Foolish duplicity detected:

[KelseyR]

It's my understanding that theists paint atheists as being the fools, and there are certainly textual passages that label every non-believer as such. Apart from belief versus non-belief I think the major separation issue is the valuing of reason, and herein lies a problem someone can perhaps resolve:

Theists will regularly corrupt reason in order to support their claims.
They also revile reason in order to fraudulently raise God over Man.

I don't care for this duplicity; this blowing hot and cold over one topic. And sorry if this all seems too defensive. Some things just need to be said, no matter how painful.

 

[ChristineM]

It's my understanding that theists paint atheists as being the fools, and there are certainly textual passages that label every non-believer as such. Apart from belief versus non-belief I think the major separation issue is the valuing of reason, and herein lies a problem someone can perhaps resolve:

Theists will regularly corrupt reason in order to support absurd claims.
They also revile reason in order to fraudulently raise God above Man.

I don't care for this duplicity; this blowing hot and cold over one topic.

Atheism : disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.

Anything else is misrepresentation and there are an awful lot of theists who misrepresent atheism.

 

[KelseyR]

Atheism : disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.

Anything else is misrepresentation and there are an awful lot of theists who misrepresent atheism.

Yes, but I don't think this resolves anything regarding the post.

 

[ChristineM]

Yes, but I don't think this resolves anything regarding the post.

How will anything resolve deliberate ignorance and lying for their god?

 

[David T]

It's my understanding that theists paint atheists as being the fools, and there are certainly textual passages that label every non-believer as such. Apart from belief versus non-belief I think the major separation issue is the valuing of reason, and herein lies a problem someone can perhaps resolve:

Theists will regularly corrupt reason in order to support their claims.
They also revile reason in order to fraudulently raise God over Man.

I don't care for this duplicity; this blowing hot and cold over one topic. And sorry if this all seems too defensive. Some things just need to be said, no matter how painful.

Of course atheists are fools. Theists are their expert on the topic!

 

[Dan From Smithville]

It's my understanding that theists paint atheists as being the fools, and there are certainly textual passages that label every non-believer as such. Apart from belief versus non-belief I think the major separation issue is the valuing of reason, and herein lies a problem someone can perhaps resolve:

Theists will regularly corrupt reason in order to support their claims.
They also revile reason in order to fraudulently raise God over Man.

I don't care for this duplicity; this blowing hot and cold over one topic. And sorry if this all seems too defensive. Some things just need to be said, no matter how painful.

I agree. I do not like that sort of duplicity either.

 

[Deeje]

It's my understanding that theists paint atheists as being the fools, and there are certainly textual passages that label every non-believer as such. Apart from belief versus non-belief I think the major separation issue is the valuing of reason, and herein lies a problem someone can perhaps resolve:

Theists will regularly corrupt reason in order to support their claims.
They also revile reason in order to fraudulently raise God over Man.

I don't care for this duplicity; this blowing hot and cold over one topic. And sorry if this all seems too defensive. Some things just need to be said, no matter how painful.

Perhaps we need to question our human ability to reason in the first place...after all, our reasoning ability on any topic is based on our knowledge of it. How much do we really know about any of it....as opposed to what we assume? This I believe applies equally in both camps.

If our knowledge is not soundly based, then our reasoning will be flawed. We tend to place science as the standard by which we judge God. But science is not exactly accurate much of the time. It comes to conclusions based on available knowledge and educated guessing in many cases. What is an established 'fact' today, may be superceded tomorrow. Facts don't change, but supposition does. How much of the science that is presented to the public (taught to children in school from a young age) is actual fact?

As I see it, people have flawed reasoning ability in both camps.
Those who think they know what the Bible teaches, base their understanding on what their "experts" (scholars) proffer, but on further investigation, demonstrate that they know very little about God and his purpose in our being here. Dogmatic beliefs fly in the face of what science knows, so it makes them look silly....uneducated.

Those who have ditched God, for science, (believing that science has successfully eliminated all need for him) are also basing their position on the flawed reasoning of others.

This is a very important issue because our future life is at stake. We are all stuck in this world for now, and depending upon what we feel in our own heart (sometimes conflicting with what is in our heads) we can either put God away...or we can't. That nagging doubt just won't go away.

Those who can accept that we are just an accident of nature and have no purpose here.....that this life is all there is....will not be disappointed. This life is all there will ever be for them. They will get what they expect.

However, those who have a spiritual nature, will fight to reconcile their spirituality with either cold science, Biblical Christianity, or some other expression of faith. It is spiritually minded people who have the greatest scope for choice. Their choice will determine their future according to the Bible. (which is what Independ on)

So how do we solve this dilemma? How do we find the diamond in the huge pile of broken glass? Is it even there?

From the Bible's viewpoint the situation is clear.

John 6:65...
Jesus said...."no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.” So we do not choose God as much as he chooses us, based on what he sees in us. Sometimes that is not just who we are now, but the potential of what we could become. The apostle Paul was a classic example of that.

Most spiritually minded people are looking for a religion (mode of worship) that suits them, rather than looking for a way to serve God that aligns with his will, rather than their own. He will never comply with our will....we must comply with his.

So those who choose their own way are also covered in the Bible....people often point to miracles as proof that God's spirit is with them....is that true?

When Jesus comes to judge the world, this is what the Bible says he confronts....from those who are sure that they are Christians in good standing...

Matthew 7:21-23...
"Not everyone saying to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the Kingdom of the heavens, but only the one doing the will of my Father who is in the heavens will. 22 Many will say to me in that day: ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and expel demons in your name, and perform many powerful works in your name?’ 23 And then I will declare to them: ‘I never knew you! Get away from me, you workers of lawlessness!"

"Lawlessness"? How can "Christians" be "workers of lawlessness"?

2 Thessalonians 2:9-12....
"But the lawless one’s presence is by the operation of Satan with every powerful work and lying signs and wonders 10 and every unrighteous deception for those who are perishing, as a retribution because they did not accept the love of the truth in order that they might be saved. 11 That is why God lets a deluding influence mislead them so that they may come to believe the lie, 12 in order that they all may be judged because they did not believe the truth but took pleasure in unrighteousness."

See...God allows people to believe lies if that is their wish.......it's a situation where it's not surprising that Jesus could say that "few" are actually on the road to life. (Matthew 7:13-14)

We all have choices.....but as I see it....not the way we might imagine.

 

[Dawnofhope]

It's my understanding that theists paint atheists as being the fools, and there are certainly textual passages that label every non-believer as such. Apart from belief versus non-belief I think the major separation issue is the valuing of reason, and herein lies a problem someone can perhaps resolve:

Theists will regularly corrupt reason in order to support their claims.
They also revile reason in order to fraudulently raise God over Man.

I don't care for this duplicity; this blowing hot and cold over one topic. And sorry if this all seems too defensive. Some things just need to be said, no matter how painful.

As a theist, I feel very comfortable and respectful of atheists who are amongst some of my best friends. With competing and contradictory claims as to what is true, with one religion competing against another atheism is an attractive option for one who values reason. Its important to recognise that many theists are not anti-atheists, just as many atheists are not anti-theist. Working towards better understanding different points of view is far more important than efforts to prove who is right and who is wrong.

 

[usfan]

It's my understanding that theists paint atheists as being the fools, and there are certainly textual passages that label every non-believer as such. Apart from belief versus non-belief I think the major separation issue is the valuing of reason, and herein lies a problem someone can perhaps resolve:

Theists will regularly corrupt reason in order to support their claims.
They also revile reason in order to fraudulently raise God over Man.

I don't care for this duplicity; this blowing hot and cold over one topic. And sorry if this all seems too defensive. Some things just need to be said, no matter how painful.

Imo, it is the phony, 'Atheists vs Christians!' flame war, that is so prevelant in the public discourse. It is mostly intolerance (from either side) and is old fashioned bigotry.. religious intolerance.

Blaming, 'They started it!' only fans the flames, and it makes it hard to have civil philosophical discussians, when the knee jerk group loyalty thing kicks in.

Respectful discourse, toward the TOPIC, not the poster, would go a long ways in opening communication channels.

We should have a great fewer disputes in the world if words were taken for what they are, the signs of our ideas only, and not for things themselves. ~John Locke

 

[Enoch07]

Apart from belief versus non-belief I think the major separation issue is the valuing of reason,

Everyone abuses reasoning. Theist, atheist, deists, whatevists, makes no difference. They use it when it supports their claim, and deny it when it counters their claim. It's not that any particular one "ists" is better than the other, or to blame. It's the human nature behind the "ists" is where the problem lies.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Perhaps we need to question our human ability to reason in the first place...after all, our reasoning ability on any topic is based on our knowledge of it. How much do we really know about any of it....as opposed to what we assume? This I believe applies equally in both camps.

If our knowledge is not soundly based, then our reasoning will be flawed. We tend to place science as the standard by which we judge God. But science is not exactly accurate much of the time. It comes to conclusions based on available knowledge and educated guessing in many cases. What is an established 'fact' today, may be superceded tomorrow. Facts don't change, but supposition does. How much of the science that is presented to the public (taught to children in school from a young age) is actual fact?

As I see it, people have flawed reasoning ability in both camps.
Those who think they know what the Bible teaches, base their understanding on what their "experts" (scholars) proffer, but on further investigation, demonstrate that they know very little about God and his purpose in our being here. Dogmatic beliefs fly in the face of what science knows, so it makes them look silly....uneducated.

Those who have ditched God, for science, (believing that science has successfully eliminated all need for him) are also basing their position on the flawed reasoning of others.

This is a very important issue because our future life is at stake. We are all stuck in this world for now, and depending upon what we feel in our own heart (sometimes conflicting with what is in our heads) we can either put God away...or we can't. That nagging doubt just won't go away.

Those who can accept that we are just an accident of nature and have no purpose here.....that this life is all there is....will not be disappointed. This life is all there will ever be for them. They will get what they expect.

However, those who have a spiritual nature, will fight to reconcile their spirituality with either cold science, Biblical Christianity, or some other expression of faith. It is spiritually minded people who have the greatest scope for choice. Their choice will determine their future according to the Bible. (which is what Independ on)

So how do we solve this dilemma? How do we find the diamond in the huge pile of broken glass? Is it even there?

From the Bible's viewpoint the situation is clear.

John 6:65...
Jesus said...."no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.” So we do not choose God as much as he chooses us, based on what he sees in us. Sometimes that is not just who we are now, but the potential of what we could become. The apostle Paul was a classic example of that.

Most spiritually minded people are looking for a religion (mode of worship) that suits them, rather than looking for a way to serve God that aligns with his will, rather than their own. He will never comply with our will....we must comply with his.

So those who choose their own way are also covered in the Bible....people often point to miracles as proof that God's spirit is with them....is that true?

When Jesus comes to judge the world, this is what the Bible says he confronts....from those who are sure that they are Christians in good standing...

Matthew 7:21-23...
"Not everyone saying to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the Kingdom of the heavens, but only the one doing the will of my Father who is in the heavens will. 22 Many will say to me in that day: ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and expel demons in your name, and perform many powerful works in your name?’ 23 And then I will declare to them: ‘I never knew you! Get away from me, you workers of lawlessness!"

"Lawlessness"? How can "Christians" be "workers of lawlessness"?

2 Thessalonians 2:9-12....
"But the lawless one’s presence is by the operation of Satan with every powerful work and lying signs and wonders 10 and every unrighteous deception for those who are perishing, as a retribution because they did not accept the love of the truth in order that they might be saved. 11 That is why God lets a deluding influence mislead them so that they may come to believe the lie, 12 in order that they all may be judged because they did not believe the truth but took pleasure in unrighteousness."

See...God allows people to believe lies if that is their wish.......it's a situation where it's not surprising that Jesus could say that "few" are actually on the road to life. (Matthew 7:13-14)

We all have choices.....but as I see it....not the way we might imagine.

 

[Deeje]

I hope you understand that the "Christians" who did that were not "Christians" at all. Slavery in Israel was never like that. To punish a slave for failing in his duty was an expectation. The whole reason for being a slave in those times was not because you were kidnapped in a foreign country and into forced labor...that was actually forbidden in Israel.

The part that the clergy played in the violent institution of slavery in America's south was a disgusting defection from the teachings of Christ. The nations of Christendom kidnapped many thousands of Africans, took them far from their own lands, and for centuries brutalized them physically and mentally as slaves. Relatively few of the clergy actively opposed it. Some of them even claimed that it was God’s will. (See Matthew 7:12)

In Israel, you had to sell yourself (or rather your services) to pay a debt. A family head who had others to feed and care for could sell their child into slavery to help pay the debt. Not much different to anyone today sending their children out to work in order to supplement the family's income.

Please remember that a good whooping was even meted out to children in the good old US of A until a few short decades ago. Parents could and so could school teachers and principals. Today it is deemed "child abuse". Back then it was called "discipline".

For Christians, "slavery" was more like employment. Tell me how people today are not slaves to their employers.
In many countries, the slaves in Israel were treated better than many "workers" today.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

Everyone abuses reasoning. Theist, atheist, deists, whatevists, makes no difference. They use it when it supports their claim, and deny it when it counters their claim. It's not that any particular one "ists" is better than the other, or to blame. It's the human nature behind the "ists" is where the problem lies.

The nugget I got from her post, whether or not I'm creating a slight Straw Man, is this: "In cases where theists think poorly of atheists, it often has to do with flawed reason."

I'm not quite sure yet what would be the reason for an atheist disliking theists. You seemingly claim that vice versa is also true, but I won't be satisfied until I find some theist-disliking atheist and ask them.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

I hope you understand that the "Christians" who did that were not "Christians" at all. Slavery in Israel was never like that. .

I'm going to have to stop you right there---because you are not being honest.

Slavery in the bible? Comes in several versions-- if you were a Hebrew **man**? You had *some* rights-- none while a slave, of course.

If you were a Hebrew **woman**? You had *no* rights-- and you were never to be freed! You were a slave for life!

If you were not a Hebrew? You were a slave for life.

If you were a female, and a virgin, when the Hebrews invaded your country? You became a sex-slave to the men.

And it WAS slavery in every meaning of the word....

 

[Deeje]

I hope you understand that the "Christians" who did that were not "Christians" at all. Slavery in Israel was never like that. To punish a slave for failing in his duty was an expectation. The whole reason for being a slave in those times was not because you were kidnapped in a foreign country and into forced labor...that was actually forbidden in Israel.

The part that the clergy played in the violent institution of slavery in America's south was a disgusting defection from the teachings of Christ. The nations of Christendom kidnapped many thousands of Africans, took them far from their own lands, and for centuries brutalized them physically and mentally as slaves. Relatively few of the clergy actively opposed it. Some of them even claimed that it was God’s will. (See Matthew 7:12)

In Israel, you had to sell yourself (or rather your services) to pay a debt. A family head who had others to feed and care for could sell their child into slavery to help pay the debt. Not much different to anyone today sending their children out to work in order to supplement the family's income.

Please remember that a good whooping was even meted out to children in the good old US of A until a few short decades ago. Parents could and so could school teachers and principals. Today it is deemed "child abuse". Back then it was called "discipline".

For Christians, "slavery" was more like employment. Tell me how people today are not slaves to their employers.
In many countries, the slaves in Israel were treated better than many "workers" today.

Here is some information on the topic if you're interested....

Did God Condone the Slave Trade? — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

Escape From Slavery—Then and Now — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

 

[Enoch07]

I'm not quite sure yet what would be the reason for an atheist disliking theists. You seemingly claim that vice versa is also true, but I won't be satisfied until I find some theist-disliking atheist and ask them.

Atheist are just as capable of being bigots as anyone else. Again it's not the "ists" that is the problem though. It's the human nature behind the "ists" that is responsible for the bigotry. I coined a term about 10 years ago for these bigot atheist by calling them militant atheist. Which kind stuck. But it's not a term that is a generalization of all atheist. It is targeted at specific atheist that would end religion if given the opportunity. Which is what partially makes them bigots, that an inflated ego, and a misguided since of superiority. Of which there is at least 5 militant atheist here on RF. Due to the rules I cannot oust them publicly, but they are easy enough to spot.

Regular old atheist I'm cool with. They are allowed to not believe in whatever they want just as religious people should be allowed free worship (long as no physical harm blah blah blah).

 

[Quagmire]

It's my understanding that theists paint atheists as being the fools, and there are certainly textual passages that label every non-believer as such. Apart from belief versus non-belief I think the major separation issue is the valuing of reason, and herein lies a problem someone can perhaps resolve:

Theists will regularly corrupt reason in order to support their claims.
They also revile reason in order to fraudulently raise God over Man.

I don't care for this duplicity; this blowing hot and cold over one topic. And sorry if this all seems too defensive. Some things just need to be said, no matter how painful.

It's my understanding that people who make vague generalizations should probably pay attention when someone suggests that they're acting foolishly.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I hope you understand that the "Christians" who did that were not "Christians" at all. Slavery in Israel was never like that. To punish a slave for failing in his duty was an expectation. The whole reason for being a slave in those times was not because you were kidnapped in a foreign country and into forced labor...that was actually forbidden in Israel.

The part that the clergy played in the violent institution of slavery in America's south was a disgusting defection from the teachings of Christ. The nations of Christendom kidnapped many thousands of Africans, took them far from their own lands, and for centuries brutalized them physically and mentally as slaves. Relatively few of the clergy actively opposed it. Some of them even claimed that it was God’s will. (See Matthew 7:12)

In Israel, you had to sell yourself (or rather your services) to pay a debt. A family head who had others to feed and care for could sell their child into slavery to help pay the debt. Not much different to anyone today sending their children out to work in order to supplement the family's income.

Please remember that a good whooping was even meted out to children in the good old US of A until a few short decades ago. Parents could and so could school teachers and principals. Today it is deemed "child abuse". Back then it was called "discipline".

For Christians, "slavery" was more like employment. Tell me how people today are not slaves to their employers.
In many countries, the slaves in Israel were treated better than many "workers" today.

You really should read the Bible. Slavery in the Bible was just as bad as that in the meme.

 

[Left Coast]

I hope you understand that the "Christians" who did that were not "Christians" at all. Slavery in Israel was never like that. To punish a slave for failing in his duty was an expectation. The whole reason for being a slave in those times was not because you were kidnapped in a foreign country and into forced labor...that was actually forbidden in Israel.

Totally untrue. At Jehovah's command, Israelites were explicitly allowed to take slaves from foreign people they conquered:

“If you approach a city to fight against it, you should also announce to it terms of peace. If it gives a peaceful answer to you and opens up to you, all the people found there will become yours for forced labor, and they will serve you. But if it refuses to make peace with you and instead goes to war with you, you should besiege it, and Jehovah your God will certainly give it into your hand, and you must strike down every male in it with the sword. However, the women, the children, the livestock, and everything that is in the city, all its spoil, you may plunder for yourself, and you will eat the spoil of your enemies, which Jehovah your God has given to you." Deut. 20:10-14

"Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you, from them you may buy a male or a female slave. Also from the sons of the foreign settlers who are residing with you, from them and from their families that are born to them in your land you may buy slaves, and they will become your possession. You may pass them on as an inheritance to your sons after you to inherit as a permanent possession." (Lev. 25:44-46)

Is it ever morally acceptable to own another person as property?

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Here is some information on the topic if you're interested....

Did God Condone the Slave Trade? — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

Escape From Slavery—Then and Now — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

No thanks-- I can read the bible for myself. I do not need someone "explaining" why the bible does not say what it REALLY says, but the exact opposite of what is written.

Pass.