Why Atheists Are So Angry...

[Henry Hawk]

He is a disciple of the Church of Richard Dawkins......Lex, dan is no different, he put his faith into Mr. Dawkins, as we do God..

That is where he gets MOST of his talking points from.............he SAYS he thinks for himself, but WE know better...

He cut's n paste quotes from the Bible that Dawkins uses all the time and says that we are TOO stupid and are liars....

[lex]

He is a disciple of the Church of Richard Dawkins......Lex, dan is no different, he put his faith into Mr. Dawkins, as we do God..

That is where he gets MOST of his talking points from.............he SAYS he thinks for himself, but WE know better...

He cut's n paste quotes from the Bible that Dawkins uses all the time and says that we are TOO stupid and are liars....

He's an angry one. Lots of energy spent hating that could be spent on something productive. Probably real young. He must have been burned by someone in church or something, it happens. I get a big kick out of how they try to say we are rewriting history, when it's their people that are doing that. He's misguided, but there is going to be a lot more of that coming. I have watched the gradual steps of brainwashing versus Christians over the years, and between TV, Holywood, and academia, they about got the job done.

It's all part of the mechanism of the end times just falling into place piece at a time. I hate talking about it, I get sick of preachers screaming about it and using it to brain their flocks over the head with fear and puff up their bank accounts. It's a time of preparation, not setting around waiting to get beamed out like star trek and think we get to miss out on all the rough stuff. I believe some of the crap Christians are taught these days about end times is 1,000,000 times more dangerous than all of the foam at the  mouth anti-christs we have running about.

The parable of the foolish virgins is in play at the moment. Forget about the dan fosters of this world, it's oil one needs for the darkness ahead.

[Sandy Eggo]

I have to interject here. You both seem to projecting and making assumptions, but not providing a whole lot of facts to support your theories. If he's wrong. Then prove it. That would put an end to it. So far, you've both failed in the proof department and you've reduced your entire argument to aspersions with a little "me too" thrown in there. From what I can tell, you have the poor persecuted christian spiel down to a science. Why's everyone always pickin' on me?. You can't say with any degree of certainty that all atheists are angry. I think that's a judgment call that would need to be made on an individual to individual basis regardless of faith or non-faith.  I don't think Dan's angry and where's all that christian happiness from you two?

[lex]

Let me explain it from my point of view if it helps. It's all spiritual in nature. It's what Jesus was talking about when he said "born again". He's on about one being born in their spiritual being, it coming alive in them and taking in things of the spirit, with one's spiritual mind, eyes, and ears.

For me, like many, it was a supernatural experience. It was as if weights fell off of me, and the entire world looked new and different to me, things that were clouded to me became clearer and clearer. This experience was quickly re-enforced as I was grievously injured not too long after my "born again" experience. I went down to the alter for prayer on crutches, and walked away without them completely healed. It wasn't some big fancy production, just a tiny humble church with some beloved brothers and sisters.

That was many years ago, but even as I have traveled far away, I haven't forgot what I experienced, and I have seen other things and had other experiences.

Now I have always been a scientist. When I was young, I read science books constantly. I was more interested in lasers, nuclear energy, and solar power than I was playing sports. I could explain to you what E=mc2 meant before I was out of 6th grade. Even back then I was questioning Einstein's relativity theories, because frankly I thought they had holes in them.

My favorite author was Isaac Asimov, his foundation trilogy was my favorite. But I don't see science at odds with God as so many do. I know Einstein didn't either, in fact he's got some good quotes like "God doesn't play dice with the Universe." He was referring in my opinion to the laws of nature, principles that we are still to this day just scratching the surface of.

I don't look at the worlds around me puzzled, it all makes sense to me at a deep level of my being. I see a disaster, and it makes sense in the big picture. I see a tree, or a baby or an ice cream cone and it's all part of a big picture.

I also marvel at the mathematical probabilities of our existence here if one was to just try to shake us out of cosmic dust into what we are. Our whole existence is exponentially improbable, it defies odds in such a way we are almost a singularity.

There is a little principle that states all things being sorta equal, the simplest explanation is most likely to be true. So, its not hard for me to balance a mountain of math saying fat chance versus the explanation of intelligent design.

I look at a tree and admire the designer's handiwork. The closer I look, the more I see the creator's vast intellect in it. I don't have to be convinced, it's all just very obvious and it baffles me how others can miss it. To me they can't see the forest for all the trees in the way. It's like we are standing in the middle of it all and people demanding you show them. It's all around us, I am freaked out you can't see it.

Then people want to argue and debate there are no trees and we are standing in a forest together. Frankly, I don't have time for it, because if someone doesn't want to see something, they will not see it. And not everyone will, they could but they don't want to and frankly that is sad, but they have been told. They can't bitch then when they bump into trees or one falls on their head. But I am sure they will.

[dan foster]

I am laughing too hard to be angry.  I don't even own a Dawkins book.  He would be preaching to the choir.  I buy books for new ideas.

I get a really big kick out of things like "I have watched the gradual steps of brainwashing versus Christians over the years, and between TV, Holywood, and academia, they about got the job done." when in fact being a christian is to be brainwashed, and that is first hand knowledge.

So, you two clowns can rage against reality all you want, but your revisionist history won't take, your freudian slips like the last paragraph will just keep coming, and with no facts whatsoever to back up your claims, you will continue to find you have no answers for what you believe in or why.

[Thinker]

This thread is funny.

[dan foster]

This thread is funny.

And deep: This sounds like mescaline or peyote.

"I look at a tree and admire the designer's handiwork. The closer I look, the more I see the creator's vast intellect in it. I don't have to be convinced, it's all just very obvious and it baffles me how others can miss it. To me they can't see the forest for all the trees in the way. It's like we are standing in the middle of it all and people demanding you show them. It's all around us, I am freaked out you can't see it."

Whether synthetic, or self-induced psychologically, the results are the same.

[Thinker]

I have a question.  If God is perfect and we are created in his image, but are not perfect, how is God infallible?

[Henry Hawk]

I have to interject here. You both seem to projecting and making assumptions, but not providing a whole lot of facts to support your theories. If he's wrong. Then prove it. That would put an end to it. So far, you've both failed in the proof department and you've reduced your entire argument to aspersions with a little "me too" thrown in there. From what I can tell, you have the poor persecuted christian spiel down to a science. Why's everyone always pickin' on me?. You can't say with any degree of certainty that all atheists are angry. I think that's a judgment call that would need to be made on an individual to individual basis regardless of faith or non-faith.  I don't think Dan's angry and where's all that christian happiness from you two?

are you saying that I AM NOT happy?..............Piya, I got NOTHING to prove, but if you have NOT read Dan's attacks on particulary ME, and not come to the conclusion HE is not angry.........then, there is nothing more to prove........

Look, I like dan, I honestly do.........if he and I was to sit in my bar...I have NO doubts we would get along just fantastic.......all I am doing is fighting back with his own tactics.............he claims I am just getting my words to live by from my church and church leaders...........and I'm just saying he is getting his own ammo from people like dawkins.............he has slammed me for being "too stupid" and a "liar"............and I have only just recently fired back................and I'm not real dang proud of it...............but, I can't sit at a bar and express my feelings the way I would love too............and using a keyboard sometimes don't allow true feeling to be displayed with the emotion attached.....

and again, I have NOTHING to prove for my Christianity..............if people on here don't care for it...................get over it.............I'm might have to raise my prices at my bar....

[Henry Hawk]

I am laughing too hard to be angry.  I don't even own a Dawkins book.  He would be preaching to the choir.  I buy books for new ideas.

I get a really big kick out of things like "I have watched the gradual steps of brainwashing versus Christians over the years, and between TV, Holywood, and academia, they about got the job done." when in fact being a christian is to be brainwashed, and that is first hand knowledge.

So, you two clowns can rage against reality all you want, but your revisionist history won't take, your freudian slips like the last paragraph will just keep coming, and with no facts whatsoever to back up your claims, you will continue to find you have no answers for what you believe in or why.

RIGHT!.. ...you NEVER read any of Dawkins....RIGHT DANNY........... ....I just laughed so hard I coughed all over my Bible......

[dan foster]

Never.  I saw him interviewed on a BBC documentary once.  I agree with his work, but I have never read anything written by him.  Now, why do you find that so hard to believe?

[IYT]

They can't bitch then when they bump into trees or one falls on their head. But I am sure they will.

Trees better stay the hell away from me.  Honestly, I look at trees too and sometimes wonder how some people don't believe in the Almighty...of course I'm looking at different trees than most people...trees that are truly divine (and coincidentally enough,  illegal too ).

[dan foster]

Trees better stay the hell away from me.  Honestly, I look at trees too and sometimes wonder how some people don't believe in the Almighty...of course I'm looking at different trees than most people...trees that are truly divine (and coincidentally enough,  illegal too ).

Ah, a spiritual high.  Now, we can all agree with that as one route to oneness with the universe.  Whether synthetic or self-induced through meditation, there are definitive physiological aspects to the mind, but still tied to physics  (or at least chemistry  )

[Thinker]

http://imagechan.com/img/img.php?id=1179

[fireguy]

I think it's funny that DF is being chastised for allegedly following the writings of someone else (Dawkins) by people who follow a book written by unknown authors, in languages we don't really understand, edited by people who's agendas are completely unknown to us and translated multiple times with multiple results. If he does follow Dawkin's work, at least he knows who wrote it and speaks/reads the language it's written in. That makes it much more plausible than the bible.