Quote:
"Faith is not a good reason to believe in any one thing. It's a bad reason to believe in everything. Faith is not synonymous with any one idea; it is synonymous with any strongly held idea, true or not. But one thing faith is not synonymous with is a logically justified idea."
There's a huge difference between a theologian and an apologist. An apologist is someone who believes in a specific God and tries to argue for the existence of their God by giving reasons for belief. They fail because there is no justified reason to believe. Where as the theologian is a former apologist who figured out that there is no justified reason to believe, so they stray into this obscure language so that their belief cannot be properly singled out.
Basically, the prophet Elisha ran into a large group of kids. The kids laughed at Elisha and mocked him for being bald. I guess that wasn't common in those times? Elisha cursed them in the name of God, and then of course God couldn't let a member of his click get picked on by some kids so he did what any mob boss would do to discipline young kids... He sends two female bears after the children. The bears rip the kids to shreds and eat them. How many kids were there?... 42 to be exact, at least by the Bible's account. This story can be found in Second Kinds chapter 2.
On Facebook I am friends with a, what I would call, fundamental Christian apologetic amateur theologian with an intellectual superiority complex. For the sake of this post, we will refer to him as "Charlie"... I was going to say we could call him "The Smartest Moron"
but I know I'd get pseudo-intellectual hate mail from him.
Since its introduction into the public view, evolutionary science has come under harsh criticism from many fronts. Originally, this was perfectly acceptable. All new theories and scientific disciplines come under fire. Not because they are naturally untrue, but because they must pass a trial by intellectual fire in order to be accepted. The first objections to evolution were based on three fronts...
The ability to tell right from wrong, good from evil, and the proper from the improper is what we refer to as “Moral Judgment.” It’s how we decide what actions should be illegal, what rights should be protected and how we should interact with others around us in our daily lives. As individuals, we exercise our moral judgment every time we speak or act in order to act in terms that are not offensive, obscene or misunderstood.
1. "I am the Lord your God, you shall have no other Gods before me."
This commandment isn't even about morality. It's about conformity. It's a jealous God telling you that you're not allowed to worship any other God. It almost seems as though he admits that other Gods exist. He must be, since the next commandment deals with the same issue, but specifically with non-existent Gods.
I was told that I, or atheists in general, have the same old tired arguments against God. To be entirely honest, I think that's true. But there's a good reason for it. As atheists, we can only respond to those God claims that we are presented with. If we could prove a negative, then we would prove Gods can't exist and be done with it. But since we cannot, we have to wait for a new God claim to come our way. We get presented with a new claim and we have new arguments. It has been a very long time since I've heard an original God claim.
My major issue with prayer is that it doesn't work. That alone should be reason enough to do away with this ancient practice. But people always want to point out the concept of "prayers for the injured, sick and dying." So once again I have to go into detail on why something that doesn't work shouldn't be done... My issue with prayers for the injured, sick and dying is that it has the best of intentions while doing nothing to solve the problem.
Yes, you do! Everyone is responsible for what they believe, why they believe it, and what they do with their beliefs! There are people out there who think they don't have to answer for their deeply held beliefs... We call them insane asylum patients. They have deeply held beliefs that they were asked to justify and they either did not or could not.
This last Saturday night was supposed to be the annual Atheist Community of Austin (ACA) Pub Crawl. An old Army buddy of mine was coming down to Texas so we could both attend. In the process of planning, we decided to meet up with two other Army buddies of ours who were planning on being in Austin the same time. This turned out to be our undoing, though we still had fun. We were too late to meet the ACA group at The Dog and Duck. Then we got to Fado's too late. We tried to find the Elephant room, but our drunk guide led us the wrong way. We tried to get into the Speak Easy and ended up going to the Chupacabra instead.
This is meant to simply clear something up for those who don't seem to understand. There are a lot of misconceptions when it comes to atheism, and in this case it's probably because of our fickle nature. There seem to be a lot of "Non-Theists" out there who are using many different labels... "Brights, Pearlist, Agnostic, Humanist," etc... What I'd like to explain to those atheists out there is this... Ultimately, there are only two positions: Atheist and Theist.
Do you believe because you know beyond a reasonable doubt? Or do you persist in believing because it is a comfortable delusion? If I told you that every time you have diarrhea there's a child who gets adopted by a loving family, would you eat spicy nachos more often?
You follow the New Testament, but not the Old Testament. You have no reason to justify this exception other than you find the New one to be personally acceptable and the Old one simply is not. Free Will... It's not a God given gift. It's just a right.
10. SHIFTING THE BURDEN OF PROOF:
THEIST:
I know God exists. If you disagree, prove otherwise. Oh you say you can't prove God doesn't exist? That's because you know he does!
ATHEIST:
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. This is the way the real world and science work. When you say God exists, you are making an extraordinary claim; therefore, the burden of proof is on you to back up your claim.
What would the 10 Commandments be like if an Atheist wrote them?...
1.) Do not hurt or kill any living person unless that person is threatening your life or limb as well.
2.) Do not hurt or kill any living animal unless presented with a survival scenario, such as hunting for food.
To say that the Bible is consistent with the world as we see it is true. The Bible is consistent with the universe as we see it from our limited point of view. The Earth is flat in the Bible, and it certainly seems flat when you stand on it. The Sun revolves around the Earth in time with the Moon, and it certainly seems like that when we watch day turn into night.
The problem is see with religious moderation is it thinks it deserves more respect and leniency because it's "other than extreme.” I see religious moderation as a form of hypocrisy since moderate beliefs require that someone claim a title such as "Christian" and yet refrain from following and believing in key ideas supported by Christian texts in the Bible.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed on the Foxhole Atheist Blog do not necessarily represent those of Atheism or all Atheists, seeing as how Atheism has no tenets, dogma or doctrines. So Suck it!
Posts
