Contradictions in atheism

Atheism like to spout about the contradictions in the Bible. However, there is an old adage that many atheists should beware: those in glass houses should beware of throwing stones.

A look at the documents of atheism is to look at glaring contradiction itself.

For legal purposes, atheists have established themselves, as reviewed and accepted by a court, a legal definition and view of themselves. So this is as good a place as any to test the theory of perfect atheism with the reality of it in practice.

http://www.atheists.org/atheism

"He wants disease conquered, poverty vanquished, war eliminated. He wants man to understand and love man."

OK, that seem apt, something few atheists would disagree with. It is also testable.

Lets see what atheist organizations do to accomplish the mission they have assigned themselves?

Conquring disease? Vanquishing Poverty? Eliminating War?

Well, one of the better 'atheist' charities is found right here:

http://foundationbeyondbelief.org/faqs

Other than raising funds however, it seems to have very little detail about the outlay of these funds once collected. It has collected some stories, about women in US Aid (Three Bags of Tea and Greg Mortensen would be a better indication of that trend however), but it does have one alarming aspect to it:

http://content.usatoday.com/communi...1/01/fitness-us-army-spirituality-religion-/1

Apparently, atheists, despite their commitment to ending war and chastizing the use of violence, are concerned about making sure atheists are afforded the highest degree of respect while conducting warfare? In fact, though spirituality has been cited in numerous studies of resiliency (a topic not discussed on this 'charitable site' at all), it is deemed unimportant as a selective indicator for soldier in need of additional help in dealing with the realities of combat - of killing other people.

Lost in this display of angst at poor treatment is any serius consideration of what atheists DO to handle the realities of combat? Where are these humanistic goals understanding and loving man - of helping those suffering with the reality of war?

These are apparently less important than the huberistic angst at having a lack of spirituality que up additional support for soldiers in need. Is it discriminatory to state, "You have no spirituality (not religion mind you), and statistics tell us that this leaves one vulnerable. Additionally, I see you served in Helmud Province as a infantryman where there was very heavy combat. Are you having issues?"

And honest discussion about the effects of PTSD and general mental health needs to be shut down because spirituality is statistically proven to be beneficial? Why?

And we see the tend continue on other atheism web site.

Positive atheism is build around the tecahings of Gora of India, a Humanist, and, as a man, someone anyone can admire for his dedication to principle:

http://www.positiveatheism.org/faq/faq1111.htm#WHATISPOSATH

So what does this apparently positive trajectory produce? What is this site accomplishing with the funds it raises?

http://www.positiveatheism.org/mail/eml8361.htm

De-converstion stories?

http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/quotes/qframe.htm

http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/quotes/scarstartframe.htm

Incredibly selective lists of quotations about the 'benefits' of atheism and the 'scariness' of religion?

http://www.positiveatheism.org/tocindia.htm

And, oh yes, if you actually want to donate money to fund Gora's out reach programs to the poor in India, you can do that too ... by contacting the site separately.

So how exactly is poverty going to eliinated by fund raising to bash religion and praise atheism?

How exactly is love and compassion being displayed by .... pulling selective quotes and overtly focusing only on the negative aspects of religion? Being overtly positive about ones self?

A better question? Why are so many atheists purusing the Bible looking for every minor detail of minutia to make hash over, but are oblivious and/or uncaring the massive contradictions in their own statements and aims?

Do atheisms claiming this mantel: "He believes that we are our brother's keepers; and are keepers of our own lives; that we are responsible persons and the job is here and the time is now.”

http://www.atheists.org/atheism

Are best spending their time focusing on Jonah in the Bible, ignoring its message, and ignoring Jesus, Moses (actively trying to make him irrelevant), or any other important religious figure will accomplish any of the lofty goals whose mantel of righteousness they have claimed?

 

I'm not really sure how atheism, that is not accepting the unevidenced claims of deities, can be contradictory.

 

Or blowing something up.

 

Humans are contradictory, a book that is supposed to be divinely inspired shouldn't be, but it is. You'd figure that God would have his story straight.

 

From what I've heard, only 2.5% of the world's population are atheists, so why even take the time to be irritated by them?

 

How totally ridiculous.

The Bible is meant to be one coherent whole (meant to be), which therefore - particularly if you believe it's the word of some "God" - should logically be free of contradictions, whether internal or historical or whatever. It is intended to prescribe a belief system, in other words.

Atheism on the other hand is not a belief system, as countless people here have tried to explain to you countless times.

So whereas, as a Christian you ARE supposed to follow the Bible, there are no such set or codified beliefs which atheists are meant to follow. In other words Positive Atheism website represents the world view of that particular website, not of atheists or atheism as whole... ditto the other sites you linked to above.

Meaning that your whole attempted analogy here doesn't even make any sense, in fact it totally fails.

 

The problem is that the Bible is written by several apostels (at least the New Tesatement) the observed events of Jesus, and are written with strong correlation, though they contain minor bits of minutia that you would expect from DIFFERENT people witnessing the same events.

Does witnessing the divine mean that everyone will see it the EXACT same way?

How how does purusing these minor details and attacking other people and the their beliefs produce anything benefical?

Why are the people looking at these minor bits of minutia NOT more concerned with what appears to be massive fraud under the guise of atheism and human outreach?

What gives?

 

You're lucky he didn't call you a "Militant atheist".....

 

Really?

How about you find a source other than your opinion? Try one that explains the NEW and OLD TESTAMENTS, and what teh changes are and why in ONE solid book whose changes go unacknolwedged by atheists making these claims?

Now, lets apply your standard to positive atheism? It is one coherenet whole, attempting to expound on the message and example of Gora, a noble cause - why is it instead ripping on religion?

And why, if truth is what matters, are atheists less concerned about this presentation of atheistic idealism then they are with lifting bits of the old testament and completely ignoring Jesus?

Why should you not be judged by the same standard?

What is rediculous about applying your standards of judgement of others beliefs to your own?

Amazing what a mirror reveals.

 

Have you look in one lately?

 

I don't know if this follows in each and every sect, but Catholicism teaches that the Bible was divinely inspired, as in the writers were inspired and aided by God.

 

REally? You are running around this forum slamming my faith, but demanding my respect while you adopt one atheist position after another to continually launch pevish attacks on my faith?

You are of course aware of what the Bible says about behavior such as yours?

"The lips of fools bring them strife, and their mouths invite a beating." (Proverbs 18:6)

"Drive out the mocker, and out goes strife; quarrels and insults are ended."
(Proverbs 22:10)

How silly of me to actually know my faith, rather than taking my religious views and calling them agnosticism.

 

How does that make their observations immune to the realities of individual perspective?

How does that make it right to puruse these various perspectives and condemn based on the trivial IN SOMEONE ELSE'S FAITH, while ignoring the blantant contradictions in ONE'S OWN FAITH?

It isn't honest discussion and exploration I fear, it is contempt and derisiion based upon these standard that I detest.

 

You still don't get it do you?

I personally couldn't care less what Positive Atheism website says because I'm not a follower of Gora of India, or a subscriber to that particular website or any such thing.

I could equally try to hold you accountable for what some Christian Zionist Church of the Aryan Christ said, and it would be just as invalid.

To put it simply for you: as a Christian the Bible is supposed to be relevant to you, because it's supposed to prescribe the belief system you adhere to ... as an atheist Positive Atheism website is totally IRRELEVANT to me unless I choose to suddenly become a follower of Gora of India or to sign up to that website, or whatever.

Seriously, I really don't get how this is SOOOOOOO hard for you to understand? Unless of course, that's because it's simply more convenient for you not to.....

 

Every morning.

And now that we know that we don;t like one another, perhaps you could deal with the subject of the thread? The OVERT contradictions in the productions of atheists?

As an agnostic, it should not be hard for you to judge BOTH sides of the God debate by the SAME standard should it? Odd that you are not, and odder still that you have such contempt for one who dares to apply YOUR standards for religion onto atheism.

Very odd indeed.

 

I think you've misunderstood.

He's not a christian.

 

YOU still don't get it do you.

YOU pretend to care about TRUTH and to have issues with immoral behavior and hypocrisy - as evidenced by your continual soliciting of minutia IN OTHER PEOPLE'S FAITH.

YET when someone applies this to YOUR FAITH'S ACTIONS - well it isn't you - you aren;t what these atheists write?

BULL(*)(*)(*)(*).

YOU, among others, have continuously chastized religion for its violent tendancies, and yet YOU just like the FIRST SOURCE listed in the OP, take great qualms in someone finding that a lack of spirituality might have detrimental mental health benefits in the very comabt you detest but are bravely part of?

YOU don;t get it.

YOU cannot come out and continually make statements about how great atheists are - a multitude of statements and attacks on others mind you - and simultaneously claim that you are saying NOTHING.

THAT would be the greatest contradiction I have ever encourntered.

Odd that those who value truth so much are so comfortable living such contradiction to attack others. To change their standards on a whim merely to be 'right' at any cost.


ACTUALLY addressing the issues in the OP? Nah, atheists say nothing - even as they force a court to acknowledge them.

PS - please remember this rant of yours as puruse SOMEONE ELSE'S FAITH, and condemn them for a literal rather than allegorical, belief in Jonah or some other such. You are quick to condemn based on one standard, and awful quick to exonerate and excuse when that standard is applied to you.

 

Can you make a short list of contradictions? Some structure?

Eliminating wars as a goal does not mean pacifism.

Spending money to educate people not to believe in Bible nonsense can be helpful in fighting poverty. Superstition is not exactly helpful in improving the life of people.

Why focus on positive aspects of Christianity, if the whole concept makes no sense?

 

Because apparently all 2.5% of them like to come into public forums and bash our faith to no end.

I wonder how they feel when their standards off attack are turned back on them? When they are judged as they judge?

Actually I know. I am sure the mods are rolling their eyes on this one, but if the standard is good for the goose, it should be good for the gander. Good for Christians and Muslims, and good for atheists.

So, if atheists are acting all upset that someone turned their standards on them and screaming? I wonder when they will acknowledge the need for MUTUAL repsect in standards?

I'd be happy to discuss religion and even atheism.

You cannot do that when even something like an archeological discussion fo Moses is interrupted with a rant about religious preaching - in a religion forum mind you - or totally unevidenced claims of here being no evidence to support Moses (just the declaration mind you) followed by often quite vicious personal attacks.

There are plenty of contradictions and many downsides to atheism as well. Thought it would be nice to referrence them rather than focus totally on teh downside of religion or its defense.

Let atheists defend their faith for a change.

 

2.5%? What is Europe then? 80% slightly Christian?

Name one. Or two. Or three. ... I think, you got the concept.

Fine, show us the downside of atheism, if there should be one.

Whatever.

 

Yes, eliminating WAR does mean pacificism.

If instead you are encourgaing the brave and just participation in war, you are OBVIOUSLY not trying to eliminate war.

Similarly, if you are raising funds to administer to the poor, as Gora is, then building a soup kitchen would help in that goal. COllecting rants about religion does not help eliminate any aspect of poverty I have ever encountered.

And if supersition is what bothers you, then perhaps you can explain the uncontrovertable proof that drives the obvious conclusion of there being no God? That should neatly eliminate both agnosticism and religion.

However, in an uncertain environment, when respect and admiriation of our fellow man is paramount according to atheism, it seems odd to have contempt of other opinions and those who hold them so high on the list of things to achieve. Contempt for others is not a lofty goal.

To be fair, the actuality of not believing in God? I have no issues with it. The reality of atheists and their behavior on this forum? I have nothing but contempt for the vicious attacks on faith dissenting opinions, the utter lack of tolerance, mutual respect, and often inaccurate criticism offered in derision.

Is THAT what atheism is?

 

It is not mine, it is Goldwaters figure.

Read the OP.

Read the OP.

 

Yeah, I do seem to recall this theme having come up before once or twice..., and you are not the only one who expressed on those occasions that Gora is not a figure they follow or necessarily agree with just because they are atheists.
But such assertions 'prove' that atheists do not have any positive beliefs, but only deny everything.

If you are not sure, you may consult one or more of the other threads about the doctrines, contradictions and hypocrisy of atheism and its adherents to gain further understanding of the inner workings of this deplorable belief system, this one for example.

 

ROFL!!!!

Three time already I have stated that atheist concerned with 'contradiction' and 'truth' seem oddly eager to excuse it in their fellow atheists, even as they attack, attack, attack, based on minutia in OTHER PEOPLE'S FAITH.

Is there even an honest discussion of the contradictions on display in the OP? In positiev atheism's stated goal and what it is actually producing? An honest attempt explore 'spirituality' in the health of our combat veternas that atheists are so compassionately caring about?

Nope.

Just another spurious excuse TO AVOID CONTRADICTION when it hits close to home. Yet Other's contradictions, these are the very things that are ripping the world apart - the basis of superstition on backward drift of mankind.

Yet, the glaring contradictions in YOUR co-religionists are excused at the drop of the hat, even those contradiction is a world killer?

Thanks for proving the point so perfectly!!!!

 

No, pacifism is hoping the bad guys will become pacifists, too. If this doesn't work, pacifists have a problem.

Eliminating war means preventing the bad guys from doing something stupid or maybe helping them to become good guys in the long run.

As long as you are not the aggressor, it's fine. Difficult concept for Americans, because they are used to be the aggressor.

Sure it helps. Bringing education to people can help them to improve their lives.

This is like the proof, that a black cat walking to the right doesn't mean something bad?

Why should Atheists respect superstition? If someone thinks, Spielberg movies are reality news, should we respect it?

So you don't like atheists because they are not always right?