|
On October 10 2013 13:35 Djzapz wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2013 00:49 PaqMan wrote:
"If you could use one word to describe Christians, what would you use?"
The top three were anti-gay, judgemental, and hypocritical. Other words that were used were hateful, condescending, and excluding.
The saddest part of it all was that the word which describes the entirety of Christianity was no where at the top of the list; love How the fuck does the word "love" describe Christianity? I mean, I recognize that as a christian, you may be disappointed in the fact that many people think lowly of your religion and I would argue that in many regards, it's unfair to describe christians as generally anti-gay, judgmental or hypocritical... but it's even more wrong to describe them as "love" (??? how can you describe people as love anyway, loving perhaps?). So, maybe the people who answered the question are a little bit wrong, maybe the guy who gave the lecture is full of shit (that's actually most likely the case) and those words were not the most common and he was just trying to get you kids riled up against the big bad adversity, and lastly maybe you need to consider the fact that "LOVE" is only what they tell you your religion is all about. They tell muslims that their religion is that of peace, but that's fundamentally incorrect and it shows in their scripture, even if we disregard the violent wordly events that are done in the name of Islam. The same thing can be said about Christianity. You guys dance about with your super positive pep talks about how Jesus forgives you for being a shitty individual who sins, and God loves you specifically because you're awesome and special, and it's a religion is PEACEFUL. Actions speak louder than words though. In reality, Christians are no less flawed than the rest of us heathens and misguided ungodly folks. Many Christians ARE needlessly anti-gay for religious and dumb traditional reasons. Many Christians are judgmental even though the scripture tells them not to be, because some of them are so ****ing proud to be in the "right" religion, and some of them are hypocritical, condescending and excluding. Much more so than they are loving. Relatively few Christians go out of their way to share love. They just say they do because it's better for PR than what the literalists do. And forgive me for perhaps coming off as rude but it's quite clear to me that love is a characteristic of Christianity in title only. In other words, the great Christians are not any more representative of Christianity than the terrible ones.But I want to say it again: The speaker was lying about the survey, or his methodology was flawed to completely mad levels.
You don't come off as rude, you come off as ignorant. That you think statements like "Relatively few Christians go out of their way to share love." even make sense to say in the first place speaks to a healthy dose of confirmation bias and an overindulgence in availability heuristics. It is a shame that you have had so little interaction with those who partake in the "good" aspects of religiosity, but your experiences with Christianity, be they personal, through the media, or through word of mouth, are only one drop in the bucket of determining what is representative of Christianity.
|
|
|
|
|
On October 10 2013 16:47 opsayo wrote:
groupthink
More... more like... POOPthink!? AM I RIGHT GUYS? Anyone? Anyone?
...okay nevermind ._.
|
On October 10 2013 17:43 ninazerg wrote:More... more like... POOPthink!? AM I RIGHT GUYS? Anyone? Anyone? ...okay nevermind ._.
I consider myself a scholar in the field of poopthink
|
Control.
As is all forms of organised religion. Have people beg you to tell them how to think, and you've got a pretty sweet deal going on.
|
I find op to be spot on and hilariously ironic.
As for me, it would be pretty hard to choose one word to describe Christians, and don't be so contrived to think I have a different word for christians as I do for muslims or catholics or whatever. I'd use the same word. Probably something like nutjobs, idiots, ignorant, etc.
yea this:
On October 10 2013 02:23 Salv wrote:If I could use one word to describe the majority of Christians I would choose ignorant. I think there are far too many Christians who are unaware of: - Their own Bible.
- Evolution
- Abiogenesis
- Scientific theory
- Fallacies
That's not to suggest all Christians are like this though and as an atheist from a semi-religious family I understand where some people are coming from when describing their faith.
I've actually been christian, catholic, mormon, baptist and been to other churches as well. My parents did a great job (unwittingly) making me understand that all these people are basically speaking the same crazy language but arguing semantics. It's all just nonsense. They should actually force kids in elemntary schools to be a different religion each year and it would produce a lot more intelligent athiests imho. I think it was Penn Jillette who said that when he read the bible it served as a catalyst to make him more atheist. I mean a lot of the stuff in there is on some fantasy fiction novel level.
PS- Does anyone else think the semantic issue of being called 'athiest' versus 'an atheist' is an important distinction? 'An athiest' sort of implies you practice some anti religion rules or go to athiest group meetings. 'Atheist' is just like nobody knows or will know so idgaf. So like if someone asks you like; "What church do you go to?", you would reply with "I'm atheist." and leave it at that. Where as an atheist would be more sort of militant about it and say something like; "I'm an atheist, you believe in that crap?"
|
On October 10 2013 01:45 Rimstalker wrote:
can't decide between 'narrow-minded' and the adjective for 'long overdue to die out' (extinction-deserving?)
Wait is there a German word for that? Because that is also pretty ironic.
|
On October 10 2013 10:17 Nick Drake wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2013 10:00 ninazerg wrote:On October 10 2013 09:51 Sermokala wrote:On October 10 2013 09:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On October 10 2013 08:03 Sermokala wrote:If god created all the animals before making the humans that means that if humans evolved from Monkeys it is compliant with the creation of the universe story. boom evolution is now a pro god theory. YOUR MOVE SCIENCE. + Show Spoiler +I've been waiting for a suitable thread for this for a really long time. I'm going to assume sarcasm? That made no sense, both on the evolutionary explanation and on the Genesis order of Creation. You are wrong on both counts. God created adam right after creating the land animals. And evolution is about how humans evovled from animals. specificaly it says that he created plants then aquatic and airborne life then he said the land should produce and support life. All this works alongside evolution your move science. I just have to point this out, not to be mean or anything, but there's one thing that always bugs me about the order of creation in Genesis: Day 1: Light and Darkness Day 2: Earth's atmosphere Day 3: Land and Sea / vegetation Day 4: Stars <------------------------------------ wait what Day 5: Fish / Birds Day 6: Land animals / Humans Day 7: Rested Personally I've always been amazed that people thousands of years ago actually got things so close. I mean the stars are off, but other than that you have an accurate description: Big Bang -> Earth/atmosphere -> plants -> fish -> mammals -> humans. That is startlingly accurate.
It's not that hard to figure out. It's pretty common sense if you think about it. Without the air and the sun nothing would grow. so plants would logically come first, then small monsters would eat those plants, then other bigger monsters would eat the plant monsters, and so on. I'm sure you could ask a bunch of random uneducated 5-6year olds to organize a list of these things chronologically and it would be pretty accurate.
|
On October 10 2013 13:48 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2013 13:35 Djzapz wrote:On October 10 2013 00:49 PaqMan wrote:
"If you could use one word to describe Christians, what would you use?"
The top three were anti-gay, judgemental, and hypocritical. Other words that were used were hateful, condescending, and excluding.
The saddest part of it all was that the word which describes the entirety of Christianity was no where at the top of the list; love How the fuck does the word "love" describe Christianity? I mean, I recognize that as a christian, you may be disappointed in the fact that many people think lowly of your religion and I would argue that in many regards, it's unfair to describe christians as generally anti-gay, judgmental or hypocritical... but it's even more wrong to describe them as "love" (??? how can you describe people as love anyway, loving perhaps?). So, maybe the people who answered the question are a little bit wrong, maybe the guy who gave the lecture is full of shit (that's actually most likely the case) and those words were not the most common and he was just trying to get you kids riled up against the big bad adversity, and lastly maybe you need to consider the fact that "LOVE" is only what they tell you your religion is all about. They tell muslims that their religion is that of peace, but that's fundamentally incorrect and it shows in their scripture, even if we disregard the violent wordly events that are done in the name of Islam. The same thing can be said about Christianity. You guys dance about with your super positive pep talks about how Jesus forgives you for being a shitty individual who sins, and God loves you specifically because you're awesome and special, and it's a religion is PEACEFUL. Actions speak louder than words though. In reality, Christians are no less flawed than the rest of us heathens and misguided ungodly folks. Many Christians ARE needlessly anti-gay for religious and dumb traditional reasons. Many Christians are judgmental even though the scripture tells them not to be, because some of them are so ****ing proud to be in the "right" religion, and some of them are hypocritical, condescending and excluding. Much more so than they are loving. Relatively few Christians go out of their way to share love. They just say they do because it's better for PR than what the literalists do. And forgive me for perhaps coming off as rude but it's quite clear to me that love is a characteristic of Christianity in title only. In other words, the great Christians are not any more representative of Christianity than the terrible ones.But I want to say it again: The speaker was lying about the survey, or his methodology was flawed to completely mad levels. You don't come off as rude, you come off as ignorant. That you think statements like "Relatively few Christians go out of their way to share love." even make sense to say in the first place speaks to a healthy dose of confirmation bias and an overindulgence in availability heuristics. It is a shame that you have had so little interaction with those who partake in the "good" aspects of religiosity, but your experiences with Christianity, be they personal, through the media, or through word of mouth, are only one drop in the bucket of determining what is representative of Christianity.
I think it's a theme for you to call others ignorant when you disagree, I've seen you do it a couple of times and I'm starting to understand why others accuse your posting of being on the weaker end of the spectrum. Since my post may not have made this clear to you, all I'm saying is that Christians are not better people than non-Christians. To reuse your cheap retort, the fact that you didn't understand that makes you come off as ignorant.
And that's my opinion, too. By calling me ignorant for questioning the turbo-love of Christians, you essentially implied that it's definitely factually correct to say that Christians are more prone to giving out love than others. Hop back to reality, man. You're all as flawed as us even though you'll call us ignorant when we criticize your greatness.
I don't know what grounds you stand on anyway when you criticize my 'assessment' of who's representative of Christianity. I didn't even give an answer myself and yet you still told me I was wrong. All I'm saying is that neither of the extremes are representative of Christianity in general. It's a very fair thing to say. 'Christians' in general aren't represented by Christian-run super awesome charities and humanitarian efforts, nor are they represented by the Abortion clinic bombers. There are a bunch of Christians, moderates and such, who aren't any more loving (or hateful) than an atheist or a good person from any religion other than Christianity.
Hypocrisy confirmed in you. And you had the guts to accuse me of confirmation bias... Come on.
**And before others mention it, yes I'm biased. But I criticized Christians independently here because that's what it's about. But very few broad classifications of people are deserving of the word 'loving' in general. No broad classifications, I would argue.
|
|
|
On October 11 2013 00:01 guN-viCe wrote:
ignorant
Straight to the feels. How dare the heathen say that we aren't the master religion 
|
Followers.
I mean, that's a word even christians wouldn't have a problem with, right?
Anyone who is a christian followed someone else's logic to come to their conclusions, either directly or indirectly. Because they all have come to conclusions that you can't really come to by following your own intrinsic thoughts. Whether they're loving or hateful, stupid or clever, bigot or tolerant, all chirstians are followers.
|
On October 10 2013 01:10 Stratos wrote:
Brainwashed.
^ this, but I would say "crazy".
I mean they are really and this would be the same to all religious peple.
|
Can't believe I'm first to write it.
Irrational.
|
On October 10 2013 21:38 MarlieChurphy wrote:I find op to be spot on and hilariously ironic. As for me, it would be pretty hard to choose one word to describe Christians, and don't be so contrived to think I have a different word for christians as I do for muslims or catholics or whatever. I'd use the same word. Probably something like nutjobs, idiots, ignorant, etc. yea this: Show nested quote +On October 10 2013 02:23 Salv wrote:If I could use one word to describe the majority of Christians I would choose ignorant. I think there are far too many Christians who are unaware of: - Their own Bible.
- Evolution
- Abiogenesis
- Scientific theory
- Fallacies
That's not to suggest all Christians are like this though and as an atheist from a semi-religious family I understand where some people are coming from when describing their faith. I've actually been christian, catholic, mormon, baptist and been to other churches as well. My parents did a great job (unwittingly) making me understand that all these people are basically speaking the same crazy language but arguing semantics. It's all just nonsense. They should actually force kids in elemntary schools to be a different religion each year and it would produce a lot more intelligent athiests imho. I think it was Penn Jillette who said that when he read the bible it served as a catalyst to make him more atheist. I mean a lot of the stuff in there is on some fantasy fiction novel level. PS- Does anyone else think the semantic issue of being called 'athiest' versus 'an atheist' is an important distinction? 'An athiest' sort of implies you practice some anti religion rules or go to athiest group meetings. 'Atheist' is just like nobody knows or will know so idgaf. So like if someone asks you like; "What church do you go to?", you would reply with "I'm atheist." and leave it at that. Where as an atheist would be more sort of militant about it and say something like; "I'm an atheist, you believe in that crap?"
they have this new term, "Religious Activist" or "Anti-Theist" for that I think. Yeah I am becoming one of those guys coming from just not believing in "god". I really think it is time we inform and push back as some people are just guillible and they need some people to explain or reason out with them to really make them realize for themselves.
|
On October 11 2013 01:11 woreyour wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2013 21:38 MarlieChurphy wrote:I find op to be spot on and hilariously ironic. As for me, it would be pretty hard to choose one word to describe Christians, and don't be so contrived to think I have a different word for christians as I do for muslims or catholics or whatever. I'd use the same word. Probably something like nutjobs, idiots, ignorant, etc. yea this: On October 10 2013 02:23 Salv wrote:If I could use one word to describe the majority of Christians I would choose ignorant. I think there are far too many Christians who are unaware of: - Their own Bible.
- Evolution
- Abiogenesis
- Scientific theory
- Fallacies
That's not to suggest all Christians are like this though and as an atheist from a semi-religious family I understand where some people are coming from when describing their faith. I've actually been christian, catholic, mormon, baptist and been to other churches as well. My parents did a great job (unwittingly) making me understand that all these people are basically speaking the same crazy language but arguing semantics. It's all just nonsense. They should actually force kids in elemntary schools to be a different religion each year and it would produce a lot more intelligent athiests imho. I think it was Penn Jillette who said that when he read the bible it served as a catalyst to make him more atheist. I mean a lot of the stuff in there is on some fantasy fiction novel level. PS- Does anyone else think the semantic issue of being called 'athiest' versus 'an atheist' is an important distinction? 'An athiest' sort of implies you practice some anti religion rules or go to athiest group meetings. 'Atheist' is just like nobody knows or will know so idgaf. So like if someone asks you like; "What church do you go to?", you would reply with "I'm atheist." and leave it at that. Where as an atheist would be more sort of militant about it and say something like; "I'm an atheist, you believe in that crap?" they have this new term, "Religious Activist" or "Anti-Theist" for that I think. Yeah I am becoming one of those guys coming from just not believing in "god". I really think it is time we inform and push back as some people are just guillible and they need some people to explain or reason out with them to really make them realize for themselves.
Please enlighten us all with your logical proof that there is not a god. You can't "inform" people about something for which no conclusions can be drawn from the evidence that we have
|
On October 11 2013 01:15 packrat386 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 11 2013 01:11 woreyour wrote:On October 10 2013 21:38 MarlieChurphy wrote:I find op to be spot on and hilariously ironic. As for me, it would be pretty hard to choose one word to describe Christians, and don't be so contrived to think I have a different word for christians as I do for muslims or catholics or whatever. I'd use the same word. Probably something like nutjobs, idiots, ignorant, etc. yea this: On October 10 2013 02:23 Salv wrote:If I could use one word to describe the majority of Christians I would choose ignorant. I think there are far too many Christians who are unaware of: - Their own Bible.
- Evolution
- Abiogenesis
- Scientific theory
- Fallacies
That's not to suggest all Christians are like this though and as an atheist from a semi-religious family I understand where some people are coming from when describing their faith. I've actually been christian, catholic, mormon, baptist and been to other churches as well. My parents did a great job (unwittingly) making me understand that all these people are basically speaking the same crazy language but arguing semantics. It's all just nonsense. They should actually force kids in elemntary schools to be a different religion each year and it would produce a lot more intelligent athiests imho. I think it was Penn Jillette who said that when he read the bible it served as a catalyst to make him more atheist. I mean a lot of the stuff in there is on some fantasy fiction novel level. PS- Does anyone else think the semantic issue of being called 'athiest' versus 'an atheist' is an important distinction? 'An athiest' sort of implies you practice some anti religion rules or go to athiest group meetings. 'Atheist' is just like nobody knows or will know so idgaf. So like if someone asks you like; "What church do you go to?", you would reply with "I'm atheist." and leave it at that. Where as an atheist would be more sort of militant about it and say something like; "I'm an atheist, you believe in that crap?" they have this new term, "Religious Activist" or "Anti-Theist" for that I think. Yeah I am becoming one of those guys coming from just not believing in "god". I really think it is time we inform and push back as some people are just guillible and they need some people to explain or reason out with them to really make them realize for themselves. Please enlighten us all with your logical proof that there is not a god. You can't "inform" people about something for which no conclusions can be drawn from the evidence that we have
well lucky me, for a few seconds I snag a believer 
Alright, here we go! As I atheist, the burden of proof is not with me as I am not claiming somthing. I just dont believe in a "god". So tell me what is your proof or claim and it would be my pleasure to enlighten you. Shall we dance?
|
On October 11 2013 01:29 woreyour wrote:Show nested quote +On October 11 2013 01:15 packrat386 wrote:On October 11 2013 01:11 woreyour wrote:On October 10 2013 21:38 MarlieChurphy wrote:I find op to be spot on and hilariously ironic. As for me, it would be pretty hard to choose one word to describe Christians, and don't be so contrived to think I have a different word for christians as I do for muslims or catholics or whatever. I'd use the same word. Probably something like nutjobs, idiots, ignorant, etc. yea this: On October 10 2013 02:23 Salv wrote:If I could use one word to describe the majority of Christians I would choose ignorant. I think there are far too many Christians who are unaware of: - Their own Bible.
- Evolution
- Abiogenesis
- Scientific theory
- Fallacies
That's not to suggest all Christians are like this though and as an atheist from a semi-religious family I understand where some people are coming from when describing their faith. I've actually been christian, catholic, mormon, baptist and been to other churches as well. My parents did a great job (unwittingly) making me understand that all these people are basically speaking the same crazy language but arguing semantics. It's all just nonsense. They should actually force kids in elemntary schools to be a different religion each year and it would produce a lot more intelligent athiests imho. I think it was Penn Jillette who said that when he read the bible it served as a catalyst to make him more atheist. I mean a lot of the stuff in there is on some fantasy fiction novel level. PS- Does anyone else think the semantic issue of being called 'athiest' versus 'an atheist' is an important distinction? 'An athiest' sort of implies you practice some anti religion rules or go to athiest group meetings. 'Atheist' is just like nobody knows or will know so idgaf. So like if someone asks you like; "What church do you go to?", you would reply with "I'm atheist." and leave it at that. Where as an atheist would be more sort of militant about it and say something like; "I'm an atheist, you believe in that crap?" they have this new term, "Religious Activist" or "Anti-Theist" for that I think. Yeah I am becoming one of those guys coming from just not believing in "god". I really think it is time we inform and push back as some people are just guillible and they need some people to explain or reason out with them to really make them realize for themselves. Please enlighten us all with your logical proof that there is not a god. You can't "inform" people about something for which no conclusions can be drawn from the evidence that we have well lucky me, for a few seconds I snag a believer Alright, here we go! As I atheist, the burden of proof is not with me as I am not claiming somthing. I just dont believe in a "god". So tell me what is your proof or claim and it would be my pleasure to enlighten you. Shall we dance?
No, because I'm not a believer myself. I just get annoyed that atheists don't understand the concept of faith. Christianity doesn't endeavor to prove to you that god exists, instead it asks you to believe particularly in spite of lack if evidence (see doubting Thomas). The burden of proof is on you because you are the one that wants proof.
|
On October 11 2013 01:29 woreyour wrote:Show nested quote +On October 11 2013 01:15 packrat386 wrote:On October 11 2013 01:11 woreyour wrote:On October 10 2013 21:38 MarlieChurphy wrote:I find op to be spot on and hilariously ironic. As for me, it would be pretty hard to choose one word to describe Christians, and don't be so contrived to think I have a different word for christians as I do for muslims or catholics or whatever. I'd use the same word. Probably something like nutjobs, idiots, ignorant, etc. yea this: On October 10 2013 02:23 Salv wrote:If I could use one word to describe the majority of Christians I would choose ignorant. I think there are far too many Christians who are unaware of: - Their own Bible.
- Evolution
- Abiogenesis
- Scientific theory
- Fallacies
That's not to suggest all Christians are like this though and as an atheist from a semi-religious family I understand where some people are coming from when describing their faith. I've actually been christian, catholic, mormon, baptist and been to other churches as well. My parents did a great job (unwittingly) making me understand that all these people are basically speaking the same crazy language but arguing semantics. It's all just nonsense. They should actually force kids in elemntary schools to be a different religion each year and it would produce a lot more intelligent athiests imho. I think it was Penn Jillette who said that when he read the bible it served as a catalyst to make him more atheist. I mean a lot of the stuff in there is on some fantasy fiction novel level. PS- Does anyone else think the semantic issue of being called 'athiest' versus 'an atheist' is an important distinction? 'An athiest' sort of implies you practice some anti religion rules or go to athiest group meetings. 'Atheist' is just like nobody knows or will know so idgaf. So like if someone asks you like; "What church do you go to?", you would reply with "I'm atheist." and leave it at that. Where as an atheist would be more sort of militant about it and say something like; "I'm an atheist, you believe in that crap?" they have this new term, "Religious Activist" or "Anti-Theist" for that I think. Yeah I am becoming one of those guys coming from just not believing in "god". I really think it is time we inform and push back as some people are just guillible and they need some people to explain or reason out with them to really make them realize for themselves. Please enlighten us all with your logical proof that there is not a god. You can't "inform" people about something for which no conclusions can be drawn from the evidence that we have well lucky me, for a few seconds I snag a believer Alright, here we go! As I atheist, the burden of proof is not with me as I am not claiming somthing. I just dont believe in a "god". So tell me what is your proof or claim and it would be my pleasure to enlighten you. Shall we dance?
Why is there no God? What proof do you have? Cwutididthere
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
