Thread: i]u]b] A world of atheists /i]/u]/b]

The schizophrenic majority
The overwhelming majority of the Earth is theist (religious, deist, or otherwise). This overwhelming majority is deluded, and, apparently schizophrenic! Schizophrenic delusions seem to be the thing, and atheists aren't in the crew. Perhaps it's as a result of some evolutionary mishap? Are humans evolving from a schizophrenic race to a more normal race?

Atheists are not normal
But how do we define 'normal' when most of the world is not normal (schizophrenic)? It makes no sense! Perhaps, then, it would make more sense to say that atheists are abnormal.

Let's examine the science:
We are born atheist; apparently most of us lose this trait as we get older. Our brains are molded and formed to the point of schizophrenia (of varying degrees). Atheists, however don't go through this process of molding and forming. They continue in the infant stage, and constantly seek to get the majority back to this infant stage, just like the ku klux klan seeks to get America back to its infant stages.

What can we do to make atheists normal?
Well, some theists have been preaching; trying to get these people to be normal. Atheists, however, don't yield, especially in light of the fact that theists are divided in their beliefs. Some disagree with trying to convert atheists, and instead just live their lives in the hope that atheists become normal. What if they don't become normal? Leave them be. Let them be happy as the outcasts they are.

The spreading of the virus
The virus of atheism is spreading as they mold their children's brains to form new atheists. Some atheists are even trying to convert theists. There are some that even seek to have a world of atheists. A French philosopher (whose name won't be mentioned in this article), for instance, is seeking to convert Europe to atheism.

The dangers
A world of atheists, to some, may result in complete tyranny. If all the world were to become atheist, the theists will be oppressed; taunted for their 'irrationality'. Some theists will have to conceal their beliefs and live in misery. It would be like a utopia turned dystopia. It would be...no different from the 'utopia' of a completely religious society.

The takeover of science
Atheists have taken over science. Apparently only atheists can be scientists. Religious people are locked out, as they are not abnormal enough.

This article was written by scientstphilosophertheist on June 21st, 2007. Any reproduction of any part of this article is strictly prohibited, except with the express permission of spt. Spt gives this permission to people on this site; however it should only be reproduced as a response to the article. Oh, and all other rights reserved.

the way i see it is theists are just not as emotionally evolved as athiests, plain and simple

theists cling on to old ways and fairy tales through a number of reasons, delusions being one, sticking with traditions(and what they are brought up with) and just pure fear of letting go of their comfort blanket, it'll pass in time and religion will just be something to laugh about in the future

what your seeing now, is finally many people starting to stand up as proud athiests and saying what they've always thought but what was once frowned on by society, In the uk its a growing thing, either as athiests or agnostics but non practacing either way, many now dont even think about religion from year to year unless its a discusssion about other peoples(eg terrorism etc)

If you look in the majority of churches the congregation is thinning and usually of one or two older generations, my generation(30somethings) and below have no use or interest in it, with the exeption of certain smaller religions in the uk(islam, hundu, sikh etc), where there is still certain cultural pressures on the younger generations


What i dont understand is your blind panic to the so called threat of athiesm, to post a thread like you have it must really be eating at you somewhat, firstly you wanted to label athiests agnostic and now this thread

The dangers
A world of atheists, to some, may result in complete tyranny. If all the world were to become atheist, the theists will be oppressed; taunted for their 'irrationality'. Some theists will have to conceal their beliefs and live in misery. It would be like a utopia turned dystopia. It would be...no different from the 'utopia' of a completely religious society.

May result in complete tyranny , most of the tyrants ofthe past have been strong thiest, yes some are athiests but that is funny. Countrys with massive athiest populations like sweden are actually nice places to live

Im abit confused on your use of the word "dystopia", thats usually meant to mean a society with oppressive social control, look to a religious country like afghanistan to see what dystopia actually means

The spreading of the virus
The virus of atheism is spreading as they mold their children's brains to form new atheists. Some atheists are even trying to convert theists. There are some that even seek to have a world of atheists. A French philosopher (whose name won't be mentioned in this article), for instance, is seeking to convert Europe to atheism.

hmm change athiest to islam or another religion and it still works

What can we do to make atheists normal?
Well, some theists have been preaching; trying to get these people to be normal. Atheists, however, don't yield, especially in light of the fact that theists are divided in their beliefs. Some disagree with trying to convert atheists, and instead just live their lives in the hope that atheists become normal. What if they don't become normal? Leave them be. Let them be happy as the outcasts they are.

Let's examine the science:
We are born atheist; apparently most of us lose this trait as we get older. Our brains are molded and formed to the point of schizophrenia (of varying degrees). Atheists, however don't go through this process of molding and forming. They continue in the infant stage, and constantly seek to get the majority back to this infant stage, just like the ku klux klan seeks to get America back to its infant stages.

I'll tie these two in together, firstly you repeatedly say athiests as not normal based on the comment that the majority of the world are thiests, well you also commented that we are born athiests, so question what happens that stops us from staying that way, hmmmm could it be from an early age the control and teaching of humans, look at places in the world or individuals(others will be able to quote examples) where no religion is taught, they stay athiests and the only thing that changes that is what the young pliable mind is told by its parents and elders, By me not saying anything to my daughters of religion as they grow, they become athiests by DEFAULT

Atheists are not normal
But how do we define 'normal' when most of the world is not normal (schizophrenic)? It makes no sense! Perhaps, then, it would make more sense to say that atheists are abnormal.

As ive mentioned above, if we are born athiests and that is our default setting then that is the basis of normality, thiests teachings and moulding of the young mind is a little less standardised and based purely on the interpretation of a particular individual thats brainwashing..... sorry teaching

Most of this is so silly that I'm not sure if you actually expect a serious response, but I'll give it a shot.

Originally Posted by scientstphilosophertheist

The schizophrenic majority
The overwhelming majority of the Earth is theist (religious, deist, or otherwise). This overwhelming majority is deluded, and, apparently schizophrenic! Schizophrenic delusions seem to be the thing, and atheists aren't in the crew. Perhaps it's as a result of some evolutionary mishap? Are humans evolving from a schizophrenic race to a more normal race?

Atheists are not normal
But how do we define 'normal' when most of the world is not normal (schizophrenic)? It makes no sense! Perhaps, then, it would make more sense to say that atheists are abnormal.

Is there supposed to be a point to any of this, or were you just hoping to score bonus "rhetorical bullshit" points with your sarcastic tone? If anything, you appear to be implying that atheists are wrong because they are in the minority. Do I really need to explain the problem with this argument to you?

Let's examine the science:
We are born atheist; apparently most of us lose this trait as we get older. Our brains are molded and formed to the point of schizophrenia (of varying degrees). Atheists, however don't go through this process of molding and forming. They continue in the infant stage, and constantly seek to get the majority back to this infant stage, just like the ku klux klan seeks to get America back to its infant stages.

Yes, young children will believe virtually anything that you tell them, and if you instill a belief in a child before they developed the ability to think critically they will often display an inability to use their new-found critical thinking ability to evaluate already-ingrained beliefs.

You seem to be implying that atheists are somehow immature because they do not posess beliefs that are normally impressed upon people at a young age. Again, do I really need to explain the logical fallacy here? Your comparison between the ku klux klan and atheism makes you look like an idiot, so I think I'll just leave that one to stand on its own.

What can we do to make atheists normal?
Well, some theists have been preaching; trying to get these people to be normal. Atheists, however, don't yield, especially in light of the fact that theists are divided in their beliefs. Some disagree with trying to convert atheists, and instead just live their lives in the hope that atheists become normal. What if they don't become normal? Leave them be. Let them be happy as the outcasts they are.

If religious people really were content to leave people who don't share their beliefs alone, most atheists would hardly think about religion at all and wouldn't have a problem with religion or religious people. Since such religious people are vanishingly rare, conflict arises.

The spreading of the virus
The virus of atheism is spreading as they mold their children's brains to form new atheists. Some atheists are even trying to convert theists. There are some that even seek to have a world of atheists. A French philosopher (whose name won't be mentioned in this article), for instance, is seeking to convert Europe to atheism.

You don't have to mold a child's brain to make them an atheist - they are all born as atheists by default. You simply have to refrain from polluting their brain with superstitious nonsense.

The dangers
A world of atheists, to some, may result in complete tyranny. If all the world were to become atheist, the theists will be oppressed; taunted for their 'irrationality'. Some theists will have to conceal their beliefs and live in misery. It would be like a utopia turned dystopia. It would be...no different from the 'utopia' of a completely religious society.

Right...because we have so many examples of the enlightened, peaceful, utopian societies that arise when religion takes over. Here's a clue for you; all the countries in the world where you would probably care to live have secular governments.

The takeover of science
Atheists have taken over science. Apparently only atheists can be scientists. Religious people are locked out, as they are not abnormal enough.

Do you seriously believe that scientists are involved in a conspiracy to keep religious people out of the field?

LMAO, very nice spt.

Originally Posted by Scifor Refugee

Most of this is so silly that I'm not sure if you actually expect a serious response, but I'll give it a shot.

It's like most satire: silly with a some truth to it. It's for you to find what's true and what's just humor.

Originally Posted by Scifor Refugee

Originally Posted by scientstphilosophertheist

The schizophrenic majority
The overwhelming majority of the Earth is theist (religious, deist, or otherwise). This overwhelming majority is deluded, and, apparently schizophrenic! Schizophrenic delusions seem to be the thing, and atheists aren't in the crew. Perhaps it's as a result of some evolutionary mishap? Are humans evolving from a schizophrenic race to a more normal race?

Atheists are not normal
But how do we define 'normal' when most of the world is not normal (schizophrenic)? It makes no sense! Perhaps, then, it would make more sense to say that atheists are abnormal.

Is there supposed to be a point to any of this, or were you just hoping to score bonus "rhetorical bullshit" points with your sarcastic tone? If anything, you appear to be implying that atheists are wrong because they are in the minority. Do I really need to explain the problem with this argument to you?

I'm not implying that the minority is wrong and the majority is right. I am well aware of what can happen if there is majority rule (as is shown when I state later in my post that there must be some balance between atheism and theism). In fact, I am in the minority in many ways: for instance, I am a religious scientist, and I'm black (well, I'm not in the minority when I'm in Jamaica, but in the US...). Rather, I'm showing how silly the idea that religious people are schizophrenic is (see the "schizophrenia and religion" thread). Apparently many atheists believe that religious people are schizophrenic. This makes no sense whatsover, as they are suggesting that the majority of the world is seeing things, has language problems, has distorted thoughts, perception problems, etc.

Originally Posted by Scifor Refugee

Let's examine the science:
We are born atheist; apparently most of us lose this trait as we get older. Our brains are molded and formed to the point of schizophrenia (of varying degrees). Atheists, however don't go through this process of molding and forming. They continue in the infant stage, and constantly seek to get the majority back to this infant stage, just like the ku klux klan seeks to get America back to its infant stages.

Yes, young children will believe virtually anything that you tell them, and if you instill a belief in a child before they developed the ability to think critically they will often display an inability to use their new-found critical thinking ability to evaluate already-ingrained beliefs.

As is seen when some atheist families instill in their children the idea that any religious thought is completely illogical. Atheists do it too, you know, it's just that it's easier for them to get away with saying "I just allow them to think freely".

Originally Posted by Scifor Refugee

You seem to be implying that atheists are somehow immature because they do not posess beliefs that are normally impressed upon people at a young age.

Congratulations, you've detected the obvious!

Originally Posted by Scifor Refugee

Again, do I really need to explain the logical fallacy here? Your comparison between the ku klux klan and atheism makes you look like an idiot, so I think I'll just leave that one to stand on its own.

Perhaps my congratulations were a bit premature. This is the humor bit, and obviously you didn't get it.

Originally Posted by Scifor Refugee

What can we do to make atheists normal?
Well, some theists have been preaching; trying to get these people to be normal. Atheists, however, don't yield, especially in light of the fact that theists are divided in their beliefs. Some disagree with trying to convert atheists, and instead just live their lives in the hope that atheists become normal. What if they don't become normal? Leave them be. Let them be happy as the outcasts they are.

If religious people really were content to leave people who don't share their beliefs alone, most atheists would hardly think about religion at all and wouldn't have a problem with religion or religious people.

This is complete crap. There are many, many atheist activists out there who are troubled not by people trying to convert them, but rather by the thought that there are so many people out there irrational enough to believe in God.

Originally Posted by Scifor Refugee

Since such religious people are vanishingly rare, conflict arises.

Well, where I live (both in Jamaica and South Florida), these types of religious people are in the majority, and their numbers are increasing exponentially. Here would be a good place to point out that in most schools in Jamaica religious education is mandatory (though Jamaica is a dominantly Christian country), and in these religious education classes, they teach about all religions, and they even teach about atheism and agnosticism; in fact, that's the first place I heard the word 'agnostic'.

Originally Posted by Scifor Refugee

The spreading of the virus
The virus of atheism is spreading as they mold their children's brains to form new atheists. Some atheists are even trying to convert theists. There are some that even seek to have a world of atheists. A French philosopher (whose name won't be mentioned in this article), for instance, is seeking to convert Europe to atheism.

You don't have to mold a child's brain to make them an atheist - they are all born as atheists by default. You simply have to refrain from polluting their brain with superstitious nonsense.

Ah, but you have to mold their brain to keep them from contracting this superstitious nonsense. In my lifetime, I've heard of many-a-atheist family getting pissed off because their children converted; many of those families get pissed because, after all they've taught the child about the irrationality of religion, the child still converted. Sounds no different than most religious family, does it?

Originally Posted by Scifor Refugee

The dangers
A world of atheists, to some, may result in complete tyranny. If all the world were to become atheist, the theists will be oppressed; taunted for their 'irrationality'. Some theists will have to conceal their beliefs and live in misery. It would be like a utopia turned dystopia. It would be...no different from the 'utopia' of a completely religious society.

Right...because we have so many examples of the enlightened, peaceful, utopian societies that arise when religion takes over. Here's a clue for you; all the countries in the world where you would probably care to live have secular governments.

Apparently you glazed over my statement: "It would be...no different from the 'utopia' of a completely religious society". I suggest you read that quote again, and reconsider your statement.

Originally Posted by Scifor Refugee

The takeover of science
Atheists have taken over science. Apparently only atheists can be scientists. Religious people are locked out, as they are not abnormal enough.

Do you seriously believe that scientists are involved in a conspiracy to keep religious people out of the field?

Again, you missed the humor of the exaggeration. I'm convinced that most atheists believe that theists cannot be scientists, and that science is an atheist field that only has the purpose of replacing religion. Need I provide proof? I can quote many atheists from many of these threads (and other websites) if you like.

Originally Posted by scientstphilosophertheist

It's like most satire: silly with a some truth to it.

Sorry, my sarcasm detector must be malfunctioning today.

I'm showing how silly the idea that religious people are schizophrenic is (see the "schizophrenia and religion" thread). Apparently many atheists believe that religious people are schizophrenic. This makes no sense whatsover, as they are suggesting that the majority of the world is seeing things, has language problems, has distorted thoughts, perception problems, etc.

Gotcha...it didn't help that I didn't read the "schizophrenia and religion" thread. But here's something that I would like you to consider: since most of the world’s religions are contradictory, this is not just a problem for atheists. Even if you believe in any particular mainstream religion, doesn't that still imply to you that most of the rest of the world is schizophrenic? After all, if Christianity is correct that there is only one God and everyone goes to heaven or hell after death, then Hinduism must be wrong about pretty much everything in their religion. This means that there are a billion or so Hindus who are seeing things, suffering from distorted thought processes, perception problems, etc. when they worship their gods and have their religious experiences. So it seems to me that unless you want to embrace some sort of generic “all the religions are equally valid” viewpoint, a religious person would still have to deal with the fact that, according to their beliefs, the majority of the world believes in bizarre, absurd things.

Originally Posted by Scifor Refugee

Originally Posted by scientstphilosophertheist

It's like most satire: silly with a some truth to it.

Sorry, my sarcasm detector must be malfunctioning today.

Happens to me a lot.

Originally Posted by Scifor Refugee

I'm showing how silly the idea that religious people are schizophrenic is (see the "schizophrenia and religion" thread). Apparently many atheists believe that religious people are schizophrenic. This makes no sense whatsover, as they are suggesting that the majority of the world is seeing things, has language problems, has distorted thoughts, perception problems, etc.

Gotcha...it didn't help that I didn't read the "schizophrenia and religion" thread. But here's something that I would like you to consider: since most of the world’s religions are contradictory, this is not just a problem for atheists. Even if you believe in any particular mainstream religion, doesn't that still imply to you that most of the rest of the world is schizophrenic? After all, if Christianity is correct that there is only one God and everyone goes to heaven or hell after death, then Hinduism must be wrong about pretty much everything in their religion. This means that there are a billion or so Hindus who are seeing things, suffering from distorted thought processes, perception problems, etc. when they worship their gods and have their religious experiences. So it seems to me that unless you want to embrace some sort of generic “all the religions are equally valid” viewpoint, a religious person would still have to deal with the fact that, according to their beliefs, the majority of the world believes in bizarre, absurd things.

You'll find that my beliefs as a Christian are quite strange (or unique, if you like). Many Christians themselves are, in most ways, deluded, literally. Some of them believe the holy spirit has taken over their body and start shouting all kinds of crap (especially in the black churches, which I tend to not attend very much). Clearly many of them are acting, but some actually believe it. I think the reason for this is that they convince themselves that what they believe is completely true to the point that their brain actually creates false sensations and perceptions. If, and that is a big if, the other religions are lieing, then the same phenomenon has occured: they believe that they've experienced God.

Unusually enough, my belief in God is less faith and more logic (please don't ask me to go into detail). The only 'experience' I've had of God is that feeling I get in my heart, body, and soul when I'm listening to Christian music or preaching, but I can hardly call that experience, as I sometimes get a similar experience when listening to other music and inspirational speeches.

What makes me even more unusual is my skepticism as to whether other religious people are going to hell, or if a hell really does exist (like I said in another thread, I take the books of Genesis and Revelations to be highly symbolic, and hardly literal). In my opinion, most of them are worshiping the same God, just in a different way, just like the Christian denominations follow the same basic ideals, just with some different beliefs here and there.

So the answer to your question is: if my religion is the right religion, then what the other people were experiencing is a direct result of over-believing; but, I'm not sure as to whether my religion is the only religion in God's favor.

With that, can you guess my denomination?

Originally Posted by Scifor Refugee

Gotcha...it didn't help that I didn't read the "schizophrenia and religion" thread. But here's something that I would like you to consider: since most of the world’s religions are contradictory, this is not just a problem for atheists. Even if you believe in any particular mainstream religion, doesn't that still imply to you that most of the rest of the world is schizophrenic? After all, if Christianity is correct that there is only one God and everyone goes to heaven or hell after death, then Hinduism must be wrong about pretty much everything in their religion. This means that there are a billion or so Hindus who are seeing things, suffering from distorted thought processes, perception problems, etc. when they worship their gods and have their religious experiences. So it seems to me that unless you want to embrace some sort of generic “all the religions are equally valid” viewpoint, a religious person would still have to deal with the fact that, according to their beliefs, the majority of the world believes in bizarre, absurd things.

Systems of thought including science and Christianity are not things that exist in stasis but are under continual development as people make new distinctions and coin new words to aid in making these distinctions. The problem you are discussing here is certainly something that a large portion of modern man consider worthy of thought and has had a big impact on shaping the thought of several new religions like Hari Krishna, Bahai, the moonies and the church of religious science to name a few. Even as a more orthodox Christian, this consideration has had quite an impact on my thinking as well, leading me to develop something that I call a "theology of pluralism", in which God is the primary culprit behind this diversity of religion and human thought.

I have seen numerous tales in speculative fiction about someone who thinks that it is their mandate to unite mankind in a single way of thinking and every bit of it convinces me of this fundamental truth: as bad as war might be, mankind united can be much much worse if it is sought in a uniformity of human thought. The possibility of war goes hand in hand with the possibility of freedom. Diversity is a fundamental characteristic of life itself and in it lies all hope for the future. Therefore the only hope for mankind united must be found in the tolerance of diversity -- no more than that -- in the realization that all beauty is found when diversity exists together in harmony.

why not address my comments?? they are still valid

Originally Posted by scientstphilosophertheist

The schizophrenic majority
The overwhelming majority of the Earth is theist (religious, deist, or otherwise). This overwhelming majority is deluded, and, apparently schizophrenic! Schizophrenic delusions seem to be the thing, and atheists aren't in the crew. Perhaps it's as a result of some evolutionary mishap? Are humans evolving from a schizophrenic race to a more normal race?

Atheists are not normal
But how do we define 'normal' when most of the world is not normal (schizophrenic)? It makes no sense! Perhaps, then, it would make more sense to say that atheists are abnormal.

Let's examine the science:
We are born atheist; apparently most of us lose this trait as we get older. Our brains are molded and formed to the point of schizophrenia (of varying degrees). Atheists, however don't go through this process of molding and forming. They continue in the infant stage, and constantly seek to get the majority back to this infant stage, just like the ku klux klan seeks to get America back to its infant stages.

What can we do to make atheists normal?
Well, some theists have been preaching; trying to get these people to be normal. Atheists, however, don't yield, especially in light of the fact that theists are divided in their beliefs. Some disagree with trying to convert atheists, and instead just live their lives in the hope that atheists become normal. What if they don't become normal? Leave them be. Let them be happy as the outcasts they are.

The spreading of the virus
The virus of atheism is spreading as they mold their children's brains to form new atheists. Some atheists are even trying to convert theists. There are some that even seek to have a world of atheists. A French philosopher (whose name won't be mentioned in this article), for instance, is seeking to convert Europe to atheism.

The dangers
A world of atheists, to some, may result in complete tyranny. If all the world were to become atheist, the theists will be oppressed; taunted for their 'irrationality'. Some theists will have to conceal their beliefs and live in misery. It would be like a utopia turned dystopia. It would be...no different from the 'utopia' of a completely religious society.

The takeover of science
Atheists have taken over science. Apparently only atheists can be scientists. Religious people are locked out, as they are not abnormal enough.

This article was written by scientstphilosophertheist on June 21st, 2007. Any reproduction of any part of this article is strictly prohibited, except with the express permission of spt. Spt gives this permission to people on this site; however it should only be reproduced as a response to the article. Oh, and all other rights reserved.

is this the script for a new SF movie ?

Originally Posted by captaincaveman

why not address my comments?? they are still valid

Well, that's because some of your statements I agree with, and others are just as a result of your missing the sarcasm in my post.

Originally Posted by scientstphilosophertheist

Originally Posted by captaincaveman

why not address my comments?? they are still valid

Well, that's because some of your statements I agree with, and others are just as a result of your missing the sarcasm in my post.

thats me speed reading over it. my mistake

Originally Posted by scientstphilosophertheist

This article was written by scientstphilosophertheist on June 21st, 2007. Any reproduction of any part of this article is strictly prohibited, except with the express permission of spt. Spt gives this permission to people on this site; however it should only be reproduced as a response to the article. Oh, and all other rights reserved.

why would anybody want too plagiarise this, it's devoid reason, devoid of satire, devoid of humour, it's just devoid.
the whole thing is just childish.
are you sure it isn't a synopsis, for a childrens scifi book.

Originally Posted by marcos

Originally Posted by scientstphilosophertheist

This article was written by scientstphilosophertheist on June 21st, 2007. Any reproduction of any part of this article is strictly prohibited, except with the express permission of spt. Spt gives this permission to people on this site; however it should only be reproduced as a response to the article. Oh, and all other rights reserved.

why would anybody want too plagiarise this, it's devoid reason, devoid of satire, devoid of humour, it's just devoid.
the whole thing is just childish.
are you sure it isn't a synopsis, for a childrens scifi book.

This last part was the key part in clarifying the point of my article: it was for people who couldn't really grasp the satire. Saying you can't reproduce it, all rights reserved, etc. was really only to show that the thing is really 80% humor and 20% truth. You said it's devoid of satire, when it is satire; you said it's devoid of humour, when it's full of humourous mockery; you said it's devoid of reason, when it was a well-planned-out assault on a ridiculous idea.

Originally Posted by marnixR

Originally Posted by scientstphilosophertheist

The schizophrenic majority
The overwhelming majority of the Earth is theist (religious, deist, or otherwise). This overwhelming majority is deluded, and, apparently schizophrenic! Schizophrenic delusions seem to be the thing, and atheists aren't in the crew. Perhaps it's as a result of some evolutionary mishap? Are humans evolving from a schizophrenic race to a more normal race?

Atheists are not normal
But how do we define 'normal' when most of the world is not normal (schizophrenic)? It makes no sense! Perhaps, then, it would make more sense to say that atheists are abnormal.

Let's examine the science:
We are born atheist; apparently most of us lose this trait as we get older. Our brains are molded and formed to the point of schizophrenia (of varying degrees). Atheists, however don't go through this process of molding and forming. They continue in the infant stage, and constantly seek to get the majority back to this infant stage, just like the ku klux klan seeks to get America back to its infant stages.

What can we do to make atheists normal?
Well, some theists have been preaching; trying to get these people to be normal. Atheists, however, don't yield, especially in light of the fact that theists are divided in their beliefs. Some disagree with trying to convert atheists, and instead just live their lives in the hope that atheists become normal. What if they don't become normal? Leave them be. Let them be happy as the outcasts they are.

The spreading of the virus
The virus of atheism is spreading as they mold their children's brains to form new atheists. Some atheists are even trying to convert theists. There are some that even seek to have a world of atheists. A French philosopher (whose name won't be mentioned in this article), for instance, is seeking to convert Europe to atheism.

The dangers
A world of atheists, to some, may result in complete tyranny. If all the world were to become atheist, the theists will be oppressed; taunted for their 'irrationality'. Some theists will have to conceal their beliefs and live in misery. It would be like a utopia turned dystopia. It would be...no different from the 'utopia' of a completely religious society.

The takeover of science
Atheists have taken over science. Apparently only atheists can be scientists. Religious people are locked out, as they are not abnormal enough.

This article was written by scientstphilosophertheist on June 21st, 2007. Any reproduction of any part of this article is strictly prohibited, except with the express permission of spt. Spt gives this permission to people on this site; however it should only be reproduced as a response to the article. Oh, and all other rights reserved.

is this the script for a new SF movie ?

Hmm...that's a good idea. I'll look into it.

not exactly my place because I am not a moderater but please attack the posts and not the poster

Originally Posted by Nevyn

not exactly my place because I am not a moderater but please attack the posts and not the poster

You're right. I'll edit my post.

Originally Posted by mitchellmckain

Even as a more orthodox Christian, this consideration has had quite an impact on my thinking as well, leading me to develop something that I call a "theology of pluralism", in which God is the primary culprit behind this diversity of religion and human thought.

An interesting thought, but I wonder why you believe this explanation instead of the much simpler (and admittedly more cynical) explanation for the existence of many popular, contradictory religions.

Also, have you considered the implications? Many religions alleged that god has personally and explicitly revealed facts to his followers, and many of these allegedly divine statements of fact are inconsistent or contradictory from one religion to another. Are you supposing that god has deliberately lied to people in order to create religious diversity? Or are you simply supposing that many of these allegedly divine facts are false, and god is merely responsible for people’s ability (that you yourself seem to find so disturbing, based on what I've seen in your posts!) to uncritically accept absurd things?

Originally Posted by scientstphilosophertheist

This last part was the key part in clarifying the point of my article: it was for people who couldn't really grasp the satire. Saying you can't reproduce it, all rights reserved, etc. was really only to show that the thing is really 80% humor and 20% truth. You said it's devoid of satire, when it is satire; you said it's devoid of humour, when it's full of humourous mockery; you said it's devoid of reason, when it was a well-planned-out assault on a ridiculous idea.

oh yeh, of course it was!, and my names "billy hunt" too.

Originally Posted by scientstphilosophertheist

Originally Posted by Nevyn

not exactly my place because I am not a moderater but please attack the posts and not the poster

You're right. I'll edit my post.

Originally Posted by marcos

Originally Posted by scientstphilosophertheist

This last part was the key part in clarifying the point of my article: it was for people who couldn't really grasp the satire. Saying you can't reproduce it, all rights reserved, etc. was really only to show that the thing is really 80% humor and 20% truth. You said it's devoid of satire, when it is satire; you said it's devoid of humour, when it's full of humourous mockery; you said it's devoid of reason, when it was a well-planned-out assault on a ridiculous idea.

oh yeh, of course it was!, and my names "billy hunt" too.

I give up.

Nevyn, I hope you now see how hard it is to restrain an ad hominem attack with this guy.

To be honest I think you two are acting like a couple of children fighting over a biscuit. For god's sake you are supposed to argue about the query and things relevent to it, NOT the tone or some funny end peice that some people took way to serious (although I did find it hard to see the humour as well)

Hey, i should be moderater :-D

~Nevyn Pendragon

Originally Posted by Nevyn

To be honest I think you two are acting like a couple of children fighting over a biscuit. For god's sake you are supposed to argue about the query and things relevent to it, NOT the tone or some funny end peice that some people took way to serious (although I did find it hard to see the humour as well)

Hey, i should be moderater :-D

~Nevyn Pendragon

It's kind of hard to not argue tone when tone is the exact reason why your opponent misunderstands you. :|

Originally Posted by Nevyn

Hey, i should be moderater :-D

You're just a few days late.

Originally Posted by scientstphilosophertheist

It's kind of hard to not argue tone when tone is the exact reason why your opponent misunderstands you. :|

doesn't mean you have to bicker about it so I am givng you two a slap on the hands

"You're just a few days late." - why? has someone been chosen already?

Originally Posted by Nevyn

"You're just a few days late." - why? has someone been chosen already?

See the "Moderator selection" and "Moderator nomination" thread in the "Site feedback" section.

I didn't notice anyone actually being selected though... oh well, it was only an idea in passing

I wasn't going to post, until I saw spt's response to marcos, stating it was hard to refrain from ad hom's with him, if you read throught the thread, you will find that all and I repeat all, found it without humour, and missed the satire. even you nevyn state that you found it hard to see the humour, yet I see nothing in both of marcos's post's that are deserved of a personal attack, I personally didn't see the OP worthy of a reply, and I presume many others who could have posted here didn't.
so spt please dont be as arrogant as to think, that your posts will always be gramatically perfect and everybody will understand them, as you can see that is not the case.

Originally Posted by Scifor Refugee

Originally Posted by mitchellmckain

Even as a more orthodox Christian, this consideration has had quite an impact on my thinking as well, leading me to develop something that I call a "theology of pluralism", in which God is the primary culprit behind this diversity of religion and human thought.

An interesting thought, but I wonder why you believe this explanation instead of the much simpler (and admittedly more cynical) explanation for the existence of many popular, contradictory religions.

Because my theology of pluralism is NOT about explaining such things. If all I was trying to do was to explain this diversity of religion and human thought I am sure that this would have been the last thing to occur to me, and I am willing to bet that you would be very very hard pressed to find another religious person giving such an explanation for this.

No my theology of pluralism is really about striving for the kind of Christian thinking that I find both rational and admirable.

Originally Posted by Scifor Refugee

Also, have you considered the implications? Many religions alleged that god has personally and explicitly revealed facts to his followers, and many of these allegedly divine statements of fact are inconsistent or contradictory from one religion to another. Are you supposing that god has deliberately lied to people in order to create religious diversity? Or are you simply supposing that many of these allegedly divine facts are false, and god is merely responsible for people’s ability (that you yourself seem to find so disturbing, based on what I've seen in your posts!) to uncritically accept absurd things?

No I am saying that God has deliberately forced people to do a lot of their thinking for themselves, by not quite spelling everything out. Unfortunately, as you say, very little can stop human beings from abdicating all sorts of responsibility for their lives, including letting other people make all sorts of decisions for them. But I would not say that it is disturbing so much as simply their perogative. I do not think that God expects everyone to be a theologian (or anything else for that matter). What we make of and do with our lives remains entirely up to us. I believe that God's real goal is and has always been to encourage life to reach toward the infinite potentiality which is part of the nature of life, but this is not a singular path but a creative one with infinite possibilities.(footnote 1)


This tendency of human beings to follow also produces a tendency to form communities of carbon copy thinking, intolerant of ideas which challenge the accepted view. It is this behavior which I believe God has found will doom mankind and this is why God has encouraged diversity. This story is found in Genesis chapters 6-11, in the stories of Noah and the Tower of Babel (especially the latter). Since the only hope for mankind was found in the social deviant crackpot, Noah, who goes about having conversations with God and building a boat on a mountain top, God started working to encourage greater human diversity. God prevented mankind from acheiving the same kind of uniformity of language and culture that they had before the flood. I love to point out that this proves that God can indeed be a "God of confusion" no matter what some organized religions might want to tell you. And so I can point out that mankind has continued to be transformed many times by singular individuals who refused to follow the crowd and eventual end up showing us all a better way to live.



footnote 1: Just so you know, I am not by the way talking about many paths to God (or salvation). My answer to that is the same as the standard modern Christian answer, that there are in fact no paths to God (or salvation), which is an anti-religious message warning people away from the false promises of religion which say that they can show you how to appease God. Nevertheless you can say that we all have our path to follow and that the ways that God finds to teach us what we need to learn are as unique as the individuals He teaches. You can say that the Christian message is that it is not the path that will get you where you need to go but God.

sciencephilosopher appears to be a half century out of date. Free Thinking has been receeding in science and society for the last half century. After the Age of Enlightenment, people wanted to reconcile science and religion because the bloody French Revolution and then the revolution of the Colonies made Europeans worry that the whole ideological structure of their society was being torn apart.

So about 150 years ago, the Voltair anti-religion attacks were all ended and scientists began to "reconcile" religion and science by compromising both---but in a way so subtle no one has ever really taken notice!

Then, when the Vietnam war was followed by an age of rising crime and our secular ideals becoming extreme and degenerating into activist cults, the public had good cause to be alarm. They responded by turning against "liberalism" and back to "conservatism." Ever since, Creationism, I.D., anti-abortion conentions have grown until now we even see Bible stories on the history and discovery channels!

And the trend continues also. The more we turn back, the worse things will be . . .

Hey, is your name "brow", "bruff", or "bro"?

Originally Posted by charles brough

sciencephilosopher appears to be a half century out of date. Free Thinking has been receeding in science and society for the last half century. After the Age of Enlightenment, people wanted to reconcile science and religion because the bloody French Revolution and then the revolution of the Colonies made Europeans worry that the whole ideological structure of their society was being torn apart.

So about 150 years ago, the Voltair anti-religion attacks were all ended and scientists began to "reconcile" religion and science by compromising both---but in a way so subtle no one has ever really taken notice!

Then, when the Vietnam war was followed by an age of rising crime and our secular ideals becoming extreme and degenerating into activist cults, the public had good cause to be alarm. They responded by turning against "liberalism" and back to "conservatism." Ever since, Creationism, I.D., anti-abortion conentions have grown until now we even see Bible stories on the history and discovery channels!

And the trend continues also. The more we turn back, the worse things will be . . .

I'm not promoting integrating religion and science.

Edit: is your name "brow", "bro", or "bruff?"