) (08/06/90)
[I believe this was compiled from a questionaire circulated on
talk.atheism. Since the folks involved in this questionaire are
probably not readers of this group, I don't think David intends you to
respond to the criticisms made here, but rather to take them into
account in developing your attitudes towards those who are not
Christian. --clh]
HERE IS A COMPILED LIST OF ANSWERS TO THE FOLLOWING QUESTION:
************************************************************************
* "WHAT MOTIVATES YOU TO ARGUE/DEBATE/DISPROVE THE EXISTENCE OF GOD?" *
************************************************************************
ONE CAN COME TO SEVERAL CONCLUSIONS ABOUT HOW PEOPLE ARE TURNED OFF TO
GOD AND RELIGION IN THEIR LIVES. HOPEFULLY ANY CONCLUSIONS YOU COME TO
WILL:
1) BE CONVICTING PERSONALLY.
2) CULTIVATE COMPASSION FOR PEOPLE WHO PUT
THEMSELVES IN THIS POSITION.
3) MOTIVATE YOU TO LEARN HOW TO BE A DISCIPLE OF JESUS AND REACH
OUT TO PEOPLE AS HE DID.
============================================================================
Answer: Self-defense.
That's a big part of it. Attempts by organized religious entities
(Christian, mostly) to impose their morality on everyone else provokes
a response from me. Purveying mythology as "fact" provokes a response
also. With the exception of one occasion -- when one Christian poster
on this group was trying to justify his homophobia by citing 1st
Corinthians as his authority -- on which I posted on soc.religion
to ask a question, I have adopted a hands-off approach.
Christians proselytizers, however, seem to take great pleasure in
posting to this group. That, of course, is their right. I believe
their more outrageous statements deserve a response. I'll generally
carry on a dialogue/conversation/argument so long as they play
by accepted rules of discourse.
---
paul hager
"I would give the Devil benefit of the law for my own safety's sake."
--from _A_Man_for_All_Seasons_ by Robert Bolt
============================================================================
The fact that people who believe in the existence of some type of God have an
influence on the society I live in, and often act on their belief in ways which
affect me.
============================================================================
1) Ammusement (I sometimes like arguing)
2) Self defense from those who are trying to prove the existence of
god(s).
3) Self defense from those who think that people who think that people
who don't believe in god(s) are bad.
4) Self defense from people who think that due to their beliefs they
have a right to legislate on what I am allowed to do.
5) I get irritated by people holding what I see as dumb (or inconnsistant)
beliefs
Note that in general I am aware that many people hold these beliefs
as important, so unless the person has signaled to me that they are
willing to have these beliefs challenged I try not to inflict my
veiws on the
-mike
============================================================================
I don't usually go around looking to argue about god. But when
someone tries to impose their views on me I do argue back. Not so
much because I care that they believe in god, but more because I hate
facists - in any form. I have no problem with someone who is very
devote to a god, but when they try to force their views on me I do get
upset.
Also, I am motivated to argue about everything because I love to
argue. Argueing is the best way to sharpen your mind and decrease
mental response time.
See ya
------
Stan Marshall
Carnegie Mellon Univ.
"Everyday I see myself in the mirror
But I do not know who's staring back at me" - Midwinter Night
============================================================================
I don't.
I simply don't believe that a god exists.
It's that simple.
I will debate with people that try to
say that *I* am wrong, but I never say that
they are. I don't care how other people
think or act. I don't care what their
beliefs are. But I feel that anyone that
tries to tell me that I am wrong for NOT
believing in god is a bigot.
There are ways of trying to "convert" people
that aren't forceful and don't come across
as "Hey! You're a fool for thinking that way!
convert or burn in hell!" But, unfortunately,
most do.
I just don't believe.
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Price | It infuriates me to be wrong
| when I know I'm right....
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
============================================================================
I have spoken to many people who CLAIM to be christians. I find it
sickening that with ONE text to go by, they all have their own OPINIONS
as to what they believe. If their god is a logical god, I would think that
he/she/it would want them to have one understanding. The lack of unity in
this let alone unity among christian relationships here is sad. If I could
find a group of people who are REALLY LIVING what they believe, not just
believing, and unity among them that could only be from a god, then my
arguing would change to questions only. That would be the closest proof to
the existence of a god I could find. I've read about the early christian
church, in the 1st century. If what is written in acts really happened,
then maybe it's happening today. The "disciples" back then had it all
together it seems. Today it's all a mess. So, where are the true disciples
today?
......franz
============================================================================
The same reason that motivates those who believe the existence of a God
that they can neither see, hear, touch, smell, etc. to defend his existence.
I do not see myself as trying to DISprove anything. The assertion is
MAN MADE that God exists,therefore I am simply waiting for some concrete
"proof" from the asserters. However, the very nature of God implies that
no concrete proof can
ever be given (i.e. in the end it always comes down to a question of
belief), and that He must be accepted on Faith alone. I for one, cannot
accept this, hence my motivation to debate the existence of said God.
~dan
============================================================================
What motivates any debate or argument?
The topic is of interest, the adversarial approach quickly illustrates the
limits of knowledge and argument (how else to test one's biases?), and
(I think) we learn a lot about people and their emotions and (ir)rationality.
It's better than a game of pickup soccer. After all, nothing of any
significance rests on the outcome of my soccer games, but I love to play
nonetheless. Debate about a contentious issue can be not only fun, but
much can be learned as well. It sort of died for me when I stopped learning.
I started reading and posting to alt.atheism when it was created. After
debate with a dozen or more theists, with a broad range of experience and
rationality and intelligence, I find my interest sated. Until something
relatively new shows up, I've given up on the debates, because I think I've
gotten as much as I am reasonably capable of getting out of them. My kill
file now contains the current 3 rabid theists, and I only drop in to see
if something new arises.
============================================================================
One reason is that I see too many people being made more ignorant and/or
intolerant because of religion. For example the irrational protests
against heavy metal because of the supposed backwards messages and their
supposed effects. Religion often is a cause of division in society
that shouldn't have to be there - I'm against all forms of intolerance
I guess I'm quite intolerant of intolerance :-)
There are probably other reasons but this is the first one I thought of.
Frank Breen
============================================================================
Mainly, the needless misery I saw folks suffering as a result of their
religious beliefs--the narrow attitudes and guilts and fears and the
passivity with which they view life. It seems that belief in the
christian god can create these problems, although I have known a few
theists for whom it did not.
By the way, I do not argue or debate the existence of god (and therefore,
haven't disproved it's existence). I simply don't think such belief is
a worthwhile endeavor.
Lisa.
============================================================================
What motivates me?
Well seeing an otherwise bright friend waste his time on a childish
superstition is part of it. And of course seeing all the other damage caused
by various superstitions.
Besides I like discussions ;-)
Stig 'Tortoise' Hemmer
PS: I hope you don't get flamed for that posting. It's a good question.
============================================================================
Mostly it's because we have so little work to do :)
Actually, I'm a 'militant atheist' because I see many of the worlds
problems as having been caused by religion. Obviously, here, (usa)
christianity is the most influential religion, and it's also one of the
most hypocritical, thus making it an easy (and slow moving) target.
Religion is a form of apathy: believe in the supernatural and there's no
need to search for the answers to life's questions. Religeous people
are placid: they have no sparc. (sun joke) They may as well be dead
now, 'cept for the fact that the world need people to be ditch diggers
and system administrators.
Just some ramblings...
--smz
============================================================================
I am not motivated to disprove the existence of dieties (a hopeless
exercise if there ever was one). I only argue or debate the issue
because it is so prevalent in western (and perhaps all) society.
I have personal feelings on the matter and only enter into a
debate when "confronted" by others. I don't put much effort into
trying to convince "believers" that they are "wrong".
I hope this helps.
Rick Gillespie | Solbourne Computer, Inc.
============================================================================
That's a toughie. Really, it just disappoints me to hear anyone seriously
talking about something as fantastic/hokus pokus as the topics presented
in the bible. That, and everyone's arguing about it on alt.atheism, so
why not just join in??!
Marc Anderson
(although I don't do a lot of posting on that newsgroup, my opinions represent
a lot of what the atheists have say....)
============================================================================
Allow me to dodge your question!
I think there are more interesting questions than "Does God exist?".
This group does spend a lot of time on that point (stimulated
by the continued postings of various Christians), but I would rather see
it move to questions like, "What is morality, if there is no God?", or
"What does one believe, if there is no God?". There are also possible
topics in such things as governmental interference with belief,
endorsement of relgion, etc. So the debate on God's existence is of
only marginal interest, to me at least.
To answer on a more basic level: I debate and argue for recreation.
I like to hear other people's ideas, and I like to share my own.
I like banter (civilized, preferably!) and I like ideas. I do it for fun,
plain and simple.
============================================================================
My interest in the atheist debate is multithreaded, which is to say that I find
the question important to me in many different aspects of my life. So one might
say that, independently of my own actual opinion on the matter, I simply find
the matter *interesting*.
Beyond this, however, I find the matter *important*. Ultimately, I think dogma
is generally bad, and I believe that religions perpetuate dogma in the name of
god. My response is to try to undermine the dogma at its source. This takes
several forms, depending on the context. Some people believe in god because they
believe the universe is Designed, or has a Purpose. They believe this because
they also believe that without purpose, there can be no hope, only pessimism.
For these people I try to paint a picture of a universe without god, but one
in which hope and dignity still play an important role. Others believe in god
because they believe that the universe requires a moral standard by which to
judge human (and other) action, and that only god could provide such a standard.
To these people I try to demonstrate that, while it is true that we need moral
standards by which to live, such standards can be derived without resort to
Divine intervention, and through a process of rational decision making.
Steve Gardner
"He who marches joyfully in rank and file has already earned my contempt.
A large brain has been wasted on this individual, since for him, a spinal cord
would suffice."
Albert Einstein
============================================================================
My response>
Whether I believe in a God, Diety, or all-powerful force, I have no real
choice but to live in this society. While there are bigots like Bruce
Tiffany who seem mentally incapable of concieving of people who don't
believe as they do, there are (I believe) a large number of people who
aren't closed minded. While for some their personal faith is unshakable
(which is fine with me) they ARE willing to allow others to believe or
not as they chose. Most of them however, are honestly curious as to what
has led a person to 'believe, disbelieve, or not have a belief'.
This forum, when not overrun with ignorant preachers, allows those of us
with other than mainstream outlooks a way to communicate our side of things
without being shouted down just because we aren't parroting the majority
viewpoint. Although I at first despaired of the continual wrangling with
the deists that refused to allow a space for non-deists to discuss their
own issues, I believe that a purpose is served in any case. Watching the
absolutist pronouncements of a fringe group of deist fundamentalists has
made many reasonable and intelligent deists become much more sympathetic
to the verbal oppression visited on those not sharing that particular
world view.
I hope this helps. On the other hand, if you are another fundy looking for
easy shots, please just leave us alone. We get enough hassle every single
day.
--
Dewey Henize Execucom Systems Corp
============================================================================
I like to argue and this topic is everlasting and interesting at the same time.
Moreover, there are so many points to defend the arguement or tear
it to shreds. I do it mostly for the fun of it and to get peoples
views on it. It also helps me to understand how that person thinks
and how matured the person is.
So, basically its a way to get to know somebody better (for me)
without actually asking direct questions.
THAT is my main motivation.
============================================================================
Hello there,
A friendly reply to the friendly question you posted:
I am perhaps not a hard-core Atheist, since I do not find
the concept of God(s) intrinsically impossible or ridiculous.
My lack of religious belief is more the result of my
application of Occam's Razor: I see no _need_ to invoke any
supernatural being to explain what I observe in the world.
And unnecessary entities are to be eliminated from one's hypotheses.
Nonetheless, the idea of God is intriguing, and makes for
fascinating speculations and discussions of the 'what-if'
type. This aspect of my interest in God puts it on a par
with my interest in science fiction (and there is indeed
a large class of science fiction/fantasy exploring such
ideas, for example Piers Anthony's 'Incarnation' series.)
More seriously, I am interested in this topic because so many people
_do_ believe in various gods. Even if _I_ can't find any
evidence for God, there must be some reason why so many
people think they have. If it were just the kind of bigoted
illiterates who fill certain churches, I wouldn't worry too
much - but I have several close friends, people whom I have good
reason to believe are intelligent and reasonable, who claim to have
found God and are now active church members.
Now it could be argued that testimony from close and trusted friends
should be sufficient to make me at least a tentative believer -
the problem is just that these friends have not all encountered
the _same_ god. Their theologies are, at least superficially,
contradictory. So, there's something funny going on, somewhere
in this business. And a major motivation for me to debate theology
and related topics is to try to find out what's going on:
- Why do some people believe in God(s) at all ?
- Why are there so many different and contradictory ideas
about God floating around ?
- IS there something real behind all this mess, and if so what ?
- If there is a God, what do I do about it ? Pascal's wager ?
All this boils down to a basic desire to understand how the world
works. If there is a God who interferes in the world, I need
to find out about this to understand the world. If there is no
God, the existence of religious faith becomes a major problem in
my attempts to understand people. Either way, I want to know what
there is to know about God, and people's faith in him.
I have read a lot of theological literature, including important parts of
the Bible, and various attempts to prove the existence or nonexistence
of God. I did not find any of this completely satisfactory - it seems
there is no way to conclusively prove anything, one way or the other.
So right now I'm stuck - I see no need for God, but can't see any
compelling reason to exclude him completely from consideration either;
a rather unsatisfactory state of affairs.
Another problem is that the traditional religions with which I'm familiar
appear to have serious problems with their internal consistency,
such as the old question of why a benevolent God has created a world
full of evil. Intelligent and rational believers must have found
ways to resolve such problems; I am interested in debating their solutions.
As I see it, a _necessary_ condition for the existence of God, is the
existence of an internally consistent _concept_ of God. If a particular
religion cannot show that their concept of God is internally consistent,
I will take that as _dis_proof of that religion (but of course not
a general disproof of God - the discussion here too easily gets stuck on
a Christian-type God, which is not the only possible kind.)
To conclude: whether God exists or not, religion is important in human
civilization. And if God does exist, this is important for
everything. In any case, God is a concept to be taken seriously,
and to be carefully investigated and debated.
I hope this is an adequate answer to your question.
May your God be with you
Sverker Johansson
============================================================================
As an atheist, nothing at all motivates me to disprove, argue or debate
the existance of anything I do not see as part of reality.
As an activist, however, I feel motivated to disprove, argue, or debate any
and all forms of tyranny in any way I can.
Regarding your attempt to use the biblical allegation that God pricks the
conscience of those who deny his existance, well, now that you have asked
me indirectly to think about how I might be harming myself, I'd ask you to
reciprocate.
No, I'm not interested in further dialogue.
==============================================================================
This is the fist time I ever read this group let alone the first reponse
I've made. It does seem a bit silly for this group to be agruing about
something they say doesn't exist. My only guesses are that 1) They want
to belive but need it proved to them or 2)Wish to spread their gosspel.
(Sometimes I think that Athism is the biggest religion of all.)
Personaly I am an Atheis (SP?) but never argued about it with anyone
since I know that it is a fact and that know one can shake me from that
fact. (I'm a stubbern bastard!) Why all these yammer heads go on about
it I'll never figure out but atleast it provides me with amusement.
Stuart Carter
==============================================================================
Think about it. You ask the above question in alt.atheism and don't
know what the motivation is? Consider the number of times that
scripture-spouters discover alt.atheism and feel compelled to curse
the regular readers. Consider the endless postings concerning
christianity (which OUGHT TO BE IN SOC.RELIGION.CHRISTIAN) that have
nothing at all to do with atheism.
I could care less about god. If it weren't for believers the subject
would never come up.
===============================================================================
As someone else said, if no one posited the existence of God, I doubt I
would find it necessary to discuss him. However, given that a great number of
people, including my current SO of eight months, seem to believe that such a
one exists, I find it worthwhile to discuss the notion. I am currently of the
belief that He does not, since I have not been given the combination of
rational argument and empirical evidence required by my nature to justify
belief in His existence, but if/when I am given such, I will certainly be
willing to believe that He does exist.
Boy, that sounds pompous. My two posts to alt.atheism thusfar have not been
typical of my usual relaxed style; hope no one holds it against me (grin).
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
| Reality: Josh Smith | Josh Smith '92 |
| | Swarthmore College |
===============================================================================
The same reason that motivates those who believe the existence of a God
that they can neither see, hear, touch, smell, etc. to defend his existence.
I do not see myself as trying to DISprove anything. The assertion is
MAN MADE that God exists,therefore I am simply waiting for some concrete
"proof" from the asserters. However, the very nature of God implies that
no concrete proof can
ever be given (i.e. in the end it always comes down to a question of
belief), and that He must be accepted on Faith alone. I for one, cannot
accept this, hence my motivation to debate the existence of said God.
~dan
===============================================================================
Hi All!
I have been reading this group for a while and feel I should contribute
something. So, I have written a little parady for you. Atheists have
Evolution and theists have their religion, so I hope you like it!
(especially my sig!)
|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|*|
Why Things Are The Way They Are (For Now):
In The Beginning (plagiarizism?) there were a bunch of little creatures
about 3 feet tall. They were insectivores who spent the day chasing
after 'four legged' Grasshoppers. One day the Grasshoppers became
'enlightened'. And they said to the three foot tall insectivores:
"Chase aftereth the cows - if you doeth so, you will grow up to
be talleth and strongeth".
The three foot tall insectivores listened to the 'four legged'
Grasshoppers and did in fact groweth up to be talleth and strongeth.
Whileeth their new food source was making them taller and stronger it
enabled them to avoideth many of the dangers the smaller critters would
succumbeth to (namely, being used as food by the larger critters). Thus:
"The oneeth who possesseth strengtheth surviveeth more easily"
Thuseth, they needeth not spend all of their day lookingeth over their
shoulder to see if they were about to become some critters luncheth.
Henceeth they had FREE TIME to - for the first time evereth - to begin
contemplating their existence. Henceeth:
"FREE TIME giveeth one opportunity to contemplateeth survival tactics"
(Also Known as)
"If a critter seeketh you as its lunch, makeeth sure it EARNs that lunch"
Sooneth they noticed the many advantages the many different critters
had by staying in groups. The now tallereth 'four footeth creatures'
noticeeth the difficulty in obtaining luncheth from a herd. Thuseth
their now blossoming intelligence concludedeth:
"Unitedeth I Surviveeth - Dividedeth I Become a Critter's Luncheth"
With this new wisdometh the now five footeth creatures began living
in largereth and largereth groups. Sooneth the number of critters
availableeth for luncheth became fewereth and fewereth in numbers.
The five footeth creatures thuseth concludedeth:
"Always moveeth to where luncheth is readily availableeth"
Sooneth the creatures grew wearyeth of alwayseth running to whereeth
the luncheth was. Thuseth they concludedeth:
"It is wisereth to move luncheth to us instead of growing wearyeth
alwayseth chasing aftereth luncheth"
And so it beganeth. Instead of killing all of the critters and using
them for luncheth, they only captured them. They would locketh them
up and only killeth the older ones. The younger ones would be made
to have babies. Thuseth luncheth would always be readily nearbyeth.
"Use of one's braineth makes life easiereth"
The creatures thuseth enjoyed an unprecedented period of Utopian life.
They had oodles and oodles of FREE TIME to think about all that there
was about them. As a resulteth, very sooneth, their FREE TIME - that
which they were so mucheth enjoying - would causeeth them all manner
of sorrow:
"How is iteth that that which provided sucheth joyeth could also
takeeth it awayeth"
The elders pondered this very question whileest all of that which they
had enjoyed crumbled around them. The younger ones kept turning to
the elders saying, over and over again:
"Whyeth, Whyeth, Whyeth, Whyeth, Whyeth, Whyeth, Whyeth, ....."
Soon, a thought occurred to the wisest of the elders. The thought was
simply that the younger ones hungered for a reason why what was Utopia
was no longer Utopia. The wisest of the elders then noticed that She
too hadeth, for a very long time, been asking that very same question.
Wise as she was, she concludedeth that all people with FREE TIME will
asketh themselves the following:
"Where Am I Going - Where Did I Come From - How Long Have I Got"
She soon evolved this thought into the realization that creatures with
FREE TIME do not need an absolute answer to these questions. Rather,
they only need AN ANSWER. Thuseth, the wisest of the elders drew the
only possible (most sacred) conclusion:
"Telleth people what they want to hear. Care not foreth the truth,
for once people feal safeeth, theyeth will no longer feareth that
which theyeth do noteth understand"
Thus the most heinous of these creatures traits was created, namely:
DECEPTION and MANIPULATION
Sooneth, the other elders caught on to the advantages of the use of
DECEPTION and MANIPULATION. They, too, begin to use it with wantless
abandonment. Soon it evolved into a fine art, and that art acquired a
name. The name was:
"P O L I T I C S"
Sooneth many of the elders learned of the powers over the masses the
selective use of "P O L I T I C S" could bring them. Soon, very soon,
they began to use "P O L I T I C S" to subdue the masses. It was
working, too. Peace and tranquility were being restored. Joy and
happiness were being restored in the hearts of the younger ones.
Then, suddenly, deep, deep, sorrow stuck Utopia. The sorrow was
caused by ILLNESS and FAMINE. The elders, even with their most skilled
use of "P O L I T I C S" could not remove the sorrow from the hearts
of the young ones as their babies and/or spouses died horribly from
painfull deaths due to ILLNESS and FAMINE.
The elders were at a total loss. The younger ones grew increasingly
more and more resentful and hateful for the loss of what they new
in their innocent hearts to be Utopia. Their resentment and hate,
without any guidance from the elders, began to be directed towards the
elders. The elders 'gulped'. They turned to the wisest of the wise
and She said "Can't we discuss this tomorrow, if you knew what kind of
a nightmare I had last night, you would not even think of talking to
me for a week".
Then it occurred to the wisest of the wise and in a thundering voice
She said:
"We are all being punished for the sins of the sinners"
This caused total confusion amongst the wise elders since they did not
understand what SIN was. The wisest elder then proceeded to explain
to the other elders what SIN was. Each of the other elders scratched
their heads pondering 'I didn't know there was anything wrong with
doing "xxx" (no-pun intended)'.
Thus the wisest of the wise had created the ultimate form of control
of the masses. This method of control would soon become known as:
"R E L I G I O N"
The other elders were completely perplexed (and shaking in their
booties as they had bowel movements). They then ran out to confront
the younger ones to tell them why such dastardly things were happening.
Meanwhile, the wisest of the elders just stood there with a smirk on
Her face. She know that She had just pulled off the greatest act of
"P O L I T I C S" that had ever been attempted, ever. You see, She had
created "R E L I G I O N", and in so doing, she had completely
outfoxed the other elders. She now had total control over all of Utopia!
Peace, joy, and happiness were once againeth being restored to Utopia.
The other elders, and the younger ones, were constantly chasing aftereth
the wisest of the wise. Fearfulleth of doing anything wrongeth, they
would constantly ask Her "Is this okay?" and "Is that okay?". Thuseth,
she had devised the most important aspect of "R E L I G I O N",
namelyeth:
M I N D C O N T R O L
Soon the other elders, with all of their wisdom, sensed that what the
wisest elder was saying could not be true. But as they watched howeth
"R E L I G I O N" did so effectively control the younger ones,
they were reminded of "DECEPTION" and "MANIPULATION" and of howeth
"P O L I T I C S" could be used to controleth the masses.
Many of the elders, seeing the POWER that the "M I N D C O N T R O L"
aspect of "R E L I G I O N" gave the wisest elder, wanted 'a piece
of the action'. A sacred manuscript was written, by the elders, giving
the elders (who were IN on IT) great powers over the entirety of the
masses.
Many of the elders were not happy with the POWERs they had been given.
They wanted MORE POWER and MORE CONTROL of the masses. But the wisest
elder would not give up any of Her POWER. So a few of the other elders
sat down and decided to write THEIR OWN sacred manuscript.
With their sacred manuscript they wondered around denouncing the wisest
elder's manuscript as being false - only the manuscript they were given,
by the supreme being Herself - MUST be followed, otherwise ILLNESS and
FAMINE would result.
The younger ones were confused. Some believed the wisest elder, others
believed the other elders. Soon both sides started calling the other
side EVIL. So EVIL that they must be cast out, even killed, otherwise
ILLNESS and FAMINE would result. Thuseth was started, the first of the:
R E L I G I O U S W A R S
Many of the masses died. Babies heads were smashed against rocks, women
who were pregnent had their fetuses cut out from them, the frail were
bludgeoned to death with rocks.
Out of all the death, destruction, misery, anger, selfrightousness, and
hatred sprang a few enlightened people. They looked into their hearts,
and at all that was around them. They thought, and then they concluded:
R E L I G I O N is B U L L F E C E S
Thuseth, just as they all had once been, they were that once again,
namely:
A T H E I S T ' s
Ron,,,
(P.S. If you consider that in each valley in Europe, a Pagan religion
started (the same way the wisest of the wise started one), and that
the elders who 'wanted a piece of the action' are the Jewish, and then
Christian, and then Moslem/(Islam?) religions, you get a good depiction
of the history of Europe/North Africa).
(P.P.S. It just occurred to me. 2,000 years ago, Grasshoppers DID
have 4 legs. They have more now because of EVOLUTION. There you
have it - Scientific Evolutionary proof of the validity of the
christian bible - Circular Reasoning at its finest!!)
(P.P.P.S. Use of She/Her as the 'wisest of the wise' is not meant to
depict Women as being dispictable or anything, rather it is meant to
'compliment' Women as being able to be just as dastardly as their Male
counterparts. Plus since, in this story, a Women thought up the whole
thing, it implies that Women are MORE intelligent them Men so don't
flame me for it! I was just trying to be a 'Nice Guy(tm)' (because I am)!
_______________________________________________________________________________
|*| |*| |*| |*| |*| |*| |*| |*| |*| |*| |*| |*| |*| |*| |*| |*| |*| |*| |*| |*|
Definition Of Demons:
Atheists who have come back from the dead to haunt and torment FUNDIES!!!
===============================================================================geoff@uunet.uu.net (Geoff Allen) (08/16/90)
David.Dahmer@uc.edu (Hello World!) gives us answers from folks in alt.atheism to the question: > >************************************************************************ >* "WHAT MOTIVATES YOU TO ARGUE/DEBATE/DISPROVE THE EXISTENCE OF GOD?" * >************************************************************************ I found some of the answers pretty convicting! Like: >...when >someone tries to impose their views on me I do argue back. ~~~~~~~~~~ >There are ways of trying to "convert" people >that aren't forceful and don't come across >as "Hey! You're a fool for thinking that way! >convert or burn in hell!" But, unfortunately, >most do. ~~~~~~~~~~ >If I could >find a group of people who are REALLY LIVING what they believe, not just >believing, and unity among them that could only be from a god, then my >arguing would change to questions only. That would be the closest proof to >the existence of a god I could find. Ouch. That one hurts! Several visitors have said what a loving atmosphere they've noticed in our church, but we sure don't live up to the example given in the next sentence. >I've read about the early christian >church, in the 1st century. If what is written in acts really happened, >then maybe it's happening today. The "disciples" back then had it all >together it seems. Today it's all a mess. So, where are the true disciples >today? My guess is look for where Christians are heavily persecuted. It's the Nazi concentration camps that produce the Corrie Ten Boomes of the world. Sad but true. ~~~~~~~~~~ >Mainly, the needless misery I saw folks suffering as a result of their >religious beliefs--the narrow attitudes and guilts and fears and the >passivity with which they view life. I don't know who this person has met, but I always thought Christianity was about joy. I'm hardly miserable that Jesus took a scum like me and made (or should I say ``is making''? :^) ) me into something worthwhile! > It seems that belief in the >christian god can create these problems, although I have known a few >theists for whom it did not. Only a few? Scary thought. ~~~~~~~~~~ >I simply don't think such belief [in God] is >a worthwhile endeavor. No one has ever shown this person how wonderful God is and what a joy it is to serve Him. ~~~~~~~~~~ >Obviously, here, (usa) >christianity is the most influential religion, and it's also one of the >most hypocritical, thus making it an easy (and slow moving) target. Interesting statement, in light of Jesus' opinions on hypocrisy. ~~~~~~~~~~ >If it were just the kind of bigoted >illiterates who fill certain churches, I wouldn't worry too >much - but I have several close friends, people whom I have good >reason to believe are intelligent and reasonable, who claim to have >found God and are now active church members. Hey! Someone's presenting a good witness out there! :^) >the problem is just that these friends have not all encountered >the _same_ god. Their theologies are, at least superficially, >contradictory. Hmm... I wonder if these differences are immersion vs. sprinkling baptism or something that really matters like the diety of Christ? ~~~~~~~~~~ >Consider the number of times that >scripture-spouters discover alt.atheism and feel compelled to curse >the regular readers. ~~~~~~~~~~ Jesus said to make disciples from all nations. That could perhaps be extended to include the strange nation known as Usenet. :^) But if we come across as Bible-thumpers pushing our way into someone else's group, I don't think we'll be too well received. People often have enough reason to oppose the gospel anyway (Jesus said that the world would hate us just as it hated Him), we don't need to add to the problem. They won't see Jesus if we stand in the way. --Petra ``Lift Him Up'' Just some thoughts.... -- Geoff Allen \ Since we live by the Spirit, uunet!pmafire!geoff \ let us keep in step with the Spirit. bigtex!pmafire!geoff \ -- Gal. 5:25 (NIV)