Atheists more Intelligent

[Cypress]

Two types. One discusses ideas. The other discusses those people.

Take it from me, unfounded and unsourced claims, libel, smears is par for the course on this message board.

To your credit, you at least feign an interest in obscure and esoteric topics concerning human intellectual history. Almost nobody on this forum would have the slightest interest in David Hume or Immanuel Kant.

[Blackwater Lunchbreak]

Take it from me, unfounded and unsourced claims, libel, smears is par for the course on this message board.

To your credit, you at least feign an interest in obscure and esoteric topics concerning human intellectual history. Almost nobody on this forum would have the slightest interest in David Hume or Immanuel Kant.

he's a fucking moron.

[Blackwater Lunchbreak]

There are two kinds of people on this forum. One discusses ideas. The other discusses those who discuss ideas. Cypress and DutchUncle are gossiping trolls.

and butt friends.

[Jerome]

Awww, I was starting to agree with you then you turned into an angry atheist again. Sad.

The "divinity" part is a matter of faith. I see no reason to "disbelieve" the other parts anymore than disbelieving any other ancient writings.

Why is it that you people always call us "angry" when we express rational thought? Is that just your self-defense mechanism to avoid critical thinking?

[jacksonsprat22]

Why is it that you people always call us "angry" when we express rational thought? Is that just your self-defense mechanism to avoid critical thinking?

Absolutely. Notice how critical thinking is the biggest enemy of the religious. They pretend to engage you in discussion but it's always about converting you.

[Doc Dutch]

I accept the bible as a historical work that explains plenty about the culture of the time in which it was written. I reject its claims with respect to the divinity of christ, or anyone else, as any person with a working frontal lobe should.

Unless you literally believe Aesop's Fables are non-fiction?

Awww, I was starting to agree with you then you turned into an angry atheist again. Sad.

The "divinity" part is a matter of faith. I see no reason to "disbelieve" the other parts anymore than disbelieving any other ancient writings.

Why is it that you people always call us "angry" when we express rational thought? Is that just your self-defense mechanism to avoid critical thinking?

Who are "you people"? Dude, claiming someone doesn't have a working frontal lobe unless they agree with you isn't rational thought.

A person can have excellent critical thinking skills and still have faith in things unproved or lack evidence of existence.

[Doc Dutch]

There's a third type. Those who make wild assed claims then resort to ad hominem and vulgar insults the second you question their dubious, unfounded, and unsourced claims.

True. Most of them are either young and ignorant or old and stupid. Sometimes it's hard to figure out who is who. I know it's hard to believe, but some people are pretty dishonest on the Internet!

Best way, IMO, to figure out what they are is to study their posting style and focus.

[Jerome]

Who are "you people"? Dude, claiming someone doesn't have a working frontal lobe unless they agree with you isn't rational thought.

A person can have excellent critical thinking skills and still have faith in things unproved or lack evidence of existence.

Can they, though? There's a very good reason Trump has a 90% approval rating among evangelicals.

[jacksonsprat22]

Can they, though? There's a very good reason Trump has a 90% approval rating among evangelicals.

Believe what you want and don't pay attention to reality. Bad philosophy.

[Doc Dutch]

Can they, though? There's a very good reason Trump has a 90% approval rating among evangelicals.

Yes. Why do you focus on the Evangelicals in particular and why do you think 90% of them support Trump? Are there any members of this forum you consider to be an Evangelical?

[Jerome]

Yes. Why do you focus on the Evangelicals in particular and why do you think 90% of them support Trump? Are there any members of this forum you consider to be an Evangelical?

White protestants who attend church regularly are evangelicals. I was wrong, it's only 80%.

https://news.gallup.com/opinion/poll...-election.aspx

. Exit polls in 2016 reported that 80% of White evangelical Christians voted for Trump;


I don't know nor do I care who the evangelicals are here, but I would define anyone as an evangelical if they believe in the literal truth of the bible (i.e. batshit gullible).

[Doc Dutch]

White protestants who attend church regularly are evangelicals. I was wrong, it's only 80%.

https://news.gallup.com/opinion/poll...-election.aspx

. Exit polls in 2016 reported that 80% of White evangelical Christians voted for Trump;


I don't know nor do I care who the evangelicals are here, but I would define anyone as an evangelical if they believe in the literal truth of the bible (i.e. batshit gullible).

Thanks for the link. IMO, you should read it before posting it:

White Mainline Protestants are also defined differently by different researchers, but essentially they are White Protestants who identify with Protestant denominations not usually classified as evangelical -- including Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Lutherans and others. In lieu of Protestant denomination data, grouping together White Protestants who are less religious can serve as an effective surrogate for the Mainline category. Either way, this group constitutes about 12% to 18% of the population, and skews toward Trump. Gallup estimates that Trump approval among White non-evangelical Protestants is about 60%, and Pew estimates that 61% of their defined group of White Mainline Protestants would vote for Trump.

What is your solution to this perceived evidence about Evangelicals?

[Cypress]

Why is it that you people always call us "angry" when we express rational thought?

Is that just your self-defense mechanism to avoid critical thinking?

Cannot speak for Dutch, but I think the reason militant atheists come across as angry is because your criticisms and condemnations about religion is highly selective - and almost invariably so.

I have yet to see an atheist condemn, ridicule, mock the beliefs of Buddhists, Hindus, Jews. When you think about it, Samsara and the perpetual re-incarnation of the soul (sometimes as a lower life form or even insect), or the Jewish eschatology of an afterlife can sound every bit as irrational as the Christian eschatology.

But for some weird reason, I have yet to see an angry atheist take the time to mock and humiliate the world's three billion Hindus, Buddhists, Jews because of their eschatological beliefs.

Which makes me think that - far from being a detached practitioner of reason - the militant atheist is really angry, specifically at Christianity.

That is emotion, not reason.


I have my own thoughts on the meaning of Scripture, and I bear my own hostility to the political involvement and theocracy of Calvinist bible thumpers.

But I attempt to put the eschatology of all religions faiths on an even playing field, and I eschew reaching a conclusion that the world's five billion Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists are all gullible dupes incapable of reason.

[Jerome]

Cannot speak for Dutch, but I think the reason militant atheists come across as angry is because your criticisms and condemnations about religion is highly selective - and almost invariably so.

I have yet to see an atheist condemn, ridicule, mock the beliefs of Buddhists, Hindus, Jews. When you think about it, Samsara and the perpetual re-incarnation of the soul (sometimes as a lower life form or even insect), or the Jewish eschatology of an afterlife can sound every bit as irrational as the Christian eschatology.

But for some weird reason, I have yet to see an angry atheist take the time to mock and humiliate the world's three billion Hindus, Buddhists, Jews because of their eschatological beliefs.

Which makes me think that - far from being a detached practitioner of reason - the militant atheist is really angry, specifically at Christianity.

That is emotion, not reason.


I have my own thoughts on the meaning of Scripture, and I bear my own hostility to the political involvement and theocracy of Calvinist bible thumpers.

But I attempt to put the eschatology of all religions faiths on an even playing field, and I eschew reaching a conclusion that the world's five billion Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists are all gullible dupes incapable of reason.

Christianity is the predominant religion in the U.S., and is a MAJOR factor in our society's homophobia, racism, sexism, etc. Christians make an unabashed effort to subvert the First Amendment's Establishment Clause in an attempt to codify their silly beliefs.

Jews, Hindus and Buddhists don't travel the world, exporting their religious ideas and evangelizing to other nations (like, for example, Uganda, which thanks to religious imperialism is maybe the most homophobic country in the world).

No, it's not emotional, it's highly rational.

Moreover, most cultural Jews are atheists.

That being said, I find all religions silly. Just not all present the clear and present danger that, say, Christianity and Islam do.

[Sailor]

Cannot speak for Dutch, but I think the reason militant atheists come across as angry is because your criticisms and condemnations about religion is highly selective - and almost invariably so.

I have yet to see an atheist condemn, ridicule, mock the beliefs of Buddhists, Hindus, Jews. When you think about it, Samsara and the perpetual re-incarnation of the soul (sometimes as a lower life form or even insect), or the Jewish eschatology of an afterlife can sound every bit as irrational as the Christian eschatology.

But for some weird reason, I have yet to see an angry atheist take the time to mock and humiliate the world's three billion Hindus, Buddhists, Jews because of their eschatological beliefs.

Which makes me think that - far from being a detached practitioner of reason - the militant atheist is really angry, specifically at Christianity.

That is emotion, not reason.


I have my own thoughts on the meaning of Scripture, and I bear my own hostility to the political involvement and theocracy of Calvinist bible thumpers.

But I attempt to put the eschatology of all religions faiths on an even playing field, and I eschew reaching a conclusion that the world's five billion Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists are all gullible dupes incapable of reason.

This is well said.