sighted enough to believe they are the greatest thing in existence. Basically, my problem is with the human race regardless of their stance on God.

But this is a rather amazing thing about human beings that no other species on the planet can do. Human beings can devote their life to some species of beetle in Timbuktu and get up in arms about people in the area threatening their extinction. But you will not find any other species on the planet doing anything similar. Yes man is dangerous and his immature use of his power threatens life on this planet, but the power of man has just as much potential for the preservation and guardianship of life. But we must guard against arrogance and self-importance and it is another aspect of Christianity that it calls upon us to mistrust ourselves. Nevertheless I see cause to rejoice in the resurgence of the pagan religions for if there is one weakness and blindspot that Christianity has always had, it is seeing the need to respect the natural world. On the other hand, it is a little unreasonable to expect human beings to respect other species when they do not even have very much respect for their own. The respect for others is founded on self-respect.

hey...

everything on this planet has potential of both destruction and construction.

i refrain from using the terms good and evil, because of their relative nature.

Originally Posted by mitchellmckain

Atheists never seem to grasp that there is no such thing as religion apart from people and that religion is a part of being human and you cannot "cure" it without destroying humanity.

I don't believe that was my statement. Why are you responding like it was?

I may disagree with the idea that the world would be a better place without atheists, but a world without the irrational hatreds towards other groups of people (regardless of whether they try to dehumanize, rationalize and excuse their hatred by saying its the religion and not the people), would indeed be a better place.

So...you're generalizing all atheists (which I cautioned about) as hating religion? I may dislike religious people (and the religion), but that's silly to put words into my (and others) mouth.

Again, nothing to do with my statement.

I am just not so foolish as the atheists here to think or even imagine that this can be accomplished. The freedom to love and the freedom to hate go hand and hand. So we will just have to put up with the people who hate no matter how much they turn the world into excrement.

Quite the opposite. I know it wont happen. In fact if you read my thread I made about Idiocracy, you'd probably know that I expect the reverse to happen.

Since my "plan" revolves around letting intellectualism thrive, I fear it has less of a chance than the hate route. Don't you agree?

But yet again...nothing to do with my statement.

Originally Posted by Jeremyhfht

I don't believe that was my statement. Why are you responding like it was?

That is one of the natural hazards of butting in to defend those spouting bigotry and hatred. I will not defend theists exhibiting such behavior, so why do you defend atheists acting this way? Are you the propaganda arm who will convince everyone how kind and wonderful you are while you carry out your program of hatred? I couldn't even tell the difference between you and the other guy.

Originally Posted by Jeremyhfht

Yes, as it would be if all theists were suddenly given education. Oh wait, if you educate them, they're no longer theists!

Ridiculous generalizations about theists and all, sounded like the same person to me. Gosh I wish you guys would come up with some new material, makes me dizzy tryin to see the difference between you.

Originally Posted by Jeremyhfht

So...you're generalizing all atheists (which I cautioned about) as hating religion? I may dislike religious people (and the religion), but that's silly to put words into my (and others) mouth.

I wouldn't dream of doing that except to someone making extra extra stupid generalizations about theists. There is no need for me to put any words in your mouth to make a fool of you. So if you think I was helping you, then you imagined it.

Originally Posted by Jeremyhfht

Quite the opposite. I know it wont happen. In fact if you read my thread I made about Idiocracy, you'd probably know that I expect the reverse to happen.

No I don't think I would bother to look past the phrase "Theists like you seem to never grasp" to imagine that there is anything you wrote that is worth reading.

Oh and then there is this piece of absurdity:

Originally Posted by Jeremyhfht

You cannot attack a "religion" that isn't a religion. You can only attack a bunch of different people with vastly different viewpoints. Which wouldn't be too effective now would it, you generalizing bastage?

arguing that atheists are different from theists because they are "a bunch of different people with vastly different viewpoints". The generalizing was all geezer's because it was his words with a few replacements. "disease" was a word of his and the communists that made your defensive nitpicking vile and disgusting.

Originally Posted by Jeremyhfht

Since my "plan" revolves around letting intellectualism thrive, I fear it has less of a chance than the hate route. Don't you agree?

LOL Your plan? LOL Letting intellectualism thrive? LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL When you hear someone, stupid enough to say that theists are lacking in education, talk about intellectualism you can be guaranteed that what they mean has nothing remotely to do with intellegence. LOL LOL LOL Final solutions are always about hate no matter what propaganda they use to hide their agenda. Why would I be stupid enough to agree with someone who endorses and stands on the side of bigotry and hatred? I have atheist friends who I think are much better persons than many of the theists I know. But I do have some standards you know.

Originally Posted by mitchellmckain

That is one of the natural hazards of butting in to defend those spouting bigotry and hatred. I will not defend theists exhibiting such behavior, so why do you defend atheists acting this way? Are you the propaganda arm who will convince everyone how kind and wonderful you are while you carry out your program of hatred? I couldn't even tell the difference between you and the other guy.

I almost forgot to respond to this. I didn't defend such actions. I attacked people generalizing atheists, and atheists that act like that to begin with. Perhaps you should reread what I wrote carefully? Please? I don't want to have to respond again.

Originally Posted by mitchellmckain

Originally Posted by Jeremyhfht

Yes, as it would be if all theists were suddenly given education. Oh wait, if you educate them, they're no longer theists!

Ridiculous generalizations about theists and all, sounded like the same person to me. Gosh I wish you guys would come up with some new material, makes me dizzy tryin to see the difference between you.

Thank you, now we get somewhere. My generalization is more of a common joking statement often used amongst intellectuals. Not that I'm one, I could be as stupid as any of you (that came out wrong...).

But it does imply that religious people, by majority, are uneducated. This is true for a variety of reasons. First of which is that since the majority ARE religious, it's a correlation that of course the majority are uneducated.