Classic case of projection. I know lots of atheists who never talk about God, or think about God.
However, substitute ex Christian, who believes Jesus is not the son of God or God incarnate but can’t stop talking about Jesus not being the son of God or God incarnate and it starts to sound familiar.
So in other words, yes, narrow – Speaker’s corner is a place intended for debate and discussion on matters of theology no? So it hardly represents all atheists any more than it would be expected to represent all Christians or Muslims.
You regularly meet with atheists in an environment that is almost exclusively to do with theology and therefore discussions about God. It stands to reason then, in that environment, of course there will be atheists talking about God. This doesn’t mean when you all go home that the atheists will continue to talk about God, which is the implication of your picture.
I can just as easily prepare a picture based upon you and this site that suggests you talk of nothing but the Trinity. Would that be fair?
Communist regimes have, yes. Atheism is just not believing in god. The dark ages were explicitly about your religion torturing and killing people that disagreed with your religion and your meme is you whining that we shut up. I hope you talk about your religion. You want us to be quiet. I wonder who has the more solid position?
“The dark ages were explicitly about your religion torturing and killing people that disagreed with your religion”
The level of historical ignorance is shocking. You don’t know much about the so called “dark ages” if you still believe that myth. In actuality, more Christians died at the hands of other Christians than atheists ever did. The medieval church was more focused on getting rid of what it considered heretical Christians.
Yes. Exactly. Christians dying at the hands of other Christians over religion! That’s what I said. I didnt say just atheists. Women were targeted. Christians were targeted.
Please comprehend what you are reading before responding so you don’t look silly again.
“Yes. Exactly. Christians dying at the hands of other Christians over religion! That’s what I said.”
No it’s not what you said.
“I didnt say just atheists”
Yes you did, check your own responses here (emphasis mine):
“Even if thise meme were accurate, it’s a bright day because THEISTS no longer have the power to silence US with violence.”
“your meme is you whining that WE shut up. I hope you talk about your religion. You want US to be quiet.”
So who is this “us” and “we” that you speak of?
You are changing your tone because you think you found a flaw in my response. Oh please.
You still don’t know much about the dark ages. I sent you a link to help you out a little, written by a fellow atheist who is able to approach history with more intellectual honesty than you.
No I didn’t. In none of your examples did I say the word ‘atheist’. You also left out the comment we were actually discussing when you whipped out your ‘you don’t know what you’re talking about’ nonsense.
Here, I’ll provide it for you since reading doesn’t seem to be your strong suit:
“The dark ages were explicitly about your religion torturing and killing people that disagreed with your religion”
Tghere are currently about 40,000 Christian sects. They disagree on parts of the bible. In the dark ages, some Christians killed other Christians who disagreed with them. They killed women they thought were witches because the bible told them to kill them. And they killed anyone they deemed to be an atheist as well.
It was about religion.
So again, the dark ages were almost exclusively about your religion killing people who disagreed with it.
Neither atheists or Christians who disagree with the majority Christian population or one endorsed by the state have to shut up any longer. In your meme you were targeting atheists and so I responded to such. When we moved onto the dark ages, we talked about more people added to that list.
You know…the part you negated to quote because it didn’t suit your narrative.
“So again, the dark ages were almost exclusively about your religion killing people who disagreed with it. ”
This is the very first time you’ve said “almost exclusively”. That’s what I was waiting for because earlier you said “The dark ages were EXPLICITLY about your religion torturing and killing people that disagreed with your religion” which is why I said the level of historical ignorance is shocking. You have now traced back your steps to a more reasonable position 🙂
“You know…the part you negated to quote because it didn’t suit your narrative.”
I haven’t conveniently ignored anything, just pointed out inconsistency in your argument which you have fallen into again lol
If you say so. I’m not going to explain myself again.
And yes you left it out and instead quoted parts where we weren’t even discussing the dark ages.
The thing most funny about that meme is that it makes you look whiny and you think it makes you look strong.
Might as well get used to people criticizing your religion because you now lack the legal authority to do anything about it besides create silly whiny memes.
In turning away from Christianity, I did think very much about it. Then once I came out as an atheist, people constantly challenged my thoughts. However, I am to the point that I do not feel the need to defend myself or study religions more. To do so is a waste of time. I can occupy my mind with more worthwhile endeavors.
Also, when I find other atheists I do like to get on the subject, as it makes me excited and happy, like syncing with anyone who is likeminded, but that is also a temporary thing. That is making a connection. Like two people who are thrown together but both discover they love football.
You don’t hate things you don’t believe in. They might dislike the religion and the ideology surrounding it, but it has nothing to do with what they consider your fictional god.
Lots of theists hate atheists though and in some parts of the world, continue to murder them. That is entirely about being an atheist.
This post reminds me of this anecdotal thing that happened a few years ago. There was this German online bulletin board about politics and religion that I liked to read. One day I discovered that many longtime atheist users who overall came across as the militant type were in fact all personas of the same troll.
This person had literally spent 12 years posting on this forum (and others) pretending to represent a majority voice, plagiarising from this blog and the other in order to present himself as scientific and intellectual, with each persona claiming to have its own PhD(s). He would copy a thread from one forum to another and repost the atheists’ answers on the original thread as though they were his, and vice versa.
I was amazed when I found out about this MO, its extent, and how somebody could be dedicated to bullying believers (mostly Christians) for such a long time. I suppose he was one who did have a problem with God and it morphed at some point into this virulence and obsession that ended up consuming a great deal of his life.
Unfortunately atheists have no basis for their morality. They think that if they can get away with wrong doing, they will not face the consequences of their actions.
You cannot build a society on such an empty foundation.
Actually Paul, morality can be found within atheism. After all, it is pretty clear that killing children is wrong, yet God gives this command more than once in the Bible. What right does God have to do This?
Is discrimination moral? Is using one’s personal belief system as a basis for refusing service to another person moral?
So what is the basis for morality in atheism, in a meaningless, pointless universe? If an atheist could commit the ‘perfect crime’ what is there to stop him?
In reality, on the Day of Judgement
“every soul will be repaid in full for what it has done. He knows best what they do.”
Who says it’s meaningless? To an atheist, the existence of life is a precious thing too. It’s the combination of an incredible set of factors that lead to life being something worthy of cherishing. We are star stuff, we are unique, and that makes us special.
‘Special’, but still meaningless. There can be no foundation to morality for atheists. Just feeling special in a universe that has no meaning or purpose does to compensate for the lack.
If an atheist could commit the ‘perfect crime’ what is there to stop him? Only a God-fearing man can be trusted.
I did not hear a reasoned philosophical explanation as to why somebody living in a purposeless, meaningless universe with no God, with no prospect of life after death, no Day of Reckoning, can ground their morality, objectively, in anything at all.
A mere feeling of specialness is totally inadequate. Something metaphysically solid is required. An atheist does not have this.
Another thing the atheist doesn’t have is a worldview compatible with consciousness and free will (essential for there to be moral choice). The atheistic position which rules out the possibility of a transcendent Creator also reduces existence to physical reality, ie, one where rational thought and moral deliberation are merely the result of brain matter interacting deterministically according to physical and chemical properties.
This is why many atheists constantly wrestle with determinism. And some end up accepting it as true, despite it being disproven by every aspect of our human experience.
You failed to understand the answer. It isn’t a question of feeling special. It’s a case of knowing, through our understanding of the universe and how we came to be, that life is precious. It is unique. It is therefore important that we cherish and respect life. That last sentence in particular is the point I made previously and you ignored it.
A mere feeling of {insert favourite word} is totally inadequate. Something metaphysically solid is required. An atheist does not have this.
“It is therefore important that we cherish and respect life.”
But this is vacuous rhetoric. Islam/Christianity says that it is objectively wrong to kill the innocent and that abortion (except for rare exceptions) is a sin and a crime.
Atheists support abortion because they have no objective binding values that truly respect all life.
The God of the Bible endorsed genocide, including child murder, more than once, on a whim. God apparently hates homosexuality, on a whim. The pro-life side of the abortion discussion is only pro-life as far as the embryo is concerned, the mother is incidental.
Both Islam and Christianity can be interpreted in various ways, including ways which condone violence. You aren’t so naive that you don’t know this. After all, who defines ‘innocent’? You may argue ‘that isn’t really Islam/Christianity ‘, but to those who interpret their faith that fashion, YOU are wrong. To them, the shedding of blood by driving a van through a crowd is perfectly justified by their faith, because they can use their faith to interpret this as being just and moral. Morality is subjective within religion, especially between different religions, and even withn different interpretations of the same religion.
You tacitly acknowledged your own question of God’s morality when you refused to answer my question about whether you’d kill at God’s command. You called it a loaded question but the reality is it made you think. You know killing is wrong, yet God repeatedly commands it in the Bible, and because it’s God it’s apparently moral, even though it goes against what you instinctively know is right.
Killing is not immoral when undertaken in a just war for example or for certain capital crimes. God has authorised this. Killing innocent children is prohibited. Abortion is murder.
So the children God commanded to be slaughtered in the Bible were guilty of… What? There is ZERO excuse for killing children, and any God who whimsically decides to have children killed is not just or moral.
“The God of the Bible endorsed genocide, including child murder, more than once, on a whim.” darthtimon
Would you mind citing the verses in which GOD endorses genocide, more than once, on a whim, please? That way we can discuss intelligently and in detail with the context wherein those kinds of things took place?
We can start with genocide and then examine the other issues you reference, as well, in order.
on what moral grounds can an atheist say these events were ‘wrong’? Remember, for an atheist, there is no God, no objective morality, just a blind, purposeless universe that does not care.
God’s morality is subjective. It is whimsical. It supports the arbitrary discrimination of anyone who does not follow him. It supports child murder. Atheists consider life to be unique and therefore valuable, remember?
Even when he commands the killing of children, who cannot possibly be guilty of the crimes suggested? Would you kill a child in his name if he ordered you to?
“Even when he commands the killing of children, who cannot possibly be guilty of the crimes suggested? Would you kill a child in his name if he ordered you to?” darthtimon
Darthtimon, don’t know if you saw it, but earlier I asked you if you think some things might be worse than death? I definitely believe there are and you might be interested in this line of reasoning and how it ties in with your sincere questions about the true character of God.
I don’t always get notifications of replies via this site (no idea why), so I may well have missed your question, in which case, apologies.
There certainly can be things worse than death. However, how can we remotely claim this to be the case in these instances? Is the argument going to be that all the people in these cases – including the children – were sinners? If so, in what way? And even then, why command their wholesale slaughter?
Additionally, which version of God’s morality do we follow? Which book is the one true truth? There are many different religions which trip over and contradict one another. Which one is right Paul? Which one is truly ‘moral’?
There’s another interesting little subplot going on here. The original discussion point of this post was the suggestion that atheists spend a lot of time talking about God. Paul’s logic for this? The theological discussions that take place at a place intended for theological discussions. By that reasoning, I can assume Paul spends a lot of time discussing atheism, and can’t go very long without doing so. With this pointed out, he quietly shifted the discussion to morality. Interesting…
Except you made quite a serious argument for why it was true, and it isn’t the first post of that nature.. And humorous or not, you still changed the subject midway through.
Including the children in the destruction of such populations actually spared them from a worse condition—that of being reared to be as wicked as their parents and thus face eternal punishment. All persons who die in childhood, according to the Bible, are ushered to Paradise and will ultimately reside in Heaven. Dave Miller PhD
Blogging Theology 
Lol!
LikeLike
The irony…
LikeLike
Classic case of projection. I know lots of atheists who never talk about God, or think about God.
However, substitute ex Christian, who believes Jesus is not the son of God or God incarnate but can’t stop talking about Jesus not being the son of God or God incarnate and it starts to sound familiar.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I know lots of ex Christians who never talk about Jesus, or think about Jesus.
LikeLike
Once again the picture makes for colourful viewing but far from accurate viewing.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s accurate in my experience
LikeLike
Then I can only assume your experiences on the subject are quite narrow.
LikeLiked by 1 person
In fact the very opposite. I regularly meet atheists in London especially at Speakers corner.
LikeLike
So in other words, yes, narrow – Speaker’s corner is a place intended for debate and discussion on matters of theology no? So it hardly represents all atheists any more than it would be expected to represent all Christians or Muslims.
LikeLiked by 1 person
So? At least I regularly meet with atheists. Hardly narrow
LikeLike
You regularly meet with atheists in an environment that is almost exclusively to do with theology and therefore discussions about God. It stands to reason then, in that environment, of course there will be atheists talking about God. This doesn’t mean when you all go home that the atheists will continue to talk about God, which is the implication of your picture.
I can just as easily prepare a picture based upon you and this site that suggests you talk of nothing but the Trinity. Would that be fair?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Even if thise meme were accurate, it’s a bright day because theists no longer have the power to silence us with violence.
Now all they can do is whine that we disagree with them on the existence of their god.
Like this meme is doing. I’ll pass you a tissue.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Atheists have silenced theists with violence plenty of times in history. Just look at the communist regimes in our recent history.
LikeLike
Communist regimes have, yes. Atheism is just not believing in god. The dark ages were explicitly about your religion torturing and killing people that disagreed with your religion and your meme is you whining that we shut up. I hope you talk about your religion. You want us to be quiet. I wonder who has the more solid position?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks for proving the accuracy of the post! Lol
LikeLike
“The dark ages were explicitly about your religion torturing and killing people that disagreed with your religion”
The level of historical ignorance is shocking. You don’t know much about the so called “dark ages” if you still believe that myth. In actuality, more Christians died at the hands of other Christians than atheists ever did. The medieval church was more focused on getting rid of what it considered heretical Christians.
An honest atheist historian might help you out with that:
http://armariummagnus.blogspot.co.uk/2009/10/gods-philosophers-how-medieval-world.html
LikeLike
Yes. Exactly. Christians dying at the hands of other Christians over religion! That’s what I said. I didnt say just atheists. Women were targeted. Christians were targeted.
Please comprehend what you are reading before responding so you don’t look silly again.
LikeLike
“Yes. Exactly. Christians dying at the hands of other Christians over religion! That’s what I said.”
No it’s not what you said.
“I didnt say just atheists”
Yes you did, check your own responses here (emphasis mine):
“Even if thise meme were accurate, it’s a bright day because THEISTS no longer have the power to silence US with violence.”
“your meme is you whining that WE shut up. I hope you talk about your religion. You want US to be quiet.”
So who is this “us” and “we” that you speak of?
You are changing your tone because you think you found a flaw in my response. Oh please.
You still don’t know much about the dark ages. I sent you a link to help you out a little, written by a fellow atheist who is able to approach history with more intellectual honesty than you.
LikeLike
No I didn’t. In none of your examples did I say the word ‘atheist’. You also left out the comment we were actually discussing when you whipped out your ‘you don’t know what you’re talking about’ nonsense.
Here, I’ll provide it for you since reading doesn’t seem to be your strong suit:
“The dark ages were explicitly about your religion torturing and killing people that disagreed with your religion”
Tghere are currently about 40,000 Christian sects. They disagree on parts of the bible. In the dark ages, some Christians killed other Christians who disagreed with them. They killed women they thought were witches because the bible told them to kill them. And they killed anyone they deemed to be an atheist as well.
It was about religion.
So again, the dark ages were almost exclusively about your religion killing people who disagreed with it.
Neither atheists or Christians who disagree with the majority Christian population or one endorsed by the state have to shut up any longer. In your meme you were targeting atheists and so I responded to such. When we moved onto the dark ages, we talked about more people added to that list.
You know…the part you negated to quote because it didn’t suit your narrative.
Cognitive dissonance much?
LikeLike
LOL you are such a backtracker:
“So again, the dark ages were almost exclusively about your religion killing people who disagreed with it. ”
This is the very first time you’ve said “almost exclusively”. That’s what I was waiting for because earlier you said “The dark ages were EXPLICITLY about your religion torturing and killing people that disagreed with your religion” which is why I said the level of historical ignorance is shocking. You have now traced back your steps to a more reasonable position 🙂
“You know…the part you negated to quote because it didn’t suit your narrative.”
I haven’t conveniently ignored anything, just pointed out inconsistency in your argument which you have fallen into again lol
By the way it’s not my meme but it sure is funny.
LikeLike
If you say so. I’m not going to explain myself again.
And yes you left it out and instead quoted parts where we weren’t even discussing the dark ages.
The thing most funny about that meme is that it makes you look whiny and you think it makes you look strong.
Might as well get used to people criticizing your religion because you now lack the legal authority to do anything about it besides create silly whiny memes.
LikeLike
If you say so 🙂
LikeLike
Apparently I did. 😊
LikeLike
In turning away from Christianity, I did think very much about it. Then once I came out as an atheist, people constantly challenged my thoughts. However, I am to the point that I do not feel the need to defend myself or study religions more. To do so is a waste of time. I can occupy my mind with more worthwhile endeavors.
LikeLike
Also, when I find other atheists I do like to get on the subject, as it makes me excited and happy, like syncing with anyone who is likeminded, but that is also a temporary thing. That is making a connection. Like two people who are thrown together but both discover they love football.
LikeLike
And there isn’t anything wrong with that.
LikeLike
Theists spend a lot of time dicussing atheism, criticise atheists for discussing religion…
LikeLike
I have met many atheists who hate God.
LikeLike
Define ‘many’.
LikeLike
You don’t hate things you don’t believe in. They might dislike the religion and the ideology surrounding it, but it has nothing to do with what they consider your fictional god.
Lots of theists hate atheists though and in some parts of the world, continue to murder them. That is entirely about being an atheist.
LikeLike
This post reminds me of this anecdotal thing that happened a few years ago. There was this German online bulletin board about politics and religion that I liked to read. One day I discovered that many longtime atheist users who overall came across as the militant type were in fact all personas of the same troll.
This person had literally spent 12 years posting on this forum (and others) pretending to represent a majority voice, plagiarising from this blog and the other in order to present himself as scientific and intellectual, with each persona claiming to have its own PhD(s). He would copy a thread from one forum to another and repost the atheists’ answers on the original thread as though they were his, and vice versa.
I was amazed when I found out about this MO, its extent, and how somebody could be dedicated to bullying believers (mostly Christians) for such a long time. I suppose he was one who did have a problem with God and it morphed at some point into this virulence and obsession that ended up consuming a great deal of his life.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Wow.
Unfortunately atheists have no basis for their morality. They think that if they can get away with wrong doing, they will not face the consequences of their actions.
You cannot build a society on such an empty foundation.
LikeLike
Actually Paul, morality can be found within atheism. After all, it is pretty clear that killing children is wrong, yet God gives this command more than once in the Bible. What right does God have to do This?
Is discrimination moral? Is using one’s personal belief system as a basis for refusing service to another person moral?
Define ‘wrongdoing’.
LikeLike
So what is the basis for morality in atheism, in a meaningless, pointless universe? If an atheist could commit the ‘perfect crime’ what is there to stop him?
In reality, on the Day of Judgement
“every soul will be repaid in full for what it has done. He knows best what they do.”
Quran 39:71.
LikeLike
Who says it’s meaningless? To an atheist, the existence of life is a precious thing too. It’s the combination of an incredible set of factors that lead to life being something worthy of cherishing. We are star stuff, we are unique, and that makes us special.
LikeLike
‘Special’, but still meaningless. There can be no foundation to morality for atheists. Just feeling special in a universe that has no meaning or purpose does to compensate for the lack.
If an atheist could commit the ‘perfect crime’ what is there to stop him? Only a God-fearing man can be trusted.
LikeLike
I just explained why and you ignored my answer in favour of repetition.
LikeLike
I did not hear a reasoned philosophical explanation as to why somebody living in a purposeless, meaningless universe with no God, with no prospect of life after death, no Day of Reckoning, can ground their morality, objectively, in anything at all.
A mere feeling of specialness is totally inadequate. Something metaphysically solid is required. An atheist does not have this.
LikeLike
Another thing the atheist doesn’t have is a worldview compatible with consciousness and free will (essential for there to be moral choice). The atheistic position which rules out the possibility of a transcendent Creator also reduces existence to physical reality, ie, one where rational thought and moral deliberation are merely the result of brain matter interacting deterministically according to physical and chemical properties.
This is why many atheists constantly wrestle with determinism. And some end up accepting it as true, despite it being disproven by every aspect of our human experience.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You failed to understand the answer. It isn’t a question of feeling special. It’s a case of knowing, through our understanding of the universe and how we came to be, that life is precious. It is unique. It is therefore important that we cherish and respect life. That last sentence in particular is the point I made previously and you ignored it.
LikeLike
OK.
A mere feeling of {insert favourite word} is totally inadequate. Something metaphysically solid is required. An atheist does not have this.
“It is therefore important that we cherish and respect life.”
But this is vacuous rhetoric. Islam/Christianity says that it is objectively wrong to kill the innocent and that abortion (except for rare exceptions) is a sin and a crime.
Atheists support abortion because they have no objective binding values that truly respect all life.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The God of the Bible endorsed genocide, including child murder, more than once, on a whim. God apparently hates homosexuality, on a whim. The pro-life side of the abortion discussion is only pro-life as far as the embryo is concerned, the mother is incidental.
Both Islam and Christianity can be interpreted in various ways, including ways which condone violence. You aren’t so naive that you don’t know this. After all, who defines ‘innocent’? You may argue ‘that isn’t really Islam/Christianity ‘, but to those who interpret their faith that fashion, YOU are wrong. To them, the shedding of blood by driving a van through a crowd is perfectly justified by their faith, because they can use their faith to interpret this as being just and moral. Morality is subjective within religion, especially between different religions, and even withn different interpretations of the same religion.
LikeLike
WTF?
LikeLike
You tacitly acknowledged your own question of God’s morality when you refused to answer my question about whether you’d kill at God’s command. You called it a loaded question but the reality is it made you think. You know killing is wrong, yet God repeatedly commands it in the Bible, and because it’s God it’s apparently moral, even though it goes against what you instinctively know is right.
LikeLike
Killing is not immoral when undertaken in a just war for example or for certain capital crimes. God has authorised this. Killing innocent children is prohibited. Abortion is murder.
LikeLike
So the children God commanded to be slaughtered in the Bible were guilty of… What? There is ZERO excuse for killing children, and any God who whimsically decides to have children killed is not just or moral.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree. But the atheist has a massive philosophical problem too as I have explained.
LikeLike
You haven’t explained anything. I’m still waiting for an explanation as to why it is just or moral for God to command the killing of children.
LikeLike
it isn’t.
LikeLike
But God has ordered exactly that in the Bible.
LikeLike
I know. Well spotted.
LikeLike
Your inability to justify this is quite revealing.
LikeLike
“The God of the Bible endorsed genocide, including child murder, more than once, on a whim.” darthtimon
Would you mind citing the verses in which GOD endorses genocide, more than once, on a whim, please? That way we can discuss intelligently and in detail with the context wherein those kinds of things took place?
We can start with genocide and then examine the other issues you reference, as well, in order.
LikeLike
1 Samuel 15:2-3. Deuteronomy 2:34, to name two examples.
LikeLike
on what moral grounds can an atheist say these events were ‘wrong’? Remember, for an atheist, there is no God, no objective morality, just a blind, purposeless universe that does not care.
LikeLike
Remember Paul, your narrative of a blind, purposeless universe is wrong.
LikeLike
Remember, atheists belive the universe has no intrinsic meaning or purpose. God does not exist and objective morality is a fiction.
LikeLike
God’s morality is subjective. It is whimsical. It supports the arbitrary discrimination of anyone who does not follow him. It supports child murder. Atheists consider life to be unique and therefore valuable, remember?
LikeLike
God is the Supreme Objective Reality. He is wise, holy and all-knowing. It is in our best interests to heed his counsel.
LikeLike
Even when he commands the killing of children, who cannot possibly be guilty of the crimes suggested? Would you kill a child in his name if he ordered you to?
LikeLike
He did not command the killing of children.
LikeLike
Yes, he did. More than once. Deut 20:16-18. 1 Sam 15:3-23.
LikeLike
“Even when he commands the killing of children, who cannot possibly be guilty of the crimes suggested? Would you kill a child in his name if he ordered you to?” darthtimon
Darthtimon, don’t know if you saw it, but earlier I asked you if you think some things might be worse than death? I definitely believe there are and you might be interested in this line of reasoning and how it ties in with your sincere questions about the true character of God.
LikeLike
I don’t always get notifications of replies via this site (no idea why), so I may well have missed your question, in which case, apologies.
There certainly can be things worse than death. However, how can we remotely claim this to be the case in these instances? Is the argument going to be that all the people in these cases – including the children – were sinners? If so, in what way? And even then, why command their wholesale slaughter?
LikeLike
Probably enabling a plugin for threaded / nested comments on wordpress would fix this notifications issue.
LikeLike
But will that solve the problem of the England football team?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Additionally, which version of God’s morality do we follow? Which book is the one true truth? There are many different religions which trip over and contradict one another. Which one is right Paul? Which one is truly ‘moral’?
LikeLike
can you take a wild stab at what my answer might be?
LikeLike
“Atheists consider life to be unique and therefore valuable, remember?” darthtimon
All of them?
Is anything worse than death?
LikeLike
There’s another interesting little subplot going on here. The original discussion point of this post was the suggestion that atheists spend a lot of time talking about God. Paul’s logic for this? The theological discussions that take place at a place intended for theological discussions. By that reasoning, I can assume Paul spends a lot of time discussing atheism, and can’t go very long without doing so. With this pointed out, he quietly shifted the discussion to morality. Interesting…
LikeLike
Dude the original post was part serious part humorous – you seem to have missed that
LikeLike
Except you made quite a serious argument for why it was true, and it isn’t the first post of that nature.. And humorous or not, you still changed the subject midway through.
LikeLike
dude you need to lighten up.
LikeLike
And you need to be consistent.
LikeLike
LOL
LikeLike
Thank you for conceding that particular point 🙂
LikeLike
Do you have a sense of humour dear boy?
LikeLike
Most certainly old chum.
LikeLike
I look forward to seeing it sometime old bean
LikeLike
Here’s a joke for you. England football team.
LikeLike
Including the children in the destruction of such populations actually spared them from a worse condition—that of being reared to be as wicked as their parents and thus face eternal punishment. All persons who die in childhood, according to the Bible, are ushered to Paradise and will ultimately reside in Heaven. Dave Miller PhD
LikeLike