Darkforbid
Well-Known Member
This type of rubbish
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
What Irks You Most About Atheists, Agnostics, And Non-Believers?
- Thread starter Skwim
- Start date
This type of rubbish
Liu
Well-Known Member
Dogmatic in the sense of being too convinced of their beliefs in how the world works.
Those I think of aren't very militant by your definition.
What Irks You Most About Atheists, Agnostics, And Non-Believers?
When they claim they are more rational and scientific than believers. I often see them as 'inside a small box' thinkers.
When they claim they are more rational and scientific than believers. I often see them as 'inside a small box' thinkers.
OK useful but can you please be a bit more specific?
ecco
Veteran Member
If by "comforting fictions" you mean beliefs in non-existent gods, yes, all atheists believe that.
I find it strange that you would refer to religious beliefs as "comforting fictions". Was that a Freudian slip?
Epic Beard Man
Bearded Philosopher
.
This isn't meant to get personal, ragging on your most detested atheist, agnostic, or non-believer, but to consider the most irksome general approaches and conduct they display.
Think in terms of, "They . . . ."
.
For me at least online wise its the pompous pretentious attitude much like theists. Especially atheists who study philosophy they are the most cancerous, and again this is speaking my experiences online. Offline I have atheist friends who like myself, keep their spiritual/non-spiritual convictions private. Although I mention God here a lot in my personal life I like to keep my spiritual convictions private but like theists, the whole "prove to me your sky daddy is real" crap is annoying. As a person who deals with the sciences unfortunately things that are involved with metaphysics cannot always be explained. When atheists ask me to prove stuff I sum it up like this:
When I was a child I experienced something....That something whatever it is but I'd like to call it divine providential experience, happened. The need to love, experience, and worship the Creator has always been in me. However my skeptical mind is often conflicted but like gravity no matter what I believe no matter much skepticism I have it draws me back. Therefore I cannot explain to you a belief through my experiences if I'm still trying to understand it myself that is why my truth is something relevant to me and should not be deductively explained.
The Reverend Bob
Fart Machine and Beastmaster
About religion? Sometimes, most of the time he is just being a gadfly and saying outrageous things to sell books to people who are gullible and don't know better. His arguments regarding eugenics? They are evil and morally indefensible
ecco
Veteran Member
That's a really nonsensical statement - on many levels.
What's "their, and our species"? Are you saying that atheists and theists are different species? Is that your level of understanding of nature?
Ignoring that, we are still left with your assertion that many of us have "an excessive faith in ... our species', ability to be consistently rational."
That's obviously not true. We would have some "faith ... in our species', ability to be consistently rational" if 90+% of people were atheists.
The Reverend Bob
Fart Machine and Beastmaster
No, the belief that life will someday be Star Trek
ecco
Veteran Member
In what way is it showing ignorance?
On the other hand, comparing gods to fairies is really not fair to the reputation of faries. Faries are kind to children and bring them joy, or money for their unneeded teeth.
Faries never horrifically drowned all the innocent little children and wooly lambs.
Last edited:
Very true.
Erebus
Well-Known Member
Okay so I'm going to have to cite Poe's law here because I'm genuinely not sure if you're being facetious!
Drowning innocent little children is absolutely in line with fairy folklore.
It really isn't.
Last edited:
ecco
Veteran Member
What is it about this "study" that impressed you?
Was it this...(my emphases)
“It suggests that religious individuals may cling to certain beliefs, especially those which seem at odds with analytic reasoning, because those beliefs resonate with their moral sentiments,” said PhD student Jared Friedman, a co-author of the study.
The majority of participants in the study identified as Christian or non-religious; Jewish, Buddhist, Hindu and Muslim participants also took part.
Do you have something else you would like to dazzle us with?
The Reverend Bob
Fart Machine and Beastmaster
The above is a good example of certain behaviors some atheists display that I dislike. I hate the facetious and glib attitudes they tend to take when discussing religion.
I think that you may eventually find out that you are projecting.
For all the attempt at making "New Atheism" a thing, there is really hardly any leadership among atheists. Because there is no need for any.
Once you consider how many of us exist, that is remarkable and hints at interesting things.
Darkforbid
Well-Known Member
ecco
Veteran Member
Well, dang. Live and learn. After reading your post, I did a little digging. Gees. Among other stuff, I came across this...
Fairy Scapegoats: A History of the Persecution of Changeling Children
Writing in 1960, the Dutch scholar Jacoba Hooykaas found child-stealing fairy or elf types were feared in Britain, Germany, France, the Netherlands, Moravia, Greece, Lithuania, Bohemia and Hungary, with a modern-day variant in Bali. In Celtic territories, fairies stole babies and children — especially boys, and especially those with blue eyes and fair hair — leaving fairy substitutes in their place. Having identified such a switch, people did everything they could to make the fairies reverse it. To the end of the nineteenth century, and probably later, such children were ritually abused by their own parents to this end. Immersed in rivers or placed at the margin of coastal tides, stood on hot coals or hung over fires, exposed in freezing weather, bathed in poisonous foxglove essence, beaten, threatened and subjected to forms of exorcism, these babies and children sometimes survived, sometimes not.
Writing in 1960, the Dutch scholar Jacoba Hooykaas found child-stealing fairy or elf types were feared in Britain, Germany, France, the Netherlands, Moravia, Greece, Lithuania, Bohemia and Hungary, with a modern-day variant in Bali. In Celtic territories, fairies stole babies and children — especially boys, and especially those with blue eyes and fair hair — leaving fairy substitutes in their place. Having identified such a switch, people did everything they could to make the fairies reverse it. To the end of the nineteenth century, and probably later, such children were ritually abused by their own parents to this end. Immersed in rivers or placed at the margin of coastal tides, stood on hot coals or hung over fires, exposed in freezing weather, bathed in poisonous foxglove essence, beaten, threatened and subjected to forms of exorcism, these babies and children sometimes survived, sometimes not.
Truly frightening. I guess my concepts of Faries came from the likes of Disney and the Cottingley Faries.
Thanks for the info.
Still, Faries never horrifically drowned all the innocent little children and wooly lambs.
The Reverend Bob
Fart Machine and Beastmaster
Also cowardly microaggressions also tend to be annoying