Atheism and it's Link to Bad Dad's

rtwngAvngr said:
Oh yes, spirituality but not religion, that false dichotomy libs love to trumpet!


Sorry sir, i wrote my respose assuming this countries right to have a different religion is still standing. Of course if you are a fundamentalist you will say anyone with a slightly different view of "religion" than you are going to hell even if its another kind of chirstian. that however is a different debate in which i do not want to say more, because it is one that will never be won.
 
InfitiasFatalis said:
Sorry sir, i wrote my respose assuming this countries right to have a different religion is still standing. Of course if you are a fundamentalist you will say anyone with a slightly different view of "religion" than you are going to hell even if its another kind of chirstian. that however is a different debate in which i do not want to say more, because it is one that will never be won.


hyperbole sucks...especially when you can't prove your point.
 
-=d=- said:
hyperbole sucks...especially when you can't prove your point.

wastnt hyperbole i didnt exagerate its truth and i did mean what i said to be taken literaly. fundamentalist chrisitans do believe that. My reason for saying is that the books of the bible written in the 2ed century state that anyone from another faith of any kind is not saved. And i may be wrong but my assesment of his reply was meant to be taken literaly therefore what i said was not hyperbole.

Hyperbole noun exaggeration for effect, not meant to be taken literally.
 
InfitiasFatalis said:
wastnt hyperbole i didnt exagerate its truth and i did mean what i said to be taken literaly.

Hyperbole noun exaggeration for effect, not meant to be taken literally.


That scares me...you really believe the things you posted in that reply? The 'tone' you take? your sarcasm?
 
InfitiasFatalis said:
i fixed that reply up to try to help you understand what i was getting at


Your assessment of the Bible is incorrect. Nowhere does the Bible tell us those of different faiths aren't or won't be 'saved'...it simply states "Faith in anyone but Christ is worthless." Different things.
 
-=d=- said:
Your assessment of the Bible is incorrect. Nowhere does the Bible tell us those of different faiths aren't or won't be 'saved'...it simply states "Faith in anyone but Christ is worthless." Different things.
yeah i over simplified again sorry. i know it says they will be saved if they recognize christ and that there will be an endless multitude of gentiles in heaven. thanks for pointing out my over simplification d
 
shadrack said:
No wonder you post some of the stupid things you do on this board. In such a belligerent way, I might add.

So now I'm STUPID and BELLIGERANT. Well you can label "how" I post as to the disposition however you like. But call me "stupid"... I take that as one of the worst things to say to a person in a forum like this. Disagree with me, don't like the manner in which I post, whine about every damn thing I say, but don't call me fucking stupid. Unless you want to start something here that I guaruntee will make your stay at this board unpleasant. Understand skippy?

Now, There are more Christians in the world than any other religion. 2 billion.

http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html

And the Bible is best selling book ever!

Today the Bible is available in whole or in part in the native tongue of 98 per cent of the people of the world. Surely that must be acknowledged as great progress and as a very broad and substantial basis on which to rear the future structure of Christianity. None of the so-called "best seller" books attain more than a small fraction of the number of Bibles sold.

http://www.mbrem.com/eschatology/post7.htm

The number of Bibles sold in the world is simply far to great to estimate. It would be somewhere in the BILLIONS.

And you want to come in here and try and tell me that Christianity "used to be" more important? What planet have you been living on not to know this? Or is putting down Christianity one of your favorite past times.
 
InfitiasFatalis said:
Sorry sir, i wrote my respose assuming this countries right to have a different religion is still standing. Of course if you are a fundamentalist you will say anyone with a slightly different view of "religion" than you are going to hell even if its another kind of chirstian. that however is a different debate in which i do not want to say more, because it is one that will never be won.

Thanks for calling me sir. You're a punk, however. You have a right to have a different religion. I just have heard all this before. "i'm spiritual but not religious" generally means, "I think all established christian churches are crap, and anyone who attends them is a closed minded bigot". This is just what I've seen and what I've learned in talking to libs.
 
damn man.. i didnt think christians took those kinds of tones with people.. condescending and what not. what happened to love thy neighbor? turning your cheek?

just read that last part rtwing.. why so much negativity? god is love, you dont pick and choose how you want a religion to benefit you. follow the teachings.
 
Mainframe said:
damn man.. i didnt think christians took those kinds of tones with people.. condescending and what not. what happened to love thy neighbor? turning your cheek?


But what about the point? The spirituality/religous dichotomy is a false one. What say you?
 
the point is moot. someones opinion on something should not steer you to a path of insults and condescention simply because you do not agree.

it seems to me you are taking it way to personal when, as i said, its just someones opinion and not a stated fact. if you are secure in your faith, what does anyone opinion on it matter?
 
Mainframe said:
the point is moot. someones opinion on something should not steer you to a path of insults and condescention simply because you do not agree.

it seems to me you are taking it way to personal when, as i said, its just someones opinion and not a stated fact. if you are secure in your faith, what does anyone opinion on it matter?

You're avoiding the issue. What is your opinion of people who claim a very strict dichotomy between spirituality and religion? ANyone who can't stand being called a punk online is a punk. And anyone who thinks calling someone a punk is some huge insult is also a punk.
 
rtwngAvngr said:
Thanks for calling me sir. You're a punk, however. You have a right to have a different religion. I just have heard all this before. "i'm spiritual but not religious" generally means, "I think all established christian churches are crap, and anyone who attends them is a closed minded bigot". This is just what I've seen and what I've learned in talking to libs.


You probably have heard many people say that in that way. I did not mean it that way tho. I actually have a high opinon of many christian churches Ive been too and many close family friends attend them and i often attend with them. Some people who attend them are close minded bigots but not even close to all of them. Most Chiristains are very good people doing all they can to help anyone.
 
This whole post is one jump in logical fallacies to the next. First of all, who's to assume that there aren't just as many if not more "bad dads" that are associated with the other religions? There are "bad dads" regardless of one's religious preference.

What he found is nothing less than astonishing. After studying the lives of more than a dozen of the world's most influential atheists, Vitz discovered that they all had one thing in common: Defective relationships with their fathers. By defective, Vitz means the fathers were dead, abusive, weak, or abandoned their children.

Moreover, a study consisting of only 12 people is statistically significant? Please. Also he didn't manage to report what he found for the 12 theists.

You keep clinging to this article, but the article is 1 - Statistically insignificant, and 2 - Requires huge jumps in logic that only the most foolhardy would be willing to accept.

This paper is far from "bulletproof."
 
Pale Rider said:
And you want to come in here and try and tell me that Christianity "used to be" more important? What planet have you been living on not to know this? Or is putting down Christianity one of your favorite past times.

I didn't say it "used to be" more important. I said it was a very important movement 2000 years ago. It does as all great books do....help explain fundamental truths of the human condition. Here's some more equally good authors of equally good books.....

Homer
Aeschylus
Sophocles
Thucydides
Euripides
Herodotus
Aristophanes
Plato
Aristotle
Euclid
Lucretius
Plutarch
Nicomachus
Lavoisier
Harvey
Archimedes
Fahrenheit
Spears
Mendeleyev
Apollonius
Virgil
Epictetus
Tacitus
Ptolemy
Plotinus
Augustine
St.Anselm
Aquinas
Dante
Chaucer
DesPrez
Machiavelli
Copernicus
Luther
Rabelais
Palestrina
Montaigne
Viete
Bacon
Shakespeare
DesCartes
Pascal
Bach
Haydn
Cervantes
Galileo
Milton
LaRochefoucauld
LaFontaine
Huygens
Eliot
Spinoza
Locke
Racine
Newton
Kepler
Leibniz
Swift
Hume
Rousseau
Moliere
Adam Smith
Kant
Darwin
Hegel
Lobachevsky
Tocqueville
Kierkegaard
Marx
Dostoevski
Tolstoy
Melville
Freud
Rutherford
Schrodinger
Bohr
Einstein
 
shadrack said:
I didn't say it "used to be" more important. I said it was a very important movement 2000 years ago. It does as all great books do....help explain fundamental truths of the human condition. Here's some more equally good authors of equally good books.....

Homer
Aeschylus
Sophocles
Thucydides
Euripides
Herodotus
Aristophanes
Plato
Aristotle
Euclid
Lucretius
Plutarch
Nicomachus
Lavoisier
Harvey
Archimedes
Fahrenheit
Spears
Mendeleyev
Apollonius
Virgil
Epictetus
Tacitus
Ptolemy
Plotinus
Augustine
St.Anselm
Aquinas
Dante
Chaucer
DesPrez
Machiavelli
Copernicus
Luther
Rabelais
Palestrina
Montaigne
Viete
Bacon
Shakespeare
DesCartes
Pascal
Bach
Haydn
Cervantes
Galileo
Milton
LaRochefoucauld
LaFontaine
Huygens
Eliot
Spinoza
Locke
Racine
Newton
Kepler
Leibniz
Swift
Hume
Rousseau
Moliere
Adam Smith
Kant
Darwin
Hegel
Lobachevsky
Tocqueville
Kierkegaard
Marx
Dostoevski
Tolstoy
Melville
Freud
Rutherford
Schrodinger
Bohr
Einstein

And ALL of those authors and their books multiplied by TEN can't equal the number of Bibles printed and sold throughout history and the world.
 

Forum List

Back
Top