Exposing Atheistic Myths

[Keith&Co.]

A lot of Christianity is a Jesus cult. Utter adoration and worship.

Since when was protestantism a Jesus cult? Those folk worship Paul.

Yes, but Paul told them they're Jesusists. So they like to think they're Jesusists.

 

[skepticalbip]

But Pauline Jesusists.

 

[Keith&Co.]

But Pauline Jesusists.

Sure. But many of these are people who insist it's not a religion, anyway. It's a 'relationship with Paul Christ.'

 

[steve_bank]

I have always said it should be called Paulism. It was Paul who got rid of Jewish requitements like circumcison and kosher diet.

A man is a Jew not by circumcision but by heart or something like that.

Christianity is a cult, and a cult that worships pain and suffering in the name of Jesus. 'The Blood' is a central theme in Christianity. Opus Dei the secretive ultra conservative RCC group wear a spiked collar around the the thigh.

Augustine said a little self flagellation is good for the soul. One of the recent popes had an apparatus for self abuse.

 

[ideologyhunter]

Agreeing with posts 280 - 284 (and whoever wrote earlier posts that I don't have time to scan.) Assuming you could drag Jesus back from the dead, can you imagine what he'd say about the New Testament, especially the letters that can be reasonably attributed to Paul. Especially Romans. "You know, I aspired to be a rabbi, and maybe a prophet, and just maybe assume the role of Messiah. But did you guys notice that I was Jewish and didn't join any sect that broke away from Judaism? So, yeah, I didn't eat pig and was circumcised and issued orders to preach only to Jews and wanted to restore the 12 tribes and observed the high holy days, but, whatever, you can leave all that behind. Also, you folks who think my mom still has my ear and can sway me, you did read how I dissed her in public, in front of her friends, did you not? I mean, my mom was not the boss of me. And holy? Floating up into heaven or whatever? Somehow I doubt it. She was something of a noodge, y'know. And, just saying, our house was small and the rooms were close together. That stuff about her staying immaculate...not so much."

 

[steve_bank]

Anti Jewish and hate of Jews by white Christians always seems like a cognitive disconnect. Statues and paintings of a tall white Jesus with flowing blonde hair and blue eyes. I can still picture the beg cross and Jesus in the church I went to as a kid.

Reality more like short dark black haired Arab-Palestinians today. People were shorter from nutrition.



He was a Jew who never renounced Judaism, in fact he was more of a Jewish reformer warning Jews return to traditional values and get rid of hypocrisy or else Israel faces destruction.

A classic Jewish prophet.

Reading into the gospels he was probably challenging a corr[t Jerusalem elite in cahoots with Romans. From the tale he was destined from the start to end badly. Imagine a Muslim reformer against the corrupt elate in Saudi Arabia. Such people were beheaded at lest as late as the 90s. In Iran such a religious reformer calling out corruption and hypocrisy would disappear in the prisons.

The gospels make sense in the light of the geopolitics of the day.

 

[skepticalbip]

.....

Statues and paintings of a tall white Jesus with flowing blonde hair and blue eyes. I can still picture the beg cross and Jesus in the church I went to as a kid.

The depictions of Jesus are recruiting tools. For a European audience, Jesus is depicted as European, for an African audience he is depicted as African, and for an Oriental audience he is depicted as Oriental.

Reality more like short dark black haired Arab-Palestinians today. People were shorter from nutrition.

Agreed. My guess is that Jesus looked more like Yasser Arafat than any of the current depictions.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

I want a Jesus with tentacles.

 

[Keith&Co.]

"Save me, Hentai Jesus, save me! Don't, you know touch me, but..."

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

That is where you have it wrong. Science has never proven that no God is required. They have merely said, "We can't tell if God exists." There's a subtle difference, Keith. It is my belief that none of this stuff you guys study would even be possible without God. Science just assume it's possible without God. But, assumptions are not proof. They are beliefs, just like my belief.

If God can't be demonstrated as having any effect over what we'd expect without God, what use is God? Your God is either non-existent or so silent and inconsequential that he may as well not exist.

 

[James Brown]

The first problem with negative theology is that, if God is described solely in terms of negation,
it is impossible to distinguish him from non-existence—“any Being which had to be characterized
entirely in negations would, surely, not be discernible from no Being at all.” God is not matter;
neither is non-existence. God does not have limitations; neither does non-existence. God is not
visible; neither is non-existence. God does not change; neither does non-existence. God cannot be
described; neither can non-existence. And so on down the list of negative predicates. If the theist
wishes to distinguish his belief in God from the belief in nothing at all, he must give some positive
substance to the concept of God

==George H. Smith, Atheism: The Case Against God

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

We are 30 pages in. Where are these atheist myths we were promised? I feel ripped off. I thought this would be a solid debunking of at least a dozen of them by the 30 page mark.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

That is where you have it wrong. Science has never proven that no God is required. They have merely said, "We can't tell if God exists." There's a subtle difference, Keith. It is my belief that none of this stuff you guys study would even be possible without God. Science just assume it's possible without God. But, assumptions are not proof. They are beliefs, just like my belief.

If God can't be demonstrated as having any effect over what we'd expect without God, what use is God? Your God is either non-existent or so silent and inconsequential that he may as well not exist.

- god > god

 

[Keith&Co.]

We are 30 pages in. Where are these atheist myths we were promised? I feel ripped off. I thought this would be a solid debunking of at least a dozen of them by the 30 page mark.

Sadly, Halfie kniws less about atheist beliefs than he knows about Christains, science, or what Jesus is said to have said when he said stuff.

 

[Keith&Co.]

... snip ...

Very heavy stuff.

That was hardly heavy. But then some people mistake feel good fluff for meaningful thoughts.

These types of responses are stupid!

If what I said is hardly heavy, then surely you should've had no problem refuting it.

Since you didn't, your comment was fluff.

So, Halfie, are you willing to stand by this claim?

If we post a comment on your claims, and you don't refute it, we can dismiss your posts as 'fluff?'

Like, if we point out five or six problems with your premise and you only respond to one niggling little detail, that's ignorable 'fluff' because you didn't respond to the actual problems? We can say your post is stupid?

 

[Worldtraveller]

So, the correct title for this thread, should have been, "Exposing the dumb ideas I have about atheists"

Can we get a mod to fix it?

 

[Half-Life]

These types of responses are stupid!

If what I said is hardly heavy, then surely you should've had no problem refuting it.

Since you didn't, your comment was fluff.

So, Halfie, are you willing to stand by this claim?

If we post a comment on your claims, and you don't refute it, we can dismiss your posts as 'fluff?'

Like, if we point out five or six problems with your premise and you only respond to one niggling little detail, that's ignorable 'fluff' because you didn't respond to the actual problems? We can say your post is stupid?

I've refuted everything, Keith. The problem is there's so many word salad ways to write, "Nuh-uh!" at me and make yourself think you are smart.

For example, atheists have agreed that it is IMPOSSIBLE to prove God doesn't exist. So, since it's impossible to prove God does not exist, atheism is based on faith, not facts, not logic, not reason, just pure and simple faith.

 

[Atheos]

Not believing in Santa Claus is based on faith, not facts, not logic, not reason, just pure and simple faith.

Not believing in Vampires is based on faith, not facts, not logic, not reason, just pure and simple faith.

Not believing in Bigfoot is based on faith, not facts, not logic, not reason, just pure and simple faith.

Not believing in Leprechauns is based on faith, not facts, not logic, not reason, just pure and simple faith.

Not believing in Zeus is based on faith, not facts, not logic, not reason, just pure and simple faith.

Not believing a perfectly formed china teapot is in orbit somewhere between the Earth and Mars is based on faith, not facts, not logic, not reason, just pure and simple faith.

Not believing Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon by uttering words given one at a time to him from God himself before the golden plates containing their original Reformed Egyptian writing were miraculously spirited away into Heaven is based on faith, not facts, not logic, not reason, just pure and simple faith.

This is fun! Everybody can play!

 

[skepticalbip]

These types of responses are stupid!

If what I said is hardly heavy, then surely you should've had no problem refuting it.

Since you didn't, your comment was fluff.

So, Halfie, are you willing to stand by this claim?

If we post a comment on your claims, and you don't refute it, we can dismiss your posts as 'fluff?'

Like, if we point out five or six problems with your premise and you only respond to one niggling little detail, that's ignorable 'fluff' because you didn't respond to the actual problems? We can say your post is stupid?

I've refuted everything, Keith. The problem is there's so many word salad ways to write, "Nuh-uh!" at me and make yourself think you are smart.

For example, atheists have agreed that it is IMPOSSIBLE to prove God doesn't exist. So, since it's impossible to prove God does not exist, atheism is based on faith, not facts, not logic, not reason, just pure and simple faith.

You seem to be having trouble with the English language. It does not take faith to not believe something for which there is no reason to believe. I don't believe that the story of Little Red Riding Hood is a narrative of real people and real events. This isn't faith. It is a lack of belief even though I was told the story many times by authority figures. Why a lack of belief? Because there is no logical reason to think it is true.

ETA:
I should have read the post after yours. Atheos pointed out your twisting of the English language much better than I did. Reading a little further would have saved me the trouble.

 

[Half-Life]

I've refuted everything, Keith. The problem is there's so many word salad ways to write, "Nuh-uh!" at me and make yourself think you are smart.

For example, atheists have agreed that it is IMPOSSIBLE to prove God doesn't exist. So, since it's impossible to prove God does not exist, atheism is based on faith, not facts, not logic, not reason, just pure and simple faith.

You seem to be having trouble with the English language. It does not take faith to not believe something for which there is no reason to believe. I don't believe that the story of Little Red Riding Hood is a narrative of real people and real events. This isn't faith. It is a lack of belief even though I was told the story many times by authority figures. Why a lack of belief? Because there is no logical reason to think it is true.

ETA:
I should have read the post after yours. Atheos pointed out your twisting of the English language much better than I did. Reading a little further would have saved me the trouble.

Everyone who says stuff like this usually always says, "Aliens might exist. I'm not saying they don't." So, why is it OK to leave the possibility open for aliens, but not God? There's no evidence for aliens, right? So why not say, "Aliens don't exist" like you do about God?

Hmmmmmmmm