It just points out certain inconsistencies in the bible. God as the earthquaker and angry punisher in one part of the bible, the same god as the merciful and self-sacrificing god (a.k.a. Jesus) in another part. Where is the misotheism?
2 Likes
Well if you cant see it, I guess its not there. Its just odd how angry atheists are getting over something they dont believe in. After all, as a theist Iâm not posting quotes from Camus and Nietzsche and then knocking them down as the archetypal straw man. I suppose what I am saying is that I just dont understand it.
If you can see it, point at it and explain it.
You are confusing your god with what theists are spreading.
You lost me here. What has this to do with the fact that the bible itself points to your your own god as the creator of earthquakes?
I think youâre just frustrated. Frustrated that atheists dare to not share your belief in supernatural stuff.
1 Like
Here we go. Here it comes. The adjectives, the suppositions.
I couldnt care less what you dont believe in, but lets not pretend that your âatheismâ doesnt contain within it an anger at religion, those who adhere to it and at God as well. These are things you dont believe in, so it makes no sense to be angry at them.
Unless you DO believe in them, of course.
Best wishes,
Padster
You are quite confusing here. Firstly, you point to a title meant as a rhetorical device, having very little to do with the opening post, which points out inconsistencies in the bible.
Then you claim atheists are angry at an entity they donât believe in. When pointed in the direction of any anger rather being directed at the behaviour of theists, you confusingly mention your own claimed restraint towards posting Nietzsche quotes, as if thatâs relevant. What Nietsche did or did not is quite irrelevant here, as the topic here is what actually written in the bible about your god.
Further, you are being inconsistent by making characterizations of atheists (âangry at godâ), while at the same time being offended by characterizations of your own behaviour. And you wonder why people find religious rhetoric frustrating?
1 Like
First, atheism doesnât contain anger. It canât. However, atheISTS can be, and often are, angry at many religions and many of the religious.
This anger is completely justified. Iâm happy to provide examples of why if you would like.
3 Likes
Your notion is ludicrous. If for no other reason than: atheists can be agnostic.
1 Like
Howdy. Welcome to the AR. Been reading a few of your posts. If you donât mind my asking, are you seriously trying to say atheists are angry at your god?.. (bemused chuckle)⌠So, based on your own âreasoningsâ, would it be reasonable for us to conclude you harbor anger and resentment toward Zeus, Odin, Shiva, and all the other several thousand gods worshiped worldwide? After all, they ARE the competition of your god, and many of them have very similar attributes and temperments. Oh, and even worse, many of those other gods tend to be much nicer and more readonable, thereby making YOUR god look like a complete douche. (Although, in all fairness, your god really doesnât need much help in that area. Your bible pretty much has that covered.) AnywayâŚ
Along similar lines, I bet you stay pretty pissed at Santa every year when he doesnât bring you the prize present you requested. And I cannot imagine your resentment toward the Easter Bunny when he stopped bringing you an Easter basket full of goodies once you got older. (Or have you sought professional therapy to help you get over it all?)
Thankfully for me, I do not believe in any of those entities. Therefore, the idea that I (or anybody else, for that matter) would hate or have any resentment toward those imaginary beings is just plain silly. Laughable, in fact. On the other hand, when the individuals/groups who DO believe in those entities attempt to force others to share those beliefs, those PEOPLE are most certainly worthy of criticism, anger, and resentment. Especially when they make open threats toward those of us who counter their chosen faith. Here is something I saw on another platform that I really like, and it seems fitting to share it hereâŚ
âIf [the Christians] truly believe what they claim to believe, then they should not be concerned about what others believe, because they should trust their god to handle it.â
Best wishes.
Tinman.
2 Likes
This is an atheist forum. Hatred/anger at God (known as misotheism) can only ever be the preserve of those who believe or are agnostic. It quite amazes me just how much misotheism is in evidence on forums that claim to be purely atheist concerns.
âOn the subject of earthquakes and God, earthquakes are a natural feature of life on Earth, and while I have no expertise in geology I suspect they serve some sort of function akin to a safety valve perhaps?â
The title that started this thread was meant just to add just a satirical touch to a serious question about the behaviour of humans when they have organized themselves into a Godâbased religion. While I personally have not the slightest doubt what so ever that that God entity does not exist in the real world , that does not stop me and others sometimes cursing Nature and its laws momentarily; our ancestral animal brains cause this instant irrational thinking on hearing for example that that huge quake occurred when most victims were in bed and in the worst position to be able to rush out of their badly constructed buildings. As ought to be basically well known by everyone these days, the real creator of earth quakes is the sudden slippage of one tectonic plate under another plate in the subduction process going on in our planet.
I am interested to hear what on Earth actually makes you a convinced theist Padster.
If you could actually start an original post about it, I would liken it to chucking a bit of meat into a den of hungry lions !
Well for a start, I am NOT a Christian, so dont assume that because I am a theist I am one. Neither am I a Jew or Muslim. Or a Hindu. I do not subscribe to any of the world religions. They are all equally ridiculous as each other, with Christianity definitely residing at the top of the absurdity pyramid. But lets not change the subject here. My beliefs are irrelevant on this particular subject, so dont go answering questions with more questions, a la Jesus Christ.
I see that the accusations of childishness (being pissed at Santa, implying that I am not an adult) are thrown into the mix early on, which is par for the course. So too is the mocking tone, which is a shame, as I havent pushed my beliefs once in this thread and I had hoped for a more adult debate. You say you dont believe in any entities, but look at the reactionary language youâre using. Why do you get so upset by it? Like I said, I just dont understand it.
The stuff about Nietzsche and Camus was an example. And the Bible God ISNT my God, so stop making assumptions.
Athiests cannot be agnostic. Athiests categorically do not believe in God. Agnostics arent sure. There is a difference. It is YOUR notion that is ludicrous.
I am not here to push my beliefs. I am interested in a bit of fairness and balance, otherwise this forum is just a mutual backslapping society.
Best wishes,
Padster
Obh obh, oh dear.
A - theist is a disbelief or lack of belief in a god or gods. It can also be a disbelief in the claims that others make for a god or gods.
A - gnostic âŚis about GNOSIS or âknowledgeâ . Two entirely different meanings, and if you could possibly open a dictionary you would find those DIFFERENT definitions right there.
I wonât go further into this as I am glad I was the first one in to correct you. I can now make some popcorn while your ignorance of the words you use is exposed by professionals.
Fare well, young knight. I hope you know a good smithy.
(edit for Captain Cat fainting as he forgot to breathe, giggling is not his strong point)
1 Like
Agnostic:
âA person who believes that nothing is known or can be known about the nature or existence of Godâ
Atheist
âA person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or godsâ
Chalk and cheese, surely?
Best wishes,
Padster
Oh, here we go. I smell the amorphous imaginary âeverything is godâ argument coming up real soon. So you claim to know the existence of something but canât actually articulate exactly what IT is. Rubbish.
So you are saying you will not debate on a debate forum? Then why are you even here? If you canât stand up to questioning, you have no credibility. Everyone has every reason to not believe a single word you say then.
Iâm glad youâre upfront about being disingenuous and dishonest.
1 Like
Debate!? Huh! thats a joke. Im still waiting for the debate to get going. All youâve done is mutter nonsense about my beliefs, which I havent mentioned. You clearly havent been following this thread at all, since youve jumped in with both feet and assumed I was preaching about my beliefs. All your ilk can do is throw perceived âinsultsâ around like children in a creche, in the hopes perhaps that Iâll âbiteâ.
Best wishes,
Padster
What is there to follow? You want to claim a sky being, what is your qualification and logic behind why one exists?
No one is here to debate shadowy figures with bold claims and no honesty. I might as well debate a chat bot then. Youâre just being a troll because you canât handle being asked for what qualifies your beliefs.
So you have something to hide is what it says to me, or your belief isnât that strong. So what is it then?
You still havent engaged with what I actually POSTED. I claimed NOTHING, at least concerning my beliefs which I DIDNT mention. Go back and read my post again, if you can be bothered.
What a truly spectacularly stupid claim, did you not watch cartoons with an âevilâ character as a child? One can hate a hypothetical construct, if the superstition being peddled contains obviously pernicious beliefs, then of course it would be rational to hate the concept.
I smell BS, and Iâve read two posts of yours and they both scream trolling.
Well that trivially true assertion neatly evades the point, you do seem to have a knack for ignoring the thread topic and preaching, I canât say I care for it.
Only if one doesnât understand that many people peddle just such a deity as real, and also fail to grasp that a debate can be based on a hypothetical notion. Just because I donât believe in any deities because no one can demonstrate any objective evidence they are real, or even possible, does not mean I canât debate the claims theists make about them, or hate such concepts if they are morally loathsome.
Wow another trivially true fact, have you never read any books that had fictional characters in them whose turpitude made them loathsome? A bit like the way the biblical deity is loathsome to me, even though I am an atheist. I can still read the claims and see they are morally repugnant, all the more so since it is claimed to be morally perfect and possess limitless power and knowledge, making its culpability more absolute, albeit hypothetically.
I donât agree they are mutually exclusive, since a concept does not have to be real in order to engender anger, especially since the concept has very real consequences in how theists behave and treat others.
How are you measuring anger here, as this sounds like pure assumption to create a response, and how are you differentiating between anger directed at theistic behaviour and revulsion at a deity that is depicted in the bible as morally repugnant?
And you tracked us down here to tell us, I find this claim as dubious as many of your others.
No one is pretending the first two, but the last one is just a straw man youâve created, and seems to be suggesting atheists secretly are not theists, a very unoriginal lie apologists often try to peddle here. I can find the biblical deity utterly loathsome without believing it exists. Though to be honest as @Get_off_my_lawn has suggested, I think the anger here is predominantly coming from you.
Well exactly, I was going to give him a little more rope on that one, but yes you are precisely correct.
Then you should have been more careful to avoid that precise tone in your opening gambit, but I suspect your faux indignation is all part of the carefully constructed act. Nothing you have posted suggests you have any interest in honest debate.
Then accurately define your deity, and demonstrate some objective evidence it exists outside of your mind? The confusion is of course your own fault as you have failed to make your position remotely clear beyond the broad claim to be a theist.
Oh dear I suggest you consult a dictionary.
Atheism is defined as disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods. Whereas agnosticism is defined as the a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God. So clearly they are not mutually exclusive, and as @Nyarlathotep says it is ludicrous to claim they are. For example you have told us precisely nothing about the deity you claim to believe is real, so of course I must rationally withhold belief from the claim, and also remain agnostic about it.
Quod erat demonstrandum.
Theism as a belief is the affirmation of a claim, atheism is simply the lack or absence of that belief, so there is no parity. You are making the claim, and brought it deliberately to people you know donât share the belief, so it is for you to properly evidence it.
But not mutually exclusive, obviously.
Your belief is defined in your profile, itâs hardly anyone elseâs fault if you have failed to offer any cogent or accurate facts beyond the broad claim.
Tell us again how angry we all are⌠
ITâS IN YOUR PROFILE!!!
This is a tired old trick many apologists have used, to be as vague as possible, and then blame others for not knowing magically what the details of your superstition are.
I dont need to tell you how angry you all are, it is in every post and thread on this forum.
Youve tried to show that atheism and agnosticism are the same things, when they clearly arent, and youve tried to disguise your misotheism as hatred for fictional characters, but I dont see you discussing Lord Voldemort or other fictional villains. I suppose what I am trying to say is that I think you have an unhealthy fixation with something you claim to have eschewed or had nothing to do with. Its all rather negative, you arent advancing atheism with fresh ideas, you are just taking potshots. You should be in politics.
Anyway, weâre getting nowhere here, so Iâll end it there.
Best wishes,
Padster
Why do I not believe you?
Not one person has tried to do this, you made the ludicrous claim that they are mutually exclusive, and several posters have tried to help you grasp just how stupid the claim is.
I donât believe in any deity or deities, I find some of the concepts of deities loathsome, this is not hard, and your ludicrous No True Scotsman fallacy aside, this should not require dumbing down for you any more than that.
I could care less about the subjective opinion of a complete stranger, but now youâve tracked me down and told me, I hope this cheered you up.
Well no one is obliged to read my posts of course, and since this is an atheists debate forum I find your objection rather pointless and Jejune.
How do you know Iâm not?
Whatever you feel is best. Please note you are ending this without telling us anything about your theistic beliefs, or offering one shred of objective evidence for it. I shall just have to come to terms with my disappointment, tâwas ever thus.
1 Like
umm, you seem to be either attempting a very poor sarcasm or you really donât know about nuance.
(edit to lay bets on the former with CC)