Posted on 12/18/2004 9:17:33 PM PST by CHARLITE
First, I have to confess that I never got that line about how "love is to never have to say you're sorry." I'm still married to the same woman I fell in love with when I was a teenager and if I hadn't learned early on to accept blame for mistakes, bad moods or stupid remarks, I think my rump would long ago been found sitting at the end of a skid mark between the front door and the curb. I've also received a few apologies in my life and always regarded them as thoughtful, considerate, kind and selfless.
Atheism, on the other hand, is a study in egocentricity and self-absorption. Heck, a devout atheist assumes the posture of being the highest form of intelligent life in the universe. No Creator to thank for inalienable rights nor for any other endowment - heck, not even creation. And no need to say please to for daily bread, forgiveness or the mental alertness to come up with the winning answer to a Jeopardy question.
The real danger in atheism is that at its core, it seeks to turn the clock back to a time prior to the Age of Reason. One of the fundamentals of rationality is the premise that it is not possible to prove a negative. Where a person of faith might say, "God only knows" and an agnostic can say "I don't know" the devout atheist doesn't hesitate to say, "I know what is NOT out there anywhere in the vast universe and what did NOT happen billions of years ago."
Religious Americans have long taken the "you go to your church and I'll go to mine" approach to religious tolerance, but atheists can NOT tolerate religion. In their own minds they are already at the top of the food chain and hold as self-evident that they know it all. And should they have any crisis of faith, a good shrink, a plastic surgeon and a pocket full of pills will suffice to get them past the moment.
Faithless faith and devout belief in disbelief aren't very satisfying as creative creeds. Nihilism is no foundation on which to build anything, hence the prerequisite destruction of what all others have accomplished.
Thank God, the atheists are losing and will lose. Constitutional casuistry is based on shifting sands.
Vox Populi, Vox Dei.
>>Atheism is to Never Have to Say Please or Thank You
>I'm an atheist and I use these words frequently. I don't
>think there is anything wrong with taking the time to be
>conscious of and thankful for our blessings. In fact that
>is a good thing. But the concept of a "creator" who is not
>part of the physical universe does not seem necessary to
>me. There is just no evidence for this. And the idea that a
> creator pays attention to our individual concerns or is
>listening to our thanks seems even more unfounded. I'll
>admit that it might be advantageous if this were not true,
>but you can't just make stuff up to be convenient.
http://shop4.gospelcom.net/epages/AIGUS.storefront/en/product/10-2-086
Features thousands of quotes by atheists on how bad the evidence is for big-bang cosmology, evolution, etc... The unified front on the part of science with regard to our origins is pure agenda. It even has quotes by atheists on the harmful effects of atheism on society.
>>The real danger in atheism is that at its core, it seeks
>>to turn the clock back to a time prior to the Age of
>>Reason.
>Isn't this backwards?
No sir. The list of Bible believing scientists is long and distinguished. Isaac Newton for instance studied the Bible daily.
>4 billion religions on earth and yours is the only one
>allowed...
But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
Matthew 5:44
The bottom line on the Bible, is that it says what happens thousands of years before it happens. Please see the following link.
http://www.yfiles.com/y3nf.html
Jesus Christ loves you.
>as long as those beliefs don't lead their holders to do harm
>to those who don't share their beliefs.
40 million aborted babies would agree.
I agree with you on that.
>The holocaust history convinced me that religious
>intolerance breeds evil. Start with 1 minority group and
>expand outward.
Hitler targeted the Church for subversion. Only with an impotent Church could he rule Germany unhindered.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=26030
I'm an atheist, and I certainly don't 'have it in' for christians. If you have faith - good for you. I hope you are right. At the same time, I don't. Live and let live, etc.
So does the Easter Bunny.
Intolerant, petty, proselytizing A**'s like this one give "religion" a bad name!
Perhaps he longs for the days of Torquemada and a state enforced religion?
Perhaps he can move to the Theocracy of his choice?
There are plenty of them around, oh, but none structured EXACTLY as HE believes, and none announcing that HE will become the new supreme leader?
Too bad.
I do my best to hold all religions in equal contempt (I do have to try harder with a few than with most others, guess which if you like), and refuse to dignify the self serving circular logic of the " but Atheism IS a religion" non-sense by being so foolish as to argue with it.
Anyone demanding that discussion is not open to real exchange of viewpoint, they are CERTAIN beyond any logic that their FAITH is all the "PROOF" that anyone should ever need.
I do not proselytize atheism, but do respond to attacks such as this one.
The right to practice religion freely MUST also be the right to be FREE FROM religion, if not it is nothing more than a cover for instating de-facto state supported religion.
I do recall that we are currently engaged in a world-wide war against religious fanatics who cannot abide anyone who does not subscribe to their exact belief's.
Holy-Joe's on a self appointed mission, like this one, are the main reason I want our populace to remain well armed, history shows them to be more dangerous to liberty than foreign government agents.
Politicians come and go, but zealots and self anointed prophets seem to be an eternal nuisance!
... and therefore that makes you "holier than thou" I guess.
... I regret if anyone here feels slighted by sanctimony ...
no, just sactimonious self righteousness, which is all too common among the "I like to use my version of Christianity as a weapon of control" types.
Merry Christmas to you too.
my beef with say pro-abort or pro-homosexual Prods like Disciples of Christ or UCC or some Catholics is about politics and ideology (morality based admittedly) but not doctrine per se.
I'm no doctrinaire.
Likewise, my beef with their pacifism is also more political than religious.
I do think Christianity has become too ecumenical.
Oddly, my own morality is more based in logical sense of right and wrong. Like support for Israel or opposing infanticide. I don't need the Bible to know that. I feel it innately.
>I respectfully disagree with this 100%. As a person very
>knowledgeable about the methodology of science and more
>specifically about cosmology and evolution, I know that the
>scientific evidence on this is compelling and the
>conclusions as stated by cosmologists and evolutionary
>biologists are as justified as any about the law of
>gravity.
Fellow Freeper, that's the beauty of these quotes, they're by atheists who were deemed worthy of being published.
>Experience tells me that this will trigger a "discussion"
>about evolution vs. creationism that results in nobody
>budging from their predetermined positions,
Fellow lover of freedon, I won't discuss evolution vs. creationism here. I've had those fights. They are as predictable as you say.
>so I will just conclude with my opinion that the
>fundamental assumptions
>about how to find truth are different for a person
>following their spiritual faith and a person following
>scientific methodology, and the two are designed to be
>different.
Actually, God dares the atheist to test Him.
Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the LORD of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that [there shall] not [be room] enough [to receive it].
Malachi 3:10
If God does not exist, then giving 10% of your income to a Christian cause, will yield no blessing.
If God does exist, then giving 10% of your income to a Christian cause, will yield a BIG blessing.
The above quote is the only place in the Bible where God asks the skeptic to test Him. Usually, we as Christians are not supposed to treat God as a jackpot machine, as in, 'I prayed for X hours, and I demand you give me Y!!!'
Jesus Christ loves you.
Not "Oddly" at all, in my opinion, an innate sense of right-and-wrong controls every person's opinion. I also support a pro-life, pro-man/woman marriage, pro-Israel agenda (yes, I have a polical "agenda", LOL). What I abhor is the false sense narrow religious superiority that one finds too commonly in politics.
Refering back to the topic of this article for example, the inference that one has to be exclusively Christian in order to have a sense of common courtesy or have conservative political leanings ... that I absolutely do not buy.
Total hogwash.
This sort of warped belief has always amused me. Do such folks really believe that common courtesy, a moral sense, brotherly love, etc. can *only* come from fear of punishment or promise of reward in the afterlife? If so, what does it say about them? Are they really so empty that the only thing holding them back from being unfeeling, amoral hedonists is their worry that God is watching them? I can't think of any other reason they would presume that atheists and other sorts of non-believers must be that way... Anyone with their own sense of decency, apart from "or else you'll go to hell" motivations for good behavior, would surely realize that other people, even non-believers, would be likewise decent people for reasons beyond "God is watching".
You have it backwards.
It was atheists who have been going for "final solutions." Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot etc.
The "holy trinity" of atheism: Gas chambers, Gulags, and the Lao Gai camps.
Interesting - because I don't really see atheists as the victims. Some (not all) atheists have made it the mission of their lives to ceaselessly attack Christianity.
Maybe they're the ones seeking "a final solution".
Horse manure. The atheist only "assumes the posture" that he wasn't personally made by some supernatural being. There could still be, for example, "higher forms of intelligent life in the universe" somewhere in the form of advanced aliens or whatever.
For that matter, one could argue that theism itself is more of a "study in egocentricity and self-absorption", since it "assumes the posture" that humanity is the entire purpose of the universe's creation, and humanity is the sole focus of an infinitely powerful being. Now *that's* egocentricity...
The real danger in atheism is that at its core, it seeks to turn the clock back to a time prior to the Age of Reason.
*snicker*
One of the fundamentals of rationality is the premise that it is not possible to prove a negative. Where a person of faith might say, "God only knows" and an agnostic can say "I don't know" the devout atheist doesn't hesitate to say, "I know what is NOT out there anywhere in the vast universe and what did NOT happen billions of years ago."
This is an extremely poor and misleading characterization of the atheist position.
Religious Americans have long taken the "you go to your church and I'll go to mine" approach to religious tolerance, but atheists can NOT tolerate religion.
Again, horse manure. Most atheists tolerate religion just fine. In fact, they tolerate it a heck of a lot better than theists tolerate atheism, on the whole.
Sure, there are a few obnoxious atheists who are rabidly anti-religion, but as usual it's the loudmouths who get all the press. That still doesn't make them representative of atheists on the whole, however, just as Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton are hardly representative of religious leaders.
In their own minds they are already at the top of the food chain and hold as self-evident that they know it all.
Odd, that seems a better description of theists, who see themselves as the glory of creation (to whom all the animals and plants on the Earth were created for their personal use), and who hold as self-evident that they have absolute truth from on high.
And should they have any crisis of faith, a good shrink, a plastic surgeon and a pocket full of pills will suffice to get them past the moment.
This is just... bizarre. I don't know any atheists who look at life this way.
Faithless faith and devout belief in disbelief aren't very satisfying as creative creeds.
Atheists have neither "faithelss faith" nor "devout belief in disbelief". This author should really get to know some first before he spews any more of his presumptions and speculations.
Nihilism is no foundation on which to build anything,
Atheism is not synonymous with nihilism, sorry.
hence the prerequisite destruction of what all others have accomplished.
This guy *really* needs to get out more...
Really? Atheists, myself included, believe that we humans are merely animals that evolved over millions of years on this tiny, fragile planet that, as Carl Sagan said, floats like a "mote of dust" in this vast, vast universe. We don't look forward to any afterlife reward whatsoever but instead try to make the best of the time we have left, hopefully leaving the world a little nicer than we found it.
Christians, on the other hand, choose to ignore mountains of evidence supporting evolution and instead cling to the primitive belief that they're the special creations of a magical deity. They also believe that they're headed for eternal life in paradise where they will equipped with perfect bodies, reunited with loved ones and spend their time walking along streets of gold and living in jewel-encrusted mansions where everything will be happy and terrific and wonderful forever.
And then they lecture atheists about how "egocentric" and "self-absorbed" their worldview is? Incredible.
The list of Bible believing scientists is long and distinguished. Isaac Newton for instance studied the Bible daily.
I'm sure there are a lot of Christian scientists. I had one in my own family. But I would bet that there are relatively few that believe literally in Genesis. Newton did indeed study the Bible in his later life. But maybe he wasn't doing with it what you would expect. Also Newton was a very complicated guy. He had both rational and irrational aspects to his thinking.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.