|
Post by cupcakes on Feb 12, 2018 16:31:57 GMT
tpfkar Your problem is that, like it or not, we are all equal here. There is no designation of host nor parasite. Those are your erroneous designations. Then start your own "atheism" board, and wait for me and my fellows to follow you there and try to convince you that God exists. Just don't hold your breath waiting. Or, not, and just enjoy you frequently howling like a little girl about it. I know what a contrail is. They were not contrails, you animal.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2018 16:56:08 GMT
In person, religious people are more annoying. They focus on food too much at their gatherings and not enough on entertainment and booze. Atheists are generally not as annoying in person because they don't act like assholes in person. Their varied and very open and free sense of morality means they are up for more things and the more things one is up for, the better companion one is. Atheists also don't make thesis statements about their atheism during cocktail quaffing and concert viewing.
Online, totally different story. Religious people pull their punches a little more while atheists troll religious people incessantly. Like for instance, the grand trolling happening in this very thread:
Atheist argument: religious people are annoying because: proselytization! Theist response: I don't proselytize, though. Atheist response: HA! Gotcha! You don't follow scriptural mandate! You don't follow scriptural mandate! Neener neener neener!
The atheist in person is a fun person. I have many as good friends. The atheist online is someone I want to punch in the face.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Feb 12, 2018 18:36:44 GMT
I don't go to church, so are you then refuting the claim that a Christian is to lead by God's example and spread the word of the gospel? I don't go to church either. So what?
|
|
|
Post by theoncomingstorm on Feb 12, 2018 18:41:17 GMT
The most annoying people are atheist vegans. There's no doubt about it.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Feb 12, 2018 18:41:55 GMT
The most annoying people are atheist vegans. There's no doubt about it. Atheist Vegans who do Crossfit.
|
|
|
Post by johnblutarsky on Feb 12, 2018 19:53:19 GMT
'Berto, why are athiest fools? Because they are 100% adamant that there is no deity/creator(s), despite them having absolutely no proof whatsoever. This makes me wonder how many atheists you actually know (or have talked with). Most atheists will tell you that they do not believe in a god or gods, based on the lack of evidence.....but, they don't know one way or the other if one actually exists. Very few atheists will tell you that they are 100% sure that no deity exists. To answer your original question...both sides can be annoying. I'm most annoyed by people who knock on my door - uninvited. I don't care if that person is a Jehovah Witness, a guy trying to sell me new windows for my house, or Uncle Louie - who wants to borrow $20 until next week.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Feb 12, 2018 22:40:15 GMT
I've never tried to convince anyone, inside or outside of religious cults. Inside a Christian religious cult, like Catholicism, they would already be convinced. Those that aren't religious then, are you saying you have never attempted to convince them that God does in fact exist? ...now ask him about Nibiru chemtrails and cone headed skulls!
|
|
|
Post by goz on Feb 12, 2018 22:44:58 GMT
Toasted Cheese You not understanding something is funny to you? Well, you are missing enough of the statement to imply they aren;t two seperate things. Was that the iontent. Otherwise, what's the issue? Are you preaching, correcting, or just being annoying with this comment? Of course I am. it's easy. I could and probably do school you any day of the week. ^ example of arrogance of ignorance
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2018 3:03:18 GMT
Atheists like the smell of their own farts.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Feb 13, 2018 4:35:34 GMT
Toasted Cheese You not understanding something is funny to you? Well, you are missing enough of the statement to imply they aren;t two seperate things. Was that the iontent. Otherwise, what's the issue? Are you preaching, correcting, or just being annoying with this comment? Of course I am. it's easy. I could and probably do school you any day of the week. ^ example of arrogance of ignorance Arrogance maybe, definitely not ignorance. I wouldn't even call it arrogance to say I'm smarter than people trying to explain me to me. I readily admit that just because you and your friends are wrong so much, that doesn't make me a genius...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2018 6:00:20 GMT
Some of them can be annoying in different and also similar ways and can be judgmental and generalize opposing sides without really knowing anything about each other. I think the issue is that people put stereotypes on religious people and atheists alike that really have nothing to do with them or what they believe or don't believe. I talked to a guy that believed atheists think that there is no purpose in life and have a negative outlook on life and I told him right away that was actually just a stereotype about atheists and not even close to being true.. Atheism is just simply lacking belief in God or gods. Not believing that there is a purpose in life is completely separate and has nothing to do with atheism. People who believe there is no purpose in life are just negative people in general regardless of what they call themselves. There are also many stereotypes about religious people and Christians especially. The most annoying stereotype put on religious people is that they're judgmental when in reality it's judgmental to call someone judgmental based on a false stereotype when you actually know nothing about them. Nothing annoys me more than the hypocrisy in that too. Another thing that bothers be about some atheists is that they claim to know for a fact God isn't real and have evidence when science neither prove or disproves God's existence. You can benefit from your own perspective of the universe that can make sense to you personally, but to claim you know more than religious people about the origins of the universe is pretty ignorant. I say there is no purpose (in general), but I wouldn't say I'm negative, just an "ontological realist," as opposed to someone choosing to believe a fantasy. Purposes are things that individuals have, just in case they have some purpose present-to-consciousness, or in other words, just insofar as an individual happens to be thinking about things in that way, where they're basically inventing some purpose for themselves. That means that purposes are ephemeral/fleeting and that they're highly variable. There's no overarching, universal purpose. And really, even individuals who think about things that way sometimes usually do no have a purpose present-to-consciousness. Also, yes I do claim to know for a fact that there is no god, but in that, I'm not saying anything about things like the origin of the universe, if there was indeed an origin. We don't know the answer there, but we can know that a god didn't have anything to do with it. It's just like if we wake up and find a spot of blood on our pillow. We may not know it's origin right away, but we can know that it's not from the tooth fairy getting into a knife fight with the sandman. I'm other words, we can know it's not from some absurd fantasy we're making up. The reality is that once you're able to create your own purpose in life then you already have a purpose. We only see reality based on what we want to view it as, so once we think something, it becomes true to us individually, but not to everyone else as a whole. Every individual has their own purpose and we can control and choose it to an extent. We don't choose how we are born and where we are born, but we are able to create our own purpose revolving around what we have. I think just to say "there is no purpose" is negative simply because you're not required to think that way but then you still choose to limit yourself into thinking that way. There is no right or wrong way of thinking when it comes to this. This belief is based off your own personal preference on how you want to see it. Your view of God might just be limited to one defintion. Unlike the tooth fairy, God isn't limited to one specific definition or limited into being only one thing. We call it "God" but we also create our own individual meaning for what God is. It is similar to other abstract concepts that are hard to define such as love or quality. We give our own meaning to those words and these things only exist because we merely want them to exist. God can also exist in this same way. But as soon as you think God doesn't exist anymore, then God stops existing. You can argue that "love" or "quality" is an absurd fantasy as well since there is no physical evidence of it. You can go by your own personal experience by what you think love is but it still doesn't make it evidence that it exists to someone else. It is the same way with you and your perception of God. You made up in your mind that God doesn't exist so therefore he or it doesn't exist to you. God and the origin of the universe are connected because their both relative to the unknown. Some people choose to believe God created the universe because its the only solution that makes the most sense to them. You can still replace God with something else like the Big Bang and still claim it to be a fantasy we're making up. The idea that there are multiple universes can be a fantasy we are making up. Any kind of theory to why we are here is a fantasy we are making up.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2018 6:51:49 GMT
Atheists who still worship the sacred cows of religion (sanctity of life, for example) are the most annoying, but that's a subset of a group. On the whole, I would say religious people.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Feb 13, 2018 6:53:50 GMT
^ example of arrogance of ignorance Arrogance maybe, definitely not ignorance. I wouldn't even call it arrogance to say I'm smarter than people trying to explain me to me. I readily admit that just because you and your friends are wrong so much, that doesn't make me a genius... I have no friends here. You are falling into the same old 'all atheists are the same' trap. Anyone who analyses an imperfect source such as the Bible after translation and interpretive problems and bases their life and morality on a man made fantasy story, is certainly ignorant.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Feb 13, 2018 8:36:23 GMT
I don't go to church either. So what? But you are a Christian right? Right. Is that information useful to you somehow?
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Feb 13, 2018 8:53:54 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Feb 13, 2018 12:07:22 GMT
I say there is no purpose (in general), but I wouldn't say I'm negative, just an "ontological realist," as opposed to someone choosing to believe a fantasy. Purposes are things that individuals have, just in case they have some purpose present-to-consciousness, or in other words, just insofar as an individual happens to be thinking about things in that way, where they're basically inventing some purpose for themselves. That means that purposes are ephemeral/fleeting and that they're highly variable. There's no overarching, universal purpose. And really, even individuals who think about things that way sometimes usually do no have a purpose present-to-consciousness. Also, yes I do claim to know for a fact that there is no god, but in that, I'm not saying anything about things like the origin of the universe, if there was indeed an origin. We don't know the answer there, but we can know that a god didn't have anything to do with it. It's just like if we wake up and find a spot of blood on our pillow. We may not know it's origin right away, but we can know that it's not from the tooth fairy getting into a knife fight with the sandman. I'm other words, we can know it's not from some absurd fantasy we're making up. The reality is that once you're able to create your own purpose in life then you already have a purpose. We only see reality based on what we want to view it as, so once we think something, it becomes true to us individually, but not to everyone else as a whole. Every individual has their own purpose and we can control and choose it to an extent. We don't choose how we are born and where we are born, but we are able to create our own purpose revolving around what we have. I think just to say "there is no purpose" is negative simply because you're not required to think that way but then you still choose to limit yourself into thinking that way. There is no right or wrong way of thinking when it comes to this. This belief is based off your own personal preference on how you want to see it. Your view of God might just be limited to one defintion. Unlike the tooth fairy, God isn't limited to one specific definition or limited into being only one thing. We call it "God" but we also create our own individual meaning for what God is. It is similar to other abstract concepts that are hard to define such as love or quality. We give our own meaning to those words and these things only exist because we merely want them to exist. God can also exist in this same way. But as soon as you think God doesn't exist anymore, then God stops existing. You can argue that "love" or "quality" is an absurd fantasy as well since there is no physical evidence of it. You can go by your own personal experience by what you think love is but it still doesn't make it evidence that it exists to someone else. It is the same way with you and your perception of God. You made up in your mind that God doesn't exist so therefore he or it doesn't exist to you. God and the origin of the universe are connected because their both relative to the unknown. Some people choose to believe God created the universe because its the only solution that makes the most sense to them. You can still replace God with something else like the Big Bang and still claim it to be a fantasy we're making up. The idea that there are multiple universes can be a fantasy we are making up. Any kind of theory to why we are here is a fantasy we are making up. When people say "there is no purpose," they're usually referring to the idea of an objective purpose. They're not saying that they don't sometimes have a purpose in mind for themselves. The reason they're pointing this out is that some people do believe that there is an objective purpose. Re God, I'm talking about something that resembles the conventional notion of gods in religions--a separately existing, conscious being who transcends at least the normal limits of the physical world in some manner, who has some control over the physical world and/or humans and their environment, etc. Sure, we could use the term "God" to refer to anything we like, and that's true of any word or set of words. Someone could respond to "There are no purple dinosaurs in Central Park" with "That's not true--though by 'purple dinosaur' I'm talking about elm trees." If we focus on the fact that anyone could have any arbitrary thing in mind with any term, then we'd not be able to say anything about anything, because we could never be sure what anyone is going to take any word to refer to. So I'm just referring to conventional connotations of "God," re that term's religious significance, etc.
|
|
|
Post by deembastille on Feb 13, 2018 12:07:32 GMT
Right now neither side is making a compelling case.
|
|
|
Post by drystyx on Feb 13, 2018 18:11:07 GMT
Atheists, by far, as proven by the flood of responses of people wanting to claim it's the other way around.
You see, our culture tis backwards in thinking that the victim is at fault, that the mob is correct. We're in the dark ages, the most evil age ever due to this idea of people believing if they're in the majority, that makes them noble and perfect.
When you get responses on a question like this, the true answer is undeniably going to be the exact opposite of the majority of responses. One person can't be annoying to twelve. It can't be done. Twelve people are annoying to one, because they are the mob in a conflict.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Feb 13, 2018 23:59:47 GMT
Atheists, by far, as proven by the flood of responses of people wanting to claim it's the other way around. You see, our culture tis backwards in thinking that the victim is at fault, that the mob is correct. We're in the dark ages, the most evil age ever due to this idea of people believing if they're in the majority, that makes them noble and perfect. When you get responses on a question like this, the true answer is undeniably going to be the exact opposite of the majority of responses. One person can't be annoying to twelve. It can't be done. Twelve people are annoying to one, because they are the mob in a conflict. I totally disagree, butt for a totally different reason. It speaks volumes that you think that there is a 'true answer' to this question. It is akin to your thinking that there is an absolute or objective morality and ties in with your myopic view that as secularism and atheism becomes more popular and your religion less so, that this is a retrograde step for society as a whole. A correct answer to this question rather than a true one, is that the atheists will tend to find theists the irritating and vice versa. So it is really a stupid question with no real point. Also your comment is total nonsense. Of course one person can be irritating to twelve and vice versa.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2018 2:46:22 GMT
The reality is that once you're able to create your own purpose in life then you already have a purpose. We only see reality based on what we want to view it as, so once we think something, it becomes true to us individually, but not to everyone else as a whole. Every individual has their own purpose and we can control and choose it to an extent. We don't choose how we are born and where we are born, but we are able to create our own purpose revolving around what we have. I think just to say "there is no purpose" is negative simply because you're not required to think that way but then you still choose to limit yourself into thinking that way. There is no right or wrong way of thinking when it comes to this. This belief is based off your own personal preference on how you want to see it. Your view of God might just be limited to one defintion. Unlike the tooth fairy, God isn't limited to one specific definition or limited into being only one thing. We call it "God" but we also create our own individual meaning for what God is. It is similar to other abstract concepts that are hard to define such as love or quality. We give our own meaning to those words and these things only exist because we merely want them to exist. God can also exist in this same way. But as soon as you think God doesn't exist anymore, then God stops existing. You can argue that "love" or "quality" is an absurd fantasy as well since there is no physical evidence of it. You can go by your own personal experience by what you think love is but it still doesn't make it evidence that it exists to someone else. It is the same way with you and your perception of God. You made up in your mind that God doesn't exist so therefore he or it doesn't exist to you. God and the origin of the universe are connected because their both relative to the unknown. Some people choose to believe God created the universe because its the only solution that makes the most sense to them. You can still replace God with something else like the Big Bang and still claim it to be a fantasy we're making up. The idea that there are multiple universes can be a fantasy we are making up. Any kind of theory to why we are here is a fantasy we are making up. When people say "there is no purpose," they're usually referring to the idea of an objective purpose. They're not saying that they don't sometimes have a purpose in mind for themselves. The reason they're pointing this out is that some people do believe that there is an objective purpose. Re God, I'm talking about something that resembles the conventional notion of gods in religions--a separately existing, conscious being who transcends at least the normal limits of the physical world in some manner, who has some control over the physical world and/or humans and their environment, etc. Sure, we could use the term "God" to refer to anything we like, and that's true of any word or set of words. Someone could respond to "There are no purple dinosaurs in Central Park" with "That's not true--though by 'purple dinosaur' I'm talking about elm trees." If we focus on the fact that anyone could have any arbitrary thing in mind with any term, then we'd not be able to say anything about anything, because we could never be sure what anyone is going to take any word to refer to. So I'm just referring to conventional connotations of "God," re that term's religious significance, etc. I don't really have set beliefs about God or what the concept of God is especially since it changes often, but one point I was trying to make is that whether someone believes that they have an objective purpose or subjective purpose is still an idea that they created based on how they perceive things around them. There is nothing about the universe we know of that would indicate that there is an objective purpose just the same as their isn't anything that would indicate that there isn't an objective purpose. Whatever you want to believe is all up to you depending on how you personally feel is benefiting to your own life. You could use the same argument on both sides that we are just living in a fantasy we made up. You seemed to claim you're against doing that or that only religious do that when it comes to their belief in the God, but we tend to do that with our beliefs or lack of beliefs a lot of the times including at times without realizing it. I see it also as a psychological thing we do, like when you choose to stay happy because you know it's benefitting for you to be happy in life. At times we train ourselves to think certain things or feel certain emotions that eventually becomes our own reality and truth to us whether it be positive or negative. There may not be any reason to why you should be happy even to someone else because of certain circumstances, but you can convince yourself to be happy long enough to make it true. I think it's same thing with God, whether it be the conventional connotation of God or philosophical concept of God etc. If our own view of God becomes fitting in our lives and helps us see the world the way we want or choose to see it then that becomes our own sense of truth even if it means being part of a religion where other people share the same sense of truth. For some people it's more benefitting for them to believe God doesn't exist and I see why, especially the Christian concept of God where God is somehow involved in our own lives. There really isn't a right or wrong here, but I do think it is highly important to be able to explain why you think the way you do and give examples supporting why you think that for your own purpose (and not someone else's). I can see why people can't take some religious people seriously because they some of the times don't even know why they "believe" what they claim to believe. It appears more as being brainwashed and not challenging their own beliefs which can be negative effect of being part of a religious community. The reason why I went away from Christianity is because I wasn't ever able to convince myself why I should be a Christian. I found no reason to be one at the time, but I still see the positive qualities to the Bible that I hold high regard to in a spiritual and symbolic sense. Not so much the literal.
|
|