Theories on Why Atheists are met with Hostility

[Quantum Windbag]

Ok, tell us where Christians are being persecuted.

Seriously? Do you get all your news from the Daily Show?

Christians The world s most persecuted people - Comment - Voices - The Independent

 

[Quantum Windbag]

That was horrible. You thoroughly dismantled any claim to verbatim accounts being believable. Now you're stuttering and mumbling hoping to minimize the damage.

You are the person who said no such accounts exist. Now you are claiming the fact that someone is honest is proof they are lying.

By the way, who was it that said that all eyewitness accounts are true again?

 

[THE LIGHT]

Well, that was some fine bullshit.

No, Jews follow Halakha, as written in the Tanakh.

Enjoy your haughty ignorance.

You still offer sacrifices as was REQUIRED?

For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.
(Leviticus 17:11 KJV)


Which Jews?

The ones that rebelled against Moshe?
The ones that sawed Isaiah in half with a wooden saw?
The ones that offer (past and present) incense to the queen of heaven?
The ones that abused the prophet Jeremiah?
The ones that stoned and killed the prophets?
The ones that attempted to stone Yashua?
The ones that worshiped the golden calf?
The ones that sacrificed their children to Molech?
The ones that had the Messiah killed?
The ones that got angry when their very own Rabbi Kaduri (one of Israels most prominent Rabbi's) said that the Messiah was indeed Yashua?

The ones that stoned Stephen when he told them the same thing I am telling you right now?

Yashua put it pretty plainly in his talks with the Pharisees. The Pharisees claimed they had God as their Father, but Yashua straightened them out showing them that their oral traditions were for nothing but their own lustful personal gain. And he had the Torah to back him up:


Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust. For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?
(John 5:45-47 KJV)

I know that ye are Abraham's seed; but ye seek to kill me, because my word hath no place in you. I speak that which I have seen with my Father: and ye do that which ye have seen with your father. They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham. But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham. Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God. Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me. Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word. Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it. And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not. Which of you convinceth me of sin? And if I say the truth, why do ye not believe me? He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.
(John 8:37-47 KJV)

And ye have not his word abiding in you: for whom he hath sent, him ye believe not. Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.
(John 5:38-40 KJV)

The scriptures he was referring to were those of the OT.

"Christians" like you are exactly they reason why Jews are very wary of evangelical "Christian" support. They don't support us because they love us, and you just made abundantly clear. They support us so that their eschatology in what you call the Book of Revelations can come true. In other words, we should live long enough so that we can die at the battle of Megiddo.

Crazy.

You don't need to read to read the Book of Revelation to find out the fate of the Jews and those of the house of Israel that will perish due to their stubbornness. Just read the Old Testament. You cannot say that I didn't warn you.

And it shall come to pass, that in all the land, saith the LORD, two parts therein shall be cut off and die; but the third shall be left therein. And I will bring the third part through the fire, and will refine them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold is tried: they shall call on my name, and I will hear them: I will say, It is my people: and they shall say, The LORD is my God.
(Zechariah 13:8-9 KJV)

And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds in thine hands? Then he shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.
(Zechariah 13:6 KJV)

And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things? And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand. And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days. Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days. But go thou thy way till the end be: for thou shalt rest, and stand in thy lot at the end of the days.
(Daniel 12:8-13 KJV)

The time of the end began with the first return of the Messiah, which is why we see the words being revealed to John.

And those are all OT scriptures saying the same thing that the Book of Revelation says of which you mock. Thus you have proved my point that you do not worship the same God but have added what you liked and subtracted what you didn't.

Read the Bible. Don't skip around looking for Torah portions that won't impact your views.

 

[Hollie]

That was horrible. You thoroughly dismantled any claim to verbatim accounts being believable. Now you're stuttering and mumbling hoping to minimize the damage.

You are the person who said no such accounts exist. Now you are claiming the fact that someone is honest is proof they are lying.

By the way, who was it that said that all eyewitness accounts are true again?

My comment was there were no witnesses to De' hey-Zeus rising from the dead. There were none.

You should pay attention to what I write.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Posting 503.

Oh, GAWD.

The member is not even smart enough to realize that some applications of law change with time.

 

[THE LIGHT]

Lashing out like a child who has been scolded for bad behavior doesn't change the perception that you and others are simply parroting false dogma.

I agree. So stop doing that.

If you are reactive and defensive about others challenging your dogma, you and others might consider actually being acquainted with the reality of that dogma.

Why are you so defensive?

 

[Statistikhengst]

Here, Light, learn:

Capital and corporal punishment in Judaism - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[Hollie]

Lashing out like a child who has been scolded for bad behavior doesn't change the perception that you and others are simply parroting false dogma.

I agree. So stop doing that.

If you are reactive and defensive about others challenging your dogma, you and others might consider actually being acquainted with the reality of that dogma.

Why are you so defensive?

That was quite a sidestep.

When you're unable to defend the claims you make, that should suggest to you that avoiding these venues would be a wise choice.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

My comment was there were no witnesses to De' hey-Zeus rising from the dead. There were none.

You should pay attention to what I write.

I should pay attention?

If you read what you wrote you might find that I did pay attention.

There are no accounts that anyone saw hey-zeus rise from the dead.

Dayam, you actual said that there are no accounts that anyone saw it. There are, therefore, you are wrong.

 

[Statistikhengst]

We already know who is looney on this thread.

 

[Hollie]

My comment was there were no witnesses to De' hey-Zeus rising from the dead. There were none.

You should pay attention to what I write.

I should pay attention?

If you read what you wrote you might find that I did pay attention.

There are no accounts that anyone saw hey-zeus rise from the dead.

Dayam, you actual said that there are no accounts that anyone saw it. There are, therefore, you are wrong.

What accounts exist? You do realize that according to the fable, De' Hey-zeus was in a cave when he magically arose.

Therefore, you are the one who is wrong.

 

[THE LIGHT]

Facts not in evidence!

Man exists and you are evidence of that therefore no faith is necessary.

There is no evidence that your God exists therefore you have no option but to have faith instead.

Yes, man exists. You don't own that fact. That fact is neutral and a premise held by most sane individuals. The options of where to put ones faith comes with the question of where man came from. Was he a product of soup or the product of an intelligent designer.

My faith rests in the Bible which I have verified to be true. Your faith rests in an unverifiable claim that mankind came from soup. There is no evidence for your position.

 

[THE LIGHT]

Posting 503.

Oh, GAWD.

The member is not even smart enough to realize that some applications of law change with time.

You continue to prove my point.

 

[THE LIGHT]

Lashing out like a child who has been scolded for bad behavior doesn't change the perception that you and others are simply parroting false dogma.

I agree. So stop doing that.

If you are reactive and defensive about others challenging your dogma, you and others might consider actually being acquainted with the reality of that dogma.

Why are you so defensive?

That was quite a sidestep.

When you're unable to defend the claims you make, that should suggest to you that avoiding these venues would be a wise choice.

Then you should heed your advice and leave.

 

[Hollie]

Facts not in evidence!

Man exists and you are evidence of that therefore no faith is necessary.

There is no evidence that your God exists therefore you have no option but to have faith instead.

Yes, man exists. You don't own that fact. That fact is neutral and a premise to most sane individuals. The options of where to put ones faith comes with the question of where man came from. Was he a product of soup or the product of an intelligent designer.

My faith rests in the Bible which I have verified to be true. Your faith rests in an unverifiable claim that mankind came from soup. There is no evidence for your position.

Actually, there's overwhelming evidence for biological evolution, none at all for supernatural intervention by ant gods. So, you are left to promote conspiracy theories as to why the relevant science community is wrong and you Flat Earth types are right regarding the diversity of life on the planet.

When supernaturalists/creationists find themselves unable to deal with the multiple independent sources of evidence for evolution that include the fossils, the genetic comparisons, comparative anatomy, biogeography, ecology etc., they retreat further and further to angry tirades and simpleton expressions of magical creation. But how does that help them?

Do gawds that created bacteria and then let everything else evolve from there conform any better with the record of Genesis than no gawds at all? Either way, the Bibles still cannot be taken literally. Adam and Eve are still an allegory. Biblical history is still a myth.

It is not the issue of evolutionary biology that actually concerns the creationist movement. It is only an irritant to the actual disagreement with science, and most creationists already know that. The disagreement fundamentally is about the issue of the evolution of human beings.

Creationism is not a theist vs. atheist controversy. It is a Fundamentalist Christian vs. everybody else controversy. It is a single biblical literalist perspective versus the entirety of the relevant science community.

 

[Hollie]

Lashing out like a child who has been scolded for bad behavior doesn't change the perception that you and others are simply parroting false dogma.

I agree. So stop doing that.

If you are reactive and defensive about others challenging your dogma, you and others might consider actually being acquainted with the reality of that dogma.

Why are you so defensive?

That was quite a sidestep.

When you're unable to defend the claims you make, that should suggest to you that avoiding these venues would be a wise choice.

Then you should heed your advice and leave.

And let you spam the thread with superstitious nonsense?

No. I'll stick around and counter your fears and superstitions with fact and reason.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Billy try this, Google "where are Christians being persecuted" and, "Is Christian persecution on the rise" and "Has the murder of Christians doubled."

Hollie, verbatim accounts of seeing Christ's return have been posted here. As badly as you want it not to be true, it's true anyway.

And this thread is a beautiful example of who is really faced with hostility. Christians do not treat atheists as badly as atheists treat Christians, and we have 25 pages of proof right here. Regardless of which side you're on, here is a bit of sound advice for all of us:

Matthew 7:12 So in everything, do unto others what you would have them do unto them.

Ironic coming from someone who has just lied about the last 25 pages of posts!

 

[THE LIGHT]

Actually, there's overwhelming evidence for biological evolution, none at all for supernatural intervention by ant gods. So, you are left to promote conspiracy theories as to why the relevant science community is wrong and you Flat Earth types are right regarding the diversity of life on the planet.

When supernaturalists/creationists find themselves unable to deal with the multiple independent sources of evidence for evolution that include the fossils, the genetic comparisons, comparative anatomy, biogeography, ecology etc., they retreat further and further to angry tirades and simpleton expressions of magical creation. But how does that help them?

Do gawds that created bacteria and then let everything else evolve from there conform any better with the record of Genesis than no gawds at all? Either way, the Bibles still cannot be taken literally. Adam and Eve are still an allegory. Biblical history is still a myth.

It is not the issue of evolutionary biology that actually concerns the creationist movement. It is only an irritant to the actual disagreement with science, and most creationists already know that. The disagreement fundamentally is about the issue of the evolution of human beings.

Creationism is not a theist vs. atheist controversy. It is a Fundamentalist Christian vs. everybody else controversy. It is a single biblical literalist perspective versus the entirety of the relevant science community.

FACTS:

• One sentence is spent asserting that there is overwhelming evidence for evolution.
• No evidence is presented for Darwinian Evolution. Not even one example.
• The remaining 4.5 paragraphs are spent railing against people who don't choose to follow Hollie's religious dogma.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Facts not in evidence!

Man exists and you are evidence of that therefore no faith is necessary.

There is no evidence that your God exists therefore you have no option but to have faith instead.

Yes, man exists. You don't own that fact.

Actually we, mankind, do own that fact.

That fact is neutral and a premise held by most sane individuals. The options of where to put ones faith comes with the question of where man came from. Was he a product of soup or the product of an intelligent designer.

My faith rests in the Bible which I have verified to be true. Your faith rests in an unverifiable claim that mankind came from soup. There is no evidence for your position.

Utterly irrelevant!

Your mythical belief that your God "created" man rests on nothing but the imaginations of bronze age men who believed that they should make a blood sacrifice of their own children to your God.

That your "faith" is placed in a bloodthirsty egomaniac who murdered innocent first born children because he was throwing a hissyfit is the height of irrationality.

While the exact origin of life is yet to be determined the evolution of man can be traced through hundreds of millions of years of scientific evidence.

 

[THE LIGHT]

Lashing out like a child who has been scolded for bad behavior doesn't change the perception that you and others are simply parroting false dogma.

I agree. So stop doing that.

If you are reactive and defensive about others challenging your dogma, you and others might consider actually being acquainted with the reality of that dogma.

Why are you so defensive?

That was quite a sidestep.

When you're unable to defend the claims you make, that should suggest to you that avoiding these venues would be a wise choice.

Then you should heed your advice and leave.

And let you spam the thread with superstitious nonsense?

No. I'll stick around and counter your fears and superstitions with fact and reason.

Don't forget to wear your tinfoil hat.