• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Blasphemy Challenge

Rasmus said:
Do Atheists come around knocking on your door a lot, or why do you vew this is overly confrontational?
Click to expand...

No, Atheists don't come knocking on my door. Nor, in 38 years of life, have any Christians or denominations of other faiths. However, I accept that this does occasionally occur and when it does I imagine they are polite and non-threatening and, right or wrong, they believe in their message. It's not a message of negativity spawned by a bunch of self-righteous people who are so frustrated that others decline to benefit from their towering intellect that they invent ever more outrageous ways of proving they are right.

Rasmus said:
Also, where is the insult? What part about "I deny the existance of the holy spirit" is an insult to you?
Click to expand...

No part of that insults me but if you can't see where the problem lies then I'm afraid nothing I can say will make a difference.
 
fuelair said:
I prefer "Jesus Christ, Vampire Hunter" (a real film).
Click to expand...
A real EXCELLENT film. I mean, Jesus has to fend off an entire street gang of marauding atheists! You go, Jesus! Defeat those evil Day-walking Lesbian Vampires!
 
Merko said:
For a Swedish-speaking person, that quote is quite funny in writing, as "FAN" means "the Devil" (though it is pronounced differently). But it is perhaps the most common Swedish expletive.
Click to expand...

and "det far som fanden" would mean? (I believe it is spelled correctly, less marks my keyboard doesn't make,. but it's remembered from over 20 years ago.):)
 
KingMerv00 said:
I was just saying that when people are given an opportunity to deny Christianity, a disproportionate number of angry atheists will step forward.
Click to expand...

It's that anger that causes the problem; it's axiomatic that, in a contest, getting your opponent angry is a good tactic because he's not thinking if he's angry.

So, it seems we have an awful lot of non-thinking atheists and skeptics. I'm trying to puzzle out how this is a good thing.

BTW, regardless of how it looks, I am not defending religion. I am, however, arguing against its demonization by the nonbelievers. Near as I can tell, I come from almost exactly the same religious and educational background as whatzizname, who did "The God Who Wasn't There," and I think he went way over the top (especially when he visited his old school). There are some things I take on faith, although I do think an examination of the actual numbers will back me up. One of these is that there are more good people in the world than bad; another is that good and bad have absolutely nothing to do with demographics of any sort. One manifestation of this is that I believe the people who are out there at the Salvation Army pots are not there because they're in it for themselves, but because they figure it's the right thing to do. Likewise, I believe that most Christians are not "into" charity out of fear or because they're jockeying for a better seat at the eternal feast, but because it's in their job description as Christians; they do it because it's what they do. Yes, there are Christians who are charitable in order to stick it to their friends and acquaintances, but that's more of a human failing than exclusively Christian.
 
Who gives, who doesn't. Who's angry, who's not.

There is no group of people who has exclusive rights to charity or anger. I find all of this kind of amusing. I laugh at the Christians who are offended by people saying "I deny the existence of the Holy Spirit", I laugh at those who perceive this as a "demonization" of Christianity, and I laugh at the atheists who thinks this makes any kind of difference. Intolerance is present all around us.

The only difference I can see is that intolerance is part of the Christian rulebook, while atheists have no rulebook.
 
Beady said:
jjramsey said:
To continue on Eos' point, Christian charities tend to identify themselves as Christian, while nontheistic charities don't make atheism or secularism a part of their identities. The latter tend to identify themselves simply by the work they do, e.g. "Doctors Without Borders."
Click to expand...

I'm confused about the point you're trying to make. What's wrong with Christian charities identifying themselves as Christian charities?
Click to expand...

Nothing at all. My point was simply that nontheistic charities don't usually seem to think of themselves as nontheistic, so you aren't likely to find an explicitly atheist charity as a counterpart to a Christian charity.
 
juryjone said:
The only difference I can see is that intolerance is part of the Christian rulebook, while atheists have no rulebook.
Click to expand...
While it is handy not to have a rulebook, I am trying to find the intolerance in "love thy neighbor as thyself," unless one is predisposed not to tolerate one's self. :boggled:

DR
 
Darth Rotor said:
While it is handy not to have a rulebook, I am trying to find the intolerance in "love thy neighbor as thyself," unless one is predisposed not to tolerate one's self. :boggled:
Click to expand...

It's the type of "love" that assumes it is good and just that all those that take this challenge should burn in hell for all eternity.
 
juryjone said:
The only difference I can see is that intolerance is part of the Christian rulebook, while atheists have no rulebook.
Click to expand...

But we're not just atheists, here. "We" are supposed to be critical thinkers above and beyond everything else, and critical thinkers do have a rulebook.

The way I interpret those rules is that atheism derived from a reasoned examination of the facts is one thing, while atheism derived and rationalized from a personal dislike of religion is just as anethema to a critical thinker as is religion.

It seems to me that many/most of the atheists on this board do an awful lot of cherrypicking, rejecting offhand anything that might throw the even the least favorable light onto believers, whether as individuals or as a group. That is against the rules.
 
I'm sure this thread is hosting a very nice debate I don't feel like reading, but I just wanted to post that I have now uploaded my own blasphemy. My reason: blaspheming is fun. As is making videos while I'm home sick all day. As is getting free stuff, and as is making a bit of a statement that it's okay to not believe in a god. Anywho, here it is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEgb90e6mFA

Now I can finally be Time's Person of the Year, 2006. Hooray!
 
Darth Rotor said:
While it is handy not to have a rulebook, I am trying to find the intolerance in "love thy neighbor as thyself," unless one is predisposed not to tolerate one's self. :boggled:

DR
Click to expand...

Well, I've heard the argument that the only thing we should carry from the Bible is "love thy neighbor as thyself", but it seems that there's an awful lot of baggage associated with it. First of all, we can toss out the entire OT and most of the NT. Why have all this extraneous information, couched in directives regarding our behavior, if we can ignore everything except this central point? Do you really think god inspired all these words just so we could toss out something we didn't like? Doesn't sound like any other rulebook I know about.

Beady said:
But we're not just atheists, here. "We" are supposed to be critical thinkers above and beyond everything else, and critical thinkers do have a rulebook.
Click to expand...

Really? Where can I purchase this rulebook? If I'd known about this then I wouldn't have needed to struggle all those years on my own shedding my unreasoned belief in religion.

It seems to me that many/most of the atheists on this board do an awful lot of cherrypicking, rejecting offhand anything that might throw the even the least favorable light onto believers, whether as individuals or as a group. That is against the rules.
Click to expand...

Once again, I'd have to ask you for your source of rules, even though I agree that painting all believers as witless drones is counter-productive.
 
Really? Where can I purchase this rulebook? If I'd known about this then I wouldn't have needed to struggle all those years on my own shedding my unreasoned belief in religion.
Click to expand...

Right here. The rules it contains applies to arguments we make, as well as those made by others.

BTW, you don't even have to buy it; it can be included free with any other purchase.
 
Last edited:
Beady said:
Right here. The rules it contains applies to arguments we make, as well as those made by others.

BTW, you don't even have to buy it; it can be included free with any other purchase.
Click to expand...

Thank you. However, I contend that the "Baloney Detection Kit" is not a rulebook for atheists in the same manner or to the same extent that the Bible is for Christians. One can arrive at atheism without use of the BDK; one cannot arrive at Christianity without the Bible.

This is not to say that the BDK is not useful, or that critical thinking is the automatic gainsaying of religion. I'm just saying that atheists have no need to look to the BDK to guide them through their lives, whereas Christians, by definition, look to the Bible for their guideposts.
 
Darth Rotor said:
While it is handy not to have a rulebook, I am trying to find the intolerance in "love thy neighbor as thyself," unless one is predisposed not to tolerate one's self. :boggled:

DR
Click to expand...

Too bad that isn't thing only thing in that book.
 
Beady said:
1st, I'd like to see your numbers and their source. 2nd, I'd like to see some evidence of the causation. Assuming you are correct, there would be some force or effect acting to suppress nonreligious charitable giving in societies where religions are given free reign. Of course, it may be simply be that even nonbelievers prefer to give to religious charities where available, and that believers give to nonreligious charities where religious charities are not so readily available. There are any number of possible explanations, again assuming you're right.



I'm more concerned with domestic charities than international. Not that "our" need is greater, but I have limited resources and I know the people next door.



I distrust words such as "Often" and "Large." Do you and your wife have sex as little as twice a night, or as often as twice a night? And define "Large."
Click to expand...

Well, I specifically used the word 'correlation' as that is as far as it goes. I am nearly sure I got that info from "The End of Faith". However, it is loaned out at the moment, and I am in the middle of moving. Can anyone with a copy handy help me with that citation?

I think I used large fraction... in my mind that is approaching if not exceeding 1/2.
 
I'll be scarce for a a few days (at least). We close on our new house on Friday. We have been packing for a while, but the heat is really on now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom