Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

d-usa wrote:Everybody judges everybody

/end thread

No not yet, I just got my seat.

Jesus Freaks what say you!

treadhead1944 wrote:

dæl wrote:

unmercifulconker wrote:

curran12 wrote:Well, the loud atheists whine and play victim in the same tone of the nonsense that loud religious people do. All the same stuff.

Bang on!

Religious fanatics preach their belief that their god is the true god.

Atheist fanatics preach their belief that there is no god.

Both groups are ignorant, enjoy.

Evangelicals of every type are idiots. The difference between faith based ones and non faith based ones is that faith based ones often cause more suffering as they make people live by illogical and outdated codes of conduct. But still, evangelicals are idiots, and "live and let live" should be the order of the day.

As an Evangelical Christian, I take offense here. I have never even stated my religious beliefs here before, while you sir have at every opportunity mentioned your atheism. Please do not paint with such a broad brush.

Evangelical as in those who believe that everyone should be the same as them and will force people to follow their system, these come from both sides of the fence. The fact you've never tried to spread your beliefs kind of precludes you from that don't you think.

I shall clarify, evangelicals who do not act in an evangelical manner fall under he "live and let live" ideal that I mentioned.

daedalus wrote:*Flexes fingers*

...Nah. Not worth it. I swear we just had this thread, like, a month ago.

Schools out for the summer. The kiddos are bored and it's, like, really hot outside or something.

dæl wrote:

treadhead1944 wrote:

dæl wrote:

unmercifulconker wrote:

curran12 wrote:Well, the loud atheists whine and play victim in the same tone of the nonsense that loud religious people do. All the same stuff.

Bang on!

Religious fanatics preach their belief that their god is the true god.

Atheist fanatics preach their belief that there is no god.

Both groups are ignorant, enjoy.

Evangelicals of every type are idiots. The difference between faith based ones and non faith based ones is that faith based ones often cause more suffering as they make people live by illogical and outdated codes of conduct. But still, evangelicals are idiots, and "live and let live" should be the order of the day.

As an Evangelical Christian, I take offense here. I have never even stated my religious beliefs here before, while you sir have at every opportunity mentioned your atheism. Please do not paint with such a broad brush.

Evangelical as in those who believe that everyone should be the same as them and will force people to follow their system, these come from both sides of the fence. The fact you've never tried to spread your beliefs kind of precludes you from that don't you think.

To a point yes, however, as defined by thefreedictionary.com, I find this a more appropriate definition of Evangelical:

1. Of, relating to, or in accordance with the Christian gospel, especially one of the four gospel books of the New Testament.

The term you want here is fundamentalism, defined at the same source as:

1. A usually religious movement or point of view characterized by a return to fundamental principles, by rigid adherence to those principles, and often by intolerance of other views and opposition to secularism.
2.
a. often Fundamentalism An organized, militant Evangelical movement originating in the United States in the late 19th and early 20th century in opposition to Protestant Liberalism and secularism, insisting on the inerrancy of Scripture.
b. Adherence to the theology of this movement.

As an Evangelical, I believe in the Bible, and Jesus as my Lord and Savior. As a human I believe in Gay rights, that the death penalty is wrong and should be abolished, I am against abortion but will never try to deny anyone the right to have one if they so wish, and lastly I believe in Evolution (Micro, not Macro) and Intelligent Design.

Ouze wrote:

Testify wrote:The replies in this thread are telling.
Athiests are better than other people, therefore they don't have a religion

Well, I can't speak for nonbelievers as a whole, but for myself, I don't think people who do believe are dumber or more gullible then me. Since I don't have faith, I think that might also somewhat circumvent my ability to understand it, so who am I to make judgements about that? If it brings you some comfort or balance or what have you, then good for you. I think militant atheists are just as bad (maybe worse!) then religious zealots.

It's the Anti-theist v. live and let live on religion. I've generally thought it best to have live and let live on believers, though there are a lot of them who don't follow that themselves, promoting more anti-theistic thinking.

Testify wrote:~Stalin~

Stalin has been dead for nearly sixty years, the Eastern bloc was dismantled more than two decades ago. Right now, in the developed world, evangelical Christians are using the very same disingenuous parallel with which this discussion to teach our children mythology dressed up with pseudo-science in place of biology. Really, where are the atheists/secularists/godless scientists that are interfering in religion doctrine?

@ treadhead Fair point, my understanding of evangelicalism comes from a vicar who used to frequent a pub I worked at. He had issues with what he saw as "evangelical atheists" and I had to agree with him on that point.

English Assassin wrote:

Testify wrote:~Stalin~

Stalin has been dead for nearly sixty years

That is just what they want you to think!

English Assassin wrote:Really, where are the atheists/secularists/godless scientists that are interfering in religion doctrine?

Stem cell research?

Aww. I was hoping for a zombie Stalin behind that spoiler button.

English Assassin wrote:...in place of biology.

Not everyone can grow up to be Richard Dawkins.

English Assassin wrote:Aww. I was hoping for a zombie Stalin behind that spoiler button.

That would be silly; Stalin is no zombie.

dogma wrote:

English Assassin wrote:...in place of biology.

Not everyone can grow up to be Richard Dawkins.

I think it would be fair to say that in a state-funded educational system, everybody deserves the right to be taught science in their science classes.

dæl wrote:Stem cell research?

Eh?

English Assassin wrote:

Testify wrote:~Stalin~

Stalin has been dead for nearly sixty years, the Eastern bloc was dismantled more than two decades ago. Right now, in the developed world, evangelical Christians are using the very same disingenuous parallel with which this discussion to teach our children mythology dressed up with pseudo-science in place of biology. Really, where are the atheists/secularists/godless scientists that are interfering in religion doctrine?

The Whitehouse, mandating that they can decide who is and who isn't a religious institution?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ahtman wrote:

English Assassin wrote:Aww. I was hoping for a zombie Stalin behind that spoiler button.

That would be silly; Stalin is no zombie.

Spoiler:

Or is he?

SHhh! The first rule of the Stalin Vampire Appreciation Society is no one talks about the Stalin Vampire Appreciation Society!

English Assassin wrote:

dæl wrote:Stem cell research?

Eh?

I was given to understand it went against religion, but people are still doing it.

English Assassin wrote:
I think it would be fair to say that in a state-funded educational system, everybody deserves the right to be taught science in their science classes.

Moms unite.

dæl wrote:

English Assassin wrote:

dæl wrote:Stem cell research?

Eh?

I was given to understand it went against religion, but people are still doing it.

Doing things of which the religious disapprove is not the same as interfering with their practice of their religion.

English Assassin wrote:
Doing things of which the religious disapprove is not the same as interfering with their practice of their religion.

Yeah, it pretty much is, hence the contention.

English Assassin wrote:

dæl wrote:

English Assassin wrote:

dæl wrote:Stem cell research?

Eh?

I was given to understand it went against religion, but people are still doing it.

Doing things of which the religious disapprove is not the same as interfering with their practice of their religion.

Fair point, I suppose gay marriage would if we forced priests to marry them in church. Just as well that was never the plan.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

dogma wrote:

English Assassin wrote:
Doing things of which the religious disapprove is not the same as interfering with their practice of their religion.

Yeah, it pretty much is, hence the contention.

It depends whether they think everyone as part of their religion I suppose.

For some reason all this talk of Stalin made me think of this:



I use the spoiler tags not to hide the image, but so that if someone doesn't truncate a post it doesn't make the pyramid even larger.

If you define religion as "how do you define humanity's connection with the universe", then atheism is absolutely a religion.


But, really, this is all just semantics and doesn't really matter.

This. There is no grand conspiracy by the religious to make evolutionary theory a religious idea so they can ban it. Take off those tin foil hats they look silly without streamers. At the end of the day most people define 'religion' however they please, and the irony of that is that atheism can be described as the anti-religion religion if one so chooses to think of it that way.

Evangelical as in those who believe that everyone should be the same as them and will force people to follow their system, these come from both sides of the fence. The fact you've never tried to spread your beliefs kind of precludes you from that don't you think.

That's not what evangelism is. Evangelism is simply preaching at every opportunity, not forcing. What you're describing is fundamentalism. But hey, most people just throw those words around so what do I know?

LordofHats wrote:There is no grand conspiracy by the religious to make evolutionary theory a religious idea so they can ban it.

Well, it isn't grand.

Ahtman wrote:

English Assassin wrote:

Testify wrote:~Stalin~

Stalin has been dead for nearly sixty years

That is just what they want you to think!

Spoiler:

Stalin is in stasis.

LordofHats wrote:

Evangelical as in those who believe that everyone should be the same as them and will force people to follow their system, these come from both sides of the fence. The fact you've never tried to spread your beliefs kind of precludes you from that don't you think.

That's not what evangelism is. Evangelism is simply preaching at every opportunity, not forcing. What you're describing is fundamentalism. But hey, most people just throw those words around so what do I know?

The problem comes when you ascribe that to atheists, how can there be an atheist fundamentalist? It's a position that can't strictly exist, how can one adhere to a theological doctrine that doesn't exist. My whole intention of bringing up the subject of evangelism was to show that it's not what people believe but how they act on those beliefs, and I was trying to lump all sides together equally, by using a definition that can only be ascribed to one side I would be against that side and not the other.

LordofHats wrote:

This. There is no grand conspiracy by the religious to make evolutionary theory a religious idea so they can ban it.

Then why bring it up at all? If its really just a discussion of what is and is not a religion, then why do theists keep making the claim that atheism is a religion? As no atheists are making the claim that it is.

If the atheists make it a religion like the atheists Buddhists, then its a religion. If they don't make it a religion then its not. Surely the people claiming atheist that categorize it as either a religion or not a religion.

Technically atheism is a religious belief...

purplefood wrote:Technically atheism is a religious belief...

NO, technically atheism is having no belief in god.

sirlynchmob wrote:

purplefood wrote:Technically atheism is a religious belief...

NO, technically atheism is having no belief in god.

Or believing there is no god, which is is the proper way to frame it.

In that context, it does seem a bit religious...

sirlynchmob wrote:

purplefood wrote:Technically atheism is a religious belief...

NO, technically atheism is having no belief in god.

It's believing that no God or higher power exists.
It's a religious belief albeit in terms of denial.
So it's technically a religious belief.
I wouldn't call it a religion though...