Atheists Are Not Stupid

Author: ethang5
Fools
Bible
psalms
apostasy

Posts

Total: 127
#31
ATroubledMan
ATroubledMan's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 200
0
1
2
ATroubledMan's avatar
ATroubledMan
0
1
2
The bible being convincing is evidenced by the multitude of people convinced by it. Just like the evidence of vanilla being the favorite flavor is evidenced by the majority of people who prefer it.

But I'm saying what is plainly obviously true, vanilla is the clear favorite, and that is validated by the fact that most people prefer it

The ad populum fallacy is the appeal to the popularity of a claim as a reason for accepting it. Saying the Bible is evidenced by the multitude of people convinced or vanilla being the favorite flavor of the majority are perfect examples of the ad poplulum fallacy.

#32
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,949
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
The Bible is good, but it ain't Google. 

But we alllllll know gods don't do books.   
IF gods did make a book.
They wouldn't name it.   
The "boring"  Bible.
Or
The "un-cool"  Koran. 

They would name it something much cooler. Like , i don't know.
( The dead sea scrolls )  
This sounds like something a god would make.  
Arrrrrrr.
  
Also the first bible books shouldn't of been written in jibberish. it should of been,
A Audio book bible version. 

#33
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,269
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ethang5
"Semi-leterate" hey....Who's the "semi-leterate" one then?


And the bible being unconvincing is evidenced by the multitude of people unconvinced by it.

For every argument there is a counter argument.
#34
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,949
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
( For every argument there is a counter argument ) 

This is messing with my head.


Topic's author
#35
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@zedvictor4
And the bible being unconvincing is evidenced by the multitude of people unconvinced by it.
How do you know the amount of people unconvinced by it? I know the number of people convinced by it by the number of converts it makes each year. What's your metric?

For every argument there is a counter argument.
Sure, but not every counter argument is good. Just being counter is not enough. It must be logical, not just counter.

The bible convinces more people than any other religion on Earth. It has been doing so for centuries. Only a fool or a fake would call the bible unconvincing.
#36
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,269
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ethang5
The bible is an inanimate book that cannot convince anyone of anything.

It's people who influence people.

And one doesn't need statistical data to quantify a multitude.


And it's a fact, that most people who loosely regard themselves as Christian have never read the bible.

For most of them  all that Christianity means, is dressing up and doing a bit of singing on a Sunday morning.
Topic's author
#37
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
How do we know that vanilla is the most popular ice cream flavor? Because the most people prefer it.

Our genius calls this a fallacy.

No wonder he needs sock puppets.
#38
ATroubledMan
ATroubledMan's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 200
0
1
2
ATroubledMan's avatar
ATroubledMan
0
1
2
How do we know that vanilla is the most popular ice cream flavor? Because the most people prefer it.
While that may be so, it is an ad populum fallacy when used in an argument. Here's another example of that fallacy used just above.

The bible convinces more people than any other religion on Earth. It has been doing so for centuries.


 Only a fool or a fake would call the bible unconvincing.
Of the 7.7 Billion people in the world, only 2.1 Billion consider the Bible convincing, a clear minority (27%) of people over the 5.6 Billion "fools or fakes"
#39
ATroubledMan
ATroubledMan's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 200
0
1
2
ATroubledMan's avatar
ATroubledMan
0
1
2
In U.S., Decline of Christianity Continues at Rapid Pace.

In Pew Research Center telephone surveys conducted in 2018 and 2019, 65% of American adults describe themselves as Christians when asked about their religion, down 12 percentage points over the past decade. Meanwhile, the religiously unaffiliated share of the population, consisting of people who describe their religious identity as atheist, agnostic or “nothing in particular,” now stands at 26%, up from 17% in 2009.

Topic's author
#40
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@zedvictor4
The bible is an inanimate book that cannot convince anyone of anything.
Untrue. I know people convinced just by reading it. The world is not your little atheist bubble.

It's people who influence people.
It also people who influence people.

And one doesn't need statistical data to quantify a multitude.
All I asked was how did you know. It seems you have no metric for your claim. That is OK. I just wanted to on record you have no evidence.

And it's a fact, that most people who loosely regard themselves as Christian have never read the bible.
Most people who loosely regard themselves as christian..... Loosely act as christian? Can the class say tautology?

For most of them  all that Christianity means, is dressing up and doing a bit of singing on a Sunday morning.
So you take out a minority and say they are not devout. So? Even they were convinced.

The atheist claim that Christianity is shrinking is just semantic nonsense. The total number of Christians on Earth grew in 2017.

Talk about an ad popullum fallacy.

Only an idiot or a liar would say every non-christian calls the bible unconvincing. Buddhists accept the bible, Islam accepts the bible. Even some atheists accept the bible. 

So anyone using a figure of 5.6 Billion a the number unconvinced is lying or just ignorant. Many of them are restricted from considering the bible by laws in their country.
#41
ATroubledMan
ATroubledMan's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 200
0
1
2
ATroubledMan's avatar
ATroubledMan
0
1
2
Buddhists accept the bible, Islam accepts the bible. Even some atheists accept the bible.

"Muslims generally view these books (i.e the Bible, or parts of it) as having been corrupted, altered and interpolated over time, while maintaining that the Quran remains as the final, unchanged and preserved word of God."

Although Jesus is still a central feature of Christian atheism, Hamilton said that to the Christian atheist, Jesus as an historical or supernatural figure is not the foundation of faith; instead, Jesus is a "place to be, a standpoint".[5] Christian atheists look to Jesus as an example of what a Christian should be, but they do not see him as God, nor as the Son of God; merely as an influential rabbi.

#42
ATroubledMan
ATroubledMan's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 200
0
1
2
ATroubledMan's avatar
ATroubledMan
0
1
2
The atheist claim that Christianity is shrinking is just semantic nonsense. 
Pew Research Center says you're wrong. Maybe give them a call and straighten them out.

#43
Tyrano_R
Tyrano_R's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 9
0
0
0
Tyrano_R's avatar
Tyrano_R
0
0
0
-->
@ATroubledMan
The atheist claim that Christianity is shrinking is just semantic nonsense. 
Pew Research Center says you're wrong. Maybe give them a call and straighten them out.

In Australia, the Federal census revealed that less than 14% of Roman Catholics regularly attend Church, indicating that most of those who say they belong to a particular religion give their faith no more than lip service and could not give a stuff about whether or not God exists.

People continue to leave Churches in droves and isn't it any wonder? Nowadays in modern civilized society, we all have access to properly researched and validated information which all but dismisses any possible reason to believe of any supernatural presence. And the irrefutable, abundant evidence we have completely puts the kibosh on any notion of there being any such thing as creation.

#44
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@SkepticalOne
So do I, but then again, I reject laying blame on an innocent person too. 
<br>
I agree. More to the point, so does God. An innocent has no need of repentance. However, the only true innocents are children who do not understand, yet, the distinction of good and evil. once that knowledge is had, innocence may be claimed, but no one after that knowledge is had can legitimately claim it. They've done something wrong, and must be able to admit and correct.
#45
SkepticalOne
SkepticalOne's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 1,720
3
3
7
SkepticalOne's avatar
SkepticalOne
3
3
7
-->
@fauxlaw
So do I, but then again, I reject laying blame on an innocent person too. 
<br>
I agree. More to the point, so does God. An innocent has no need of repentance. However, the only true innocents are children who do not understand, yet, the distinction of good and evil. once that knowledge is had, innocence may be claimed, but no one after that knowledge is had can legitimately claim it. They've done something wrong, and must be able to admit and correct.
Jesus is said to be an innocent, no?
#46
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@SkepticalOne
Yes, but he was unique in that regard.
#47
SkepticalOne
SkepticalOne's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 1,720
3
3
7
SkepticalOne's avatar
SkepticalOne
3
3
7
-->
@fauxlaw
...an argument against the virtue of innocence if ever I heard one! 😝

#48
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@SkepticalOne
How is that an argument against innocence? It certainly is an argument against having the mentality to be innocent, but that is a decision entirely on the individual, not the value of innocence.
Topic's author
#49
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@SkepticalOne
..an argument against the virtue of innocence if ever I heard one! 😝
This exact point is asked in the bible! And Paul deals with the contention.

This board would be much more quiet if atheists only read what they so oppose.
Topic's author
#50
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
Notice Gentle Reader, that some atheists have left the topic and are now arguing about how many people go to church!

I'm embarrassed to say that makes my thread title look like a lie. I guess I should have titled it, "Some Atheists Are Not Stupid".

Others go into a sock puppet feeding frenzy, posting what they view as antichristian data, but is just off topic silliness. 
#51
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,269
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ethang5
If the world population continues to expand then the numbers of those regarded as "Christian" will inevitably expand also.

As will the numbers of those regarded as atheist.

In terms of percentage though, approximately 34% of the world population is considered to have a  Christian label, which means that approximately 66% is labelled differently, including approximately 12% atheist/agnostic.... All of which can rightly be regarded as multitudes.

So non-Christian is the greater and Christian is the single greatest...It really all depends upon how one chooses to manipulate statistics and present information.

And of course a lot depends upon which sectors of World society breed and expand the most rapidly, because the transfer of labels is obviously relative to the expansion of multitudes.

Nonetheless, no amount of statistical  manipulation will validate a religious text.


#52
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,321
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
( give a meaningless post title comment ) 
Majority of Theists are right handed and yes some are left handed. 

( Then whack in a name followed by some numbers and add some jibberish ) 
ROBERT 17 : 24.   did e just like flick a ciggy but at me cat 
And 
Elizabeth  22 : 22.  A rolling stone is worth two in the bush.  

( give proper meaning for said names with numbers )
Some take these verses to mean. Theists are bat shlt crazy and lack sense. 
This is true BUT they mean other things also . 

( then write some more crap in Shakespeare esk way ) 
( then chuck in a sentence or two of sciencey stuff ) 

State some more things you think you know because of the scripts . 

Deliver it in a cocky manner. 

Press the create post button. 

Then reply to what others say about it, whilst all the time making sure not to answer any questions ( DIRECTLY ) you are asked about. 

Typical ethang. 

A1

Topic's author
#53
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@zedvictor4
If the world population continues to expand then the numbers of those regarded as "Christian" will inevitably expand also.
Untrue. Unfortunately for you, Christians are not born, they are converted, so a simple increase in world population should not necessarily translate into an increase in the number of Christians. 

Atheists can be born, so an increase in world population will result in an increase in the number of atheists. But unlike Christians, a decrease in the worlds population would necessarily mean a decrease in the worlds atheists. Whereas the number of Christians could actually increase in a world with a decreasing population.

All of which can rightly be regarded as multitudes.
Untrue. You claimed they were multitudes who had considered the bible and had failed to be convinced. That is a lie my friend. Very few of them have considered the bible. Many of them have no experience with the bible. Still my point is true, Christianity is the most convincing religion on Earth. That's why you're running away from it.

Nonetheless, no amount of statistical  manipulation will validate a religious text.
Your bias cannot change reality. If more people are convinced of one text over another, that text is validated for convinsibility.

And statistical manipulation is you trying to say that every non-christian is a person who has not been convinced by the Bible.

If your argument is valid, why do you need to lie?
Topic's author
#54
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Stephen
You forgot to mention singing groups. Deb has a fixation on singing groups.
#55
RoderickSpode
RoderickSpode's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,044
2
2
2
RoderickSpode's avatar
RoderickSpode
2
2
2
-->
@ATroubledMan
Or, they take their information from medical professionals who outline the reasons for abortions.
I'm not really talking about that. I'm referring to, for one, the barbaric practices inside clinics that have caused employees to quit, and take an ant-abortion stance. That, and the idea of pro-choice for the woman. Pro-choice doesn't just benefit the woman. It benefits men as well. Sometimes it's the man who requires the abortion whether the woman wants it or not. I know of such a case. Do you think the abortion doctors make sure it's the woman's decision?


Very much in the same way we find societies in the past as completely barbaric. 

Yes! Exactly!

Humanist movements have been around for much longer than that and they did oppose the Jim Crow Laws, to no avail.
Yes, they have. The reason I focused on the U.S. is because I was specifically addressing American television in the 40s.

Christians opposed Jim Crow Laws as well. The Civil Rights Movement itself involved many Christians.

Would you be able to tell me how many humanists were Christians during these laws? I sure couldn't. If you can, by all means show me.

Would you be able to tell me how many humanists were atheists during these laws? I sure couldn't. If you can, by all means show me.

I'd be extremely suspicious of anyone claiming all the humanists back then were atheists. If I tried to claim that it was only Christians that supported racial civil rights, and you tried to claim it was only atheist/humanists that did so, we'd be nothing but spin doctors.

And it's not just about the Jim Crow laws. Hollywood has always been very liberal, and they had absolutely no problem whatsoever with casting Black-American actors as being illiterate, and afraid of their own shadow.


History shows, racial stereotypes (or even segregation) never comes to an end without substantial protest from the victims. We're still dealing with this.

#56
RoderickSpode
RoderickSpode's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,044
2
2
2
RoderickSpode's avatar
RoderickSpode
2
2
2
-->
@SkepticalOne
Hello, Roderick! 

Keep in mind the context of this statement. I was not suggesting the actions of atheists are necessarily better or worse than believers.

As Ethang conceded, the Bible gives examples of each. King David sent Uriah to die so that he may have Delila. The good Samaritan was a non-believer.

In modern times, Priests rape altar boys (and the church covers it up). If for some reason you reject Catholics are Christian, then Southern Baptists have ~700 victims of sexual abuse they've tried to cover up.

On the other side, there are individuals like Bill Gates who through his foundation seeks "enhance healthcare and reduce extreme poverty globally, and, in the U.S., expand educational opportunities and access to information technology" [1] Then there are groups of atheists working to make the world a better place in various ways through organizations such as Foundation Beyond Belief, Atheists Helping the Homeless, Non-Belief Relief, etc.

This is not to say believers do no good or non-believers do no wrong - it is a given this is not the case. I simply challenge the connotation that believer should be seen as good and atheist should be seen as bad.


Fair enough.

I think one of the major themes Ethan is employing, is that the Bible is stressing the inner thoughts of man, pretty much irregardless of what that person claims to be. That can make anyone uncomfortable including myself. And that would be why the idea of an impersonal god, like in deism would more appealing to some. And sometimes an atheist might suggest a Christian is claiming special knowledge when we testify of our belief in the God in the Bible. The problem is that the deist would be doing the same. And even an atheist when (as I've seen happen) they claim that if there
is an outside intelligence that influenced our existence, it wouldn't focus on our thoughts, enjoy our singing and praises, or have any type of
personal involvement with us mere humans.

As far as the sexual abuse, this is becoming more common in numerous arenas like school and college sports. And we don't really know what the perpetrators believe, or don't believe.

And we don't really know the inner thoughts of Bill Gates, any member of an atheist or humanist charity, the Dalai Llama, Red Cross volunteers, the pastor of a church, etc. As an example, if any one of them (myself included) looked lustfully at another man's wife, that act was immoral. And if it
is a continuously occurring theme, that person is immoral, no matter what righteous acts they do on the surface.
#57
ATroubledMan
ATroubledMan's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 200
0
1
2
ATroubledMan's avatar
ATroubledMan
0
1
2
-->
@fauxlaw
 However, the only true innocents are children who do not understand, yet, the distinction of good and evil. once that knowledge is had, innocence may be claimed, but no one after that knowledge is had can legitimately claim it.
That's a very interesting point. I'm reminded of the Garden of Eden tale in which innocence and the lack of knowledge of good and evil was a virtue in God's eyes. Now it seems to have changed to the other way round.

#58
ATroubledMan
ATroubledMan's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 200
0
1
2
ATroubledMan's avatar
ATroubledMan
0
1
2
Christians are not born, they are converted
While it's technically true that all children are born atheist in that they lack a belief in God, children who are born and raised to be Christians have not been converted as they have not abandoned another faith in order to become Christians.

#59
ATroubledMan
ATroubledMan's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 200
0
1
2
ATroubledMan's avatar
ATroubledMan
0
1
2
I'm not really talking about that. I'm referring to, for one, the barbaric practices inside clinics that have caused employees to quit, and take an ant-abortion stance.
Sorry, I'm not aware of that

Do you think the abortion doctors make sure it's the woman's decision?
It's the women who fill out the applications, however what happens behind the scenes is anyone's guess.

Would you be able to tell me how many humanists were Christians during these laws? I sure couldn't. If you can, by all means show me.

Would you be able to tell me how many humanists were atheists during these laws? I sure couldn't. If you can, by all means show me.
No idea, sorry.

History shows, racial stereotypes (or even segregation) never comes to an end without substantial protest from the victims. We're still dealing with this.
Agreed.
#60
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 77
Posts: 3,565
4
7
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
7
10
-->
@ATroubledMan
innocence and the lack of knowledge of good and evil was a virtue in God's eyes. Now it seems to have changed to the other way round.

Innocence is a virtue, but one cannot extend that to lack of knowledge, which is not exclusively a characteristic of innocence, and is not a virtue, ever, so, no, it has not changed, and virtue never does. It is immutable as the ten digits by which all mathematics is applied.