Understanding the Mentality and World View of the Christian Fundamentalist

[Book of Jeremiah]

Very simple. Buy a Bible. Everyone who followed Jesus Christ was a Christian fundamentalist. If you're not a fundamentalist? You're not a follower of Jesus Christ.

And if you hate Christian fundamentalists? You are an enemy of Jesus Christ.

That's a load of crap. But then, every religion believes it is the one and only religion.

If a person says they are a Christian yet refuses to take the Word of God literally and do what it says I have every reason to believe they are not a follower of Christ. Again - God is not interested in what denomination you are a member of - your church cannot save you - only His Son can save you and therein lies the redemption plan.

Well Jeremiah, here's the problem. Taking the bible literally is not what it means to be a Christian. Most Christians understand that the Bible is not the literal word of God. Most Christians understand that it was written by men who were inspired by god (or rather, claim to have been inspired by god). And in fact, most Christians understand that the new testament was written many decades after events transpired. Only fundamentalists believe in a literal interpretation of the bible. Ironically, they too don't live by a literal interpretation. I don't see any fundies owning slaves today. Do you?

Personally, I don't believe in god and subscribe to no religion. To many people have died in the name of religion for anyone to heed the call, in my opinion. It is the bane of mankind, and is killing this planet.

How can you speak of the bible as if you are an authority on it and yet have no light in which to see? The King James Bible is the bible God put into the hands of mankind - against all odds I might add! It has saved millions of souls throughout the ages, delivered people from addictions, healed them of terminal diseases, brought them through deep trials, lifted up the downtrodden, changed entire societies, cities, nations, peoples throughout the earth when read and followed. It is Satan that is killing this planet not the Word of God. The Word of God is what is saving people! When you take the Word literally? God answers! There is no other way to take the Bible but literally! My children take me literally and God expects us to take Him literally! Count on it!

It has to be one of the craziest tactics I've seen out there - telling people not to take the Bible literally! Totally amazing! Hopefully people will see through the agenda of those who tell them not to take the Bible literally!

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Personally, I don't believe in god and subscribe to no religion. To many people have died in the name of religion for anyone to heed the call, in my opinion. It is the bane of mankind, and is killing this planet.

More people have died in the name of money and greed than religion. Would you throw out all manner of economics because of that?

If I could? Yes. Alas, we are all slaves to the economy. We are not slaves, however, to a magical sky daddy because he doesn't actually exist.

You are wrong. God is whether you believe He is or not. He is your creator and one day your knee is going to bow and your tongue is going to confess that Jesus Christ is LORD. I see in the other post that you do not quite understand what faith is so I'll give you the Biblical definition:

Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

______
To have faith is to know you have received before you even ask in prayer. You are missing out on what life is all about. It's all about Jesus Christ! I pray the LORD opens your eyes, Orogenicman.

 

[orogenicman]

Very simple. Buy a Bible. Everyone who followed Jesus Christ was a Christian fundamentalist. If you're not a fundamentalist? You're not a follower of Jesus Christ.

And if you hate Christian fundamentalists? You are an enemy of Jesus Christ.

That's a load of crap. But then, every religion believes it is the one and only religion.

If a person says they are a Christian yet refuses to take the Word of God literally and do what it says I have every reason to believe they are not a follower of Christ. Again - God is not interested in what denomination you are a member of - your church cannot save you - only His Son can save you and therein lies the redemption plan.

Well Jeremiah, here's the problem. Taking the bible literally is not what it means to be a Christian. Most Christians understand that the Bible is not the literal word of God. Most Christians understand that it was written by men who were inspired by god (or rather, claim to have been inspired by god). And in fact, most Christians understand that the new testament was written many decades after events transpired. Only fundamentalists believe in a literal interpretation of the bible. Ironically, they too don't live by a literal interpretation. I don't see any fundies owning slaves today. Do you?

Personally, I don't believe in god and subscribe to no religion. To many people have died in the name of religion for anyone to heed the call, in my opinion. It is the bane of mankind, and is killing this planet.

How can you speak of the bible as if you are an authority on it and yet have no light in which to see?

Because I was raised Catholic, went to private Catholic schools for 9 years, and dropped my religion when I became a scientists and realize how much religion had brainwashed me into accepting as true things which simply weren't.

]The King James Bible is the bible God put into the hands of mankind - against all odds I might add!

Really? That is an interesting claim since it is an English translation of the Christian Bible for the Church of England begun in 1604 and completed in 1611, essentially 1,600 years after the fact.

It has saved millions of souls throughout the ages, delivered people from addictions, healed them of terminal diseases, brought them through deep trials, lifted up the downtrodden, changed entire societies, cities, nations, peoples throughout the earth when read and followed. It is Satan that is killing this planet not the Word of God. The Word of God is what is saving people! When you take the Word literally? God answers! There is no other way to take the Bible but literally! My children take me literally and God expects us to take Him literally! Count on it!

You mean it has brainwashed millions while killing millions of other who didn't believe. Don't try to deny the heinous history of the Christian religion, because it is out there in black and white for all to see. How many American Indians did the Spanish missionaries kill? How many did the French and English kill? How many did we Americans kill? Not to mention what went on south and north of the border. Not to mention what went on in Europe, the Middle East and elsewhere. Here is what the Catholic church says about taking the Bible literally:

 

[orogenicman]

Personally, I don't believe in god and subscribe to no religion. To many people have died in the name of religion for anyone to heed the call, in my opinion. It is the bane of mankind, and is killing this planet.

More people have died in the name of money and greed than religion. Would you throw out all manner of economics because of that?

If I could? Yes. Alas, we are all slaves to the economy. We are not slaves, however, to a magical sky daddy because he doesn't actually exist.

You are wrong. God is whether you believe He is or not. He is your creator and one day your knee is going to bow and your tongue is going to confess that Jesus Christ is LORD. I see in the other post that you do not quite understand what faith is so I'll give you the Biblical definition:

Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

______
To have faith is to know you have received before you even ask in prayer. You are missing out on what life is all about. It's all about Jesus Christ! I pray the LORD opens your eyes, Orogenicman.

To have faith is to believe despite the lack of evidence. And that is a rather lazy way to be; to blindly believe something, to never question what it is you are believing. You don't know that god exists any more than I know that your god doesn't. But my non-belief is not faith. It is lack of faith. I lack the faith because - well, I have thoughts. And we all know how thoughts can screw up the faith thing. Ask any Christian. Look, it is very simple. Faith is a personal revelation. Personal revelation, by definition, is first person in nature. As such, I am under no obligation to accept your personal revelation any more than I am under any obligation to believe anyone else's personal revelation. Farmer Bob may be the most honest, god-fearing man anyone has ever known, but we still need evidence that the Virgin Mary visited him in his corn field.

 

[Derideo_Te]

On page 38 in Francis Galton: Pioneer of Heredity and Biometry written by M. G. Bulmer the author states Galton rejected Christianity.

Making a claim without providing any credible link to substantiate it doesn't cut it.

Where is your credible link?

It is up to you to provide credible evidence that Galton embraced the religion he was trained in.

You posted that Galton was provided with religious education. Are you backpedaling on your own posts now?

Up to you refute your own posts.

 

[Thunderbird]

realize how much religion had brainwashed me into accepting as true things which simply weren't.

You prefer to be brainwashed by the media bosses into embracing PC pieties?

Don't try to deny the heinous history of the Christian religion,

Also don't try to deny the existence of Christian reformers: The Abolitionists Christian History

And don't make up lies about Christians: Crusade Myths Thomas F. Madden

And don't forget about atheist atrocities: The Black Book of Communism - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

So many imperialists/racists/eugenicists/nationalists/fascists/social Darwinists were non-Christians or anti-Christians. Consider people like Jules Ferry, Francis Galton, Ernst Haeckel, Martin Bormann, Mussolini, Ayn Rand, and John Stuart Mill.

John Stuart Mill and Liberal Imperialism

EUGENICS AND THE PROGRESSIVE MOVEMENT

 

[Thunderbird]

Where is your credible link?

Francis Galton Pioneer of Heredity and Biometry - M. G. Bulmer - Google Books

Now where is your credible link? Is it possible you don't have one because you made a mistake and can't admit it? lol

You seem terrified of my questions:

Did you say Galton was a Quaker yes or no?

Please provide evidence Galton was a Quaker as an adult.

Is it because you are intellectually dishonest?

 

[Thunderbird]

Personally, I don't believe in god and subscribe to no religion. To many people have died in the name of religion for anyone to heed the call, in my opinion. It is the bane of mankind, and is killing this planet.

If you reject Christianity because people have been killed by Christians you should reject atheism also because atheists have killed millions of people.

To have faith is to believe despite the lack of evidence.

Evidence: What is the fine-tuning of the universe and how does it serve as a pointer to God BioLogos

And that is a rather lazy way to be; to blindly believe something, to never question what it is you are believing. You don't know that god exists any more than I know that your god doesn't.

What's lazy is reciting empty atheist clichés. Stop the childish caricatures. Many Christians value science and reason. Many materialists lack a firm foundation to their philosophy.

Open your mind a little:

The Hollow Men Hitchens Dawkins and Harris - Taki s Magazine

Five Things Science Cannot Prove but are necessary for science to work internetmonk.com

But my non-belief is not faith. It is lack of faith. I lack the faith because - well, I have thoughts.

Your "thoughts" seem like 2nd hand clichés. In the golden age of atheism (late 1800's) atheism was generally held to be "the doctrine or belief that there is no God". Today some atheists prefer to define atheism as merely "lack of belief in God". While I appreciate the intellectual retreat the new definition represents, this new definition is illogical. According to the 2nd definition those who know or think there is a God are atheists, which is absurd.

Personal revelation, by definition, is first person in nature. As such, I am under no obligation to accept your personal revelation any more than I am under any obligation to believe anyone else's personal revelation.

Seems closed-minded.

 

[orogenicman]

realize how much religion had brainwashed me into accepting as true things which simply weren't.

You prefer to be brainwashed by the media bosses into embracing PC pieties?=

Media bosses? Erm, no. I am a published scientist. I studies anthropology for four years before changing majors to geology.

Don't try to deny the heinous history of the Christian religion,

Also don't try to deny the existence of Christian reformers: The Abolitionists Christian History[/quote]

I salute those who did what they could to help rid slavery from this continent. But that was almost too little too late since it had already been going on for 200 years as the hands of Christians; and that movement did nothing for Native Americans, who were generally not enslaved - they were instead, massacred and thrown on reservations, where many still exist in poverty to this day, with no indication that will change any time soon.

And don't make up lies about Christians: Crusade Myths Thomas F. Madden

I made no reference to the crusades. My reference to Europe had to do with burning witches, pagan, non-believers, and the inquisition, particularly those that went on in Spain, France, and England, but elsewhere as well.

And don't forget about atheist atrocities: The Black Book of Communism - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

First of all, every single one of those communist countries where those atrocities occurred were also brainwashed by a cult personality. In Russia, you had Stalin, and his successors. In China, you had Mao, in Cambodia, North Korea, Ethiopia, etc. all the same. Cults of personality. Now, many of these leaders were atheists, but they were also megalomaniacs, and very brutal dictators. You cannot compare modern atheism, particularly in this country, with any of those regimes. The Country today that is almost entirely atheist, and completely peaceful? That would be Denmark. American atheists are also a rather peaceful lot; hardly any in jail, as opposed to the huge number of Christians filling our prisons.

So while you are reminding me of things of which I am already aware, perhaps you should read up on the atrocities that occurred wrt to Native populations in North, Central, and South American at the hands of Christian missionaries, Christian miners, settlers, loggers, land barons, ranchers, etc, etc, etc. At least 7 million Native Americans alone were killed during the onslaught of colonization. It was just as bad, if not worse, in Central and South America.

Then we have the Spanish atrocities in the Philippines, The English, Belgian, French and German atrocities in Africa, and the English crimes in India. Do you want to count up the casualties for all of these, or shall I do it for you?

And then let's talk, if you care to, about how you Christians treat yourselves. You people have been killing one another almost since Christ himself died. Which probably explains why you care even less for what you've done to others. Want to go there? I am ready if you are? Oh, and let's talk about what you people have done to the Jews for 1,800 years or more.

 

[orogenicman]

Personally, I don't believe in god and subscribe to no religion. To many people have died in the name of religion for anyone to heed the call, in my opinion. It is the bane of mankind, and is killing this planet.[/QUOTE=tunderbird]If you reject Christianity because people have been killed by Christians you should reject atheism also because atheists have killed millions of people.

Don't get your knickers in a twist. I reject all religions. But of all the religions, I like all of the Abrahamic traditions the least. They are the least believable, and have by far the most damning history. That said, none of them are believable. And by the way, not all communists were/are atheists.

]To have faith is to believe despite the lack of evidence.

Evidence: What is the fine-tuning of the universe and how does it serve as a pointer to God BioLogos

I hate to break it to you, but the universe is not fine-tuned for us. 99.9999 percent of the universe is utterly hostile to life. Step out of the International Space station into the vacuum of space, and you are dead in seconds. Nearly all life is a sitting duck for ionizing radiation. Cancer, ebola, alzheimers, ALS, birth defects, a dog eat dog natural world, etc., etc., etc. I could go on for hours about why the universe is not fine-tuned for us, but I suspect it would fall on deaf ears.

And that is a rather lazy way to be; to blindly believe something, to never question what it is you are believing. You don't know that god exists any more than I know that your god doesn't.

What's lazy is reciting empty atheist clichés. Stop the childish caricatures. Many Christians value science and reason.

It is not an empty cliché to point out that blind faith is a lazy faith. If science relied on faith, we'd all still be living in caves. That is not cliché. That is a fact. But don't take all of this on my say so. Listen to what someone else has to dsay about it:

Many materialists lack a firm foundation to their philosophy.

Open your mind a little:

The Hollow Men Hitchens Dawkins and Harris - Taki s Magazine

Five Things Science Cannot Prove but are necessary for science to work internetmonk.com

I read the first paragraph from Daniel Jepsen's article, and couldn't get past that paragraph. Why? Read it for yoruself:

Perhaps the most common misunderstanding of science today is the idea that it alone operates only on what can be proven. The scientist, we are told, unlike the historian, sociologist, or (shudder) the theologian, believes nothing except what is proven to be true by the scientific method; therefore he or she alone is the oracle of true knowledge of the physical world.

Reading that first paragraph, it struck me as ironic, because here he is claiming to corect a misunderstanding, and in that very paragraph, he stated what the entire creationist movement completely misunderstands about science. First of all, many historians and sociologists, in fact, use the very scientific method that he would have us believe they are not privy to. Secondly, science cannot prove anything. Proofs are constructed in mathematics, but not in science. Science is about gathering emperical evidence, and then creating a hypothesis based on that evidence and then testing it to see if it is a best fit with the evidence. If it fits, a paper is written, and others read it and check the results and do their own tests. If, after (often) years of testing/validating, nearly everyone agrees that the hypothesis fits the evidence, then it becomes a theory. It has nothing to do with being oracles or living in an exclusive priesthood (unlike your theologians), because EVERYONE can learn the method and use it for themselves, evern you. Even Daniel Jepsen. And because his first paragraph failed so miserably at something so basic, there is no point in reading further and seeing him embarrass himself further.

But my non-belief is not faith. It is lack of faith. I lack the faith because - well, I have thoughts.

Your "thoughts" seem like 2nd hand clichés.

You are complaining about cliches? I take it you've never read the bible.

In the golden age of atheism (late 1800's) atheism was generally held to be "the doctrine or belief that there is no God". Today some atheists prefer to define atheism as merely "lack of belief in God". While I appreciate the intellectual retreat the new definition represents, this new definition is illogical. According to the 2nd definition those who know or think there is a God are atheists, which is absurd.

Erm, what? That makes no sense. Atheists simply don't believe in the supernatural. Full Stop. Why? Because there is no such thing as the supernatural. If it exists, then it is part of the natural world. There is nothing super about it. And if it is part of the natural world, then we can discover it and study it. Got anything like that? I know, religious types always come back and say their god is not part of the natural world. First of all, that's a convenient cop out. You think it gets you off the hook from the fact that there is no physical evidence that can be brought to bear on the subject. Life doesn't work that way, my friend.

Personal revelation, by definition, is first person in nature. As such, I am under no obligation to accept your personal revelation any more than I am under any obligation to believe anyone else's personal revelation.

Seems closed-minded.

On the contrary. Scientists are keen to keep an open mind, so long as our brains don't fall out.

 

[Thunderbird]

Media bosses? Erm, no. I am a published scientist. I studies anthropology for four years before changing majors to geology.

If you were really intelligent you wouldn't be spewing childish caricatures.

But that was almost too little too late since it had already been going on for 200 years as the hands of Christians;

Many of the slave-owners were non-Christians. This was the Age of Enlightenment after all. Many of the slave traders were non-Christian or Jewish.

Volatire was one such "enlightened" racist: http://www.oodegr.co/english/atheismos/diafwt_ratsism.htm

My reference to Europe had to do with burning witches, pagan, non-believers, and the inquisition,

Lots of myths there too. Check this out: Thomas Madden The Truth about the Spanish Inquisition

First of all, every single one of those communist countries where those atrocities occurred were also brainwashed by a cult personality. In Russia, you had Stalin, and his successors. In China, you had Mao, in Cambodia, North Korea, Ethiopia, etc. all the same. Cults of personality. Now, many of these leaders were atheists, but they were also megalomaniacs, and very brutal dictators.

I think this is typical. People don't believe in nothing. Atheists reject God and then eagerly enslave themselves to some political creed or dictator.

You cannot compare modern atheism, particularly in this country, with any of those regimes. The Country today that is almost entirely atheist, and completely peaceful? That would be Denmark.

The upper classes in Europe and North America are heavily indoctrinated and some are devout atheists. Please realize that the rich atheist-prone European countries helped invade Middle Eastern countries, have sold weapons around the world, lived lives of luxury based on the exploitation of the poor, and are rapidly going extinct.

An incredible image shows how powerful countries are buying up much of the world s land - The Washington Post

American atheists are also a rather peaceful lot; hardly any in jail, as opposed to the huge number of Christians filling our prisons.

I'd like to see evidence they were Christian before they went to prison.

So while you are reminding me of things of which I am already aware, perhaps you should read up on the atrocities that occurred wrt to Native populations in North, Central, and South American at the hands of Christian missionaries, Christian miners, settlers, loggers, land barons, ranchers, etc, etc, etc.

You really can't sasy they were Christians.

At least 7 million Native Americans alone were killed during the onslaught of colonization. It was just as bad, if not worse, in Central and South America.

You are ill-informed. Here's Jared Diamond: Infectious diseases introduced with Europeans, like smallpox and measles, spread from one Indian tribe to another, far in advance of Europeans themselves, and killed an estimated 95% of the New World's Indian population.

Then we have the Spanish atrocities in the Philippines, The English, Belgian, French and German atrocities in Africa, and the English crimes in India.

What you are missing is that the Golden Age of Imperialism (mid to late 1800s) coincided with the Golden Age of Atheism. Many of the imperialists had read Gibbon and Voltaire (and later on Nietzsche and Galton) and despised Christianity.

You people have been killing one another almost since Christ himself died.

Atheists are pretty good at killing each other. Murderous Stalinists fight murderous Trotskyites. Russian Communists fight Chinese Communists. Right-wing atheists battle left-wing atheists.

Bloodthirsty atheist leaders: The Dangerous Atheism of Christopher Hitchens and Sam Harris Alternet

 

[Derideo_Te]

Stop the childish caricatures

Ironic!

 

[Thunderbird]

I hate to break it to you, but the universe is not fine-tuned for us. 99.9999 percent of the universe is utterly hostile to life.

Designed to produce life, not designed to be crammed with life at any given point in time! Perhaps we (and other advanced forms of life) are meant to expand the domain of life. Life could be established on many planets. Maybe the universe is big to reflect the glory of God.

Nearly all life is a sitting duck for ionizing radiation. Cancer, ebola, alzheimers,

What would life be without challenges?

It is not an empty cliché to point out that blind faith is a lazy faith. If science relied on faith, we'd all still be living in caves.

Instead of submitting your mind to lazy cliches and primitive anti-Christian bigotry check out an alternative viewpoint: Christianity and the Birth of Science

Science is about gathering emperical evidence, and then creating a hypothesis based on that evidence and then testing it to see if it is a best fit with the evidence.

You are being very superficial. What is real? Is this empirical evidence what is real?

Quote: In fact, it is fairly astonishing how Dawkins, Harris and Hitchens are oblivious to the whole rise of postmodern skepticism. They do not bother to address the objection that, from Hume and Kant to Foucault and Derrida, a progressively secularizing West has grown increasingly less capable of maintaining the rational foundations of scientific realism. In short, they are oblivious to the whole problem of the loss of absolutes in the modern and postmodern eras.

Link: The Hollow Men Hitchens Dawkins and Harris - Taki s Magazine

EVERYONE can learn the method and use it for themselves, evern you. Even Daniel Jepsen.

Anyone can become a Christian too.

Erm, what? That makes no sense. Atheists simply don't believe in the supernatural. Full Stop.

Actually some atheists say there is no God.

Because there is no such thing as the supernatural.

You're deeply confused. First you say you simply don't believe in God now you say you adhere to the materialist philosophy. Now you are making a statement so please provide evidence. What is your evidence there is no such thing as the supernatural? Why do you believe in the materialist philosophy?

 

[pillars]

[ Atheists reject God and then eagerly enslave themselves to some political creed or dictator.

You reject caricatures of Christians while eagerly making them about Atheists.

Kudos, you win the hypocritical post of the day award.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Where is your credible link?

Francis Galton Pioneer of Heredity and Biometry - M. G. Bulmer - Google Books

Now where is your credible link? Is it possible you don't have one because you made a mistake and can't admit it? lol

You seem terrified of my questions:

Did you say Galton was a Quaker yes or no?

Please provide evidence Galton was a Quaker as an adult.

Is it because you are intellectually dishonest?

The Life Letters and Labours of Francis Galton - Karl Pearson - Google Books

That excerpt of Galton's writings was when he was 50 years old.

Explain why an Atheist would care one way or another as to why the people of Africa embrace one religion rather than another?

Embracing religion is only of any importance to those who care about it. Atheists have no interest in who believes what. It is utterly irrelevant to them.

Let us take this a step further with something else that Galton said that contradicts your blatherings;

Eugenics Its Definition Scope and Aims by Francis Galton

5. Persistence in setting forth the national importance of eugenics. There are three stages to be passed through: (I) It must be made familiar as an academic question, until its exact importance has been understood and accepted as a fact. (2) It must be recognized as a subject whose practical development deserves serious consideration. (3) It must be introduced into the national conscience, like a new religion. It has, indeed, strong claims to become an orthodox religious, tenet of the future, ​

Why would an Atheist want to start a "new religion"? Atheists are opposed to religion so they wouldn't advocate starting another.

Galton's terminology and his expounding upon religion in his writing demonstrate that it was something that he was constantly thinking about.

Is it because you are intellectually dishonest?

Ironic coming from an dishonest creationist.

You have utterly failed to support your baseless allegation that Galton was an Atheist. Instead you have been provided with links establishing that religion was something that he was concerned about his entire life.

I don't expect you to provide anything of substance to support your drivel because you can't.

Instead you will continue to lie as you have been doing throughout this thread.

Have a nice day.

 

[BluePhantom]

Personally, I don't believe in god and subscribe to no religion. To many people have died in the name of religion for anyone to heed the call, in my opinion. It is the bane of mankind, and is killing this planet.

More people have died in the name of money and greed than religion. Would you throw out all manner of economics because of that?

If I could? Yes. Alas, we are all slaves to the economy. We are not slaves, however, to a magical sky daddy because he doesn't actually exist.

Ironically, that is a statement of faith. You can disprove the existence of God no more than I can prove the contrary. Thus, your statement of an absolute ("....he doesn't exist") is actually a statement of faith. You have an absolute belief that God doesn't exist despite an inability to prove it. Welcome to the community of faith.

Nope!

Logically God cannot exist because of the Omnipotence paradox.

Logic is not faith.

That only works if you believe that God is omnipotent. Besides, while it's an interesting logical exercise, it hardly establishes any proof. Thomas Young's two-slit experiment established that light acts as both a particle and a wave until observed or measured. This is totally illogical and, according to our life experience and scientific understanding, completely impossible. Yet it happens....every single time the experiment is replicated. Thus, there are things that science can observe that defy logic and are "impossible" according to our degree of understanding. Therefore, a logical argument cannot be used to establish fact. It can certainly add weight to a position, or provide an aspect of interest that acts as a catalyst for greater understanding, but it doesn't ice the cake.

 

[BluePhantom]

To have faith is to believe despite the lack of evidence...You don't know that god exists any more than I know that your god doesn't. But my non-belief is not faith. It is lack of faith.

You just contradicted your own definition. You believe that God is a myth, yet you have no evidence to support that position. By your own definition, that is faith. It's in faith in the absence of God, but faith nonetheless.

 

[BluePhantom]

On the contrary. Scientists are keen to keep an open mind, so long as our brains don't fall out.

Again, you contradict yourself. You speak in absolutes about the existence of God, yet confess you have no evidence to back your position. That's not an open mind. That is a very closed and biased mind. An open mind would say "I do not believe in the existence of God, although I may be wrong". You just flat out say "there is no God". You demonstrate the exact defects you mock.

 

[Thunderbird]

Explain why an Atheist would care one way or another as to why the people of Africa embrace one religion rather than another?

This is just sad Derideo_Te. Is your reading comprehension really this poor? Galton is talking about Arabs civilizing Africa and Christians opposing slavery, etc. Of course this does not prove Galton was a Quaker or even a Christian.

Embracing religion is only of any importance to those who care about it. Atheists have no interest in who believes what. It is utterly irrelevant to them.

Laughable. Atheists often discuss religion and try to convince others that religion is foolish. What are you doing at this very moment!

Why would an Atheist want to start a "new religion"? Atheists are opposed to religion so they wouldn't advocate starting another.

If your literacy level ever improves you'll notice that Galton was trying to establish a secular religion of eugenics! Atheists often try to establish secular religions like Marxism or Rand's Objectivism. One definition of religion is: a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects. So you can definitely have an atheist religion.

Ironic coming from an dishonest creationist.

I'm not a creationist.

You have utterly failed to support your baseless allegation that Galton was an Atheist.

I never said he was. Please stop lying. I am saying the evidence shows Galton rejected Christianity.

Instead you have been provided with links establishing that religion was something that he was concerned about his entire life.

Yea people can be concerned with religion but still reject it.

Please stop being pathetic and admit your error.

 

[sealybobo]

See if the far left drones can answer this:

So is Jeremiah Wright a "Christian Fundamentalist"?

Hard to know unless we got to ask him a few questions. Does he take the bible stories as literal or allegories? And does he believe non christians go to hell?