War in Heaven (No Atheists)

[SkinWalker]

Atheists impose their beliefs more than any other religion regardless of anybody trying to convert them

Do you have quantitative data for that? Show it. Show us the statistics of proselytizing that compares atheism, christianity and islam.

If you can't show a citation to this statistic, then we can all accept your words as just BS, right?

 

[spiritual_spy]

Atheists impose their beliefs more than any other religion regardless of anybody trying to convert them.

Do you see atheists walking up to you on the street screaming god dosent exist? No, but you know what you do hear? Christians screaming convert or go to hell or that jesus loves you so join him.

 

[Crunchy Cat]

Atheists are the most fanatical of all religions. They cannot help themselves. They are the most dogmatic, imposing, wackos of all religions.

I suppose you have evidence of Atheists imposing upon the 'believer' more so than a religion imposes upon 'non-believers' or 'alternative-believers'? Before you respond just remember those itty bitty events like the Crusades.

 

[lixluke]

This article has everything you need to be an expert on the topic.

http://www.revelatorium.com/Chapt23.htm

Holy kewl.
I was reading the through the first few sections of the site where it talks about all the cubits and such. But I don't understand what it means.

 

[superluminal]

How dare you "believers" accuse ANYONE of being fanatical, wacko, or arrogant regarding their worldview? Atheists are humble before nature and let the actual objective, demonstrable FACTS guide them. You dare to presume you know the TRUTH based on literally nothing but a feeling and some dogma from ancient texts and then take atheists to task. True "believers" are the most arrogant assholes on the planet. You are blind to anything but your own self-importance. You deserve to be ridiculed, laughed at, and otherwise humiliated for your childish behavior at every opportunity. Face it. Belief of any kind, without some modicum of supportable evidence if just formalized and socially condoned stupidity.

Now, prove me right by not addressing one single piece of objective support for your god theories. Let's hear your standard dance of ignorance as you stumble and sputter your way through your self justifications for your own stupidity. C'mon. It'll be fun!

 

[lixluke]

Show us the statistics of prosyletization that

You mean proselytization?
Ive already done so many many times. The discussion ended long ago. Although not all atheists are so, atheism does infact contain the most fanatical nutbags of all religions.

 

[superluminal]

Dance on cool skill, dance on...

 

[baumgarten]

I'd definitely place atheism below Southern Baptism and Militant Islam on my wack-o-meter.

 

[superluminal]

Cool is an idiot.

 

[baumgarten]

That's uncalled for.

 

[superluminal]

How about this... Fuck you baumgarten, for being a wishy-washy pussy. Hmm?

 

[SkinWalker]

You mean proselytization?

Yes, I did. Thank you.

Ive already done so many many times. The discussion ended long ago.

Really? Think you could link to it? In the meantime, here is the data I have. It pretty much says you're lying unless you can show what the other data are.

According to Gallup and Lindsay (1999:121), 30% of Canadians do not believe in God or a “Higher Power,” up from 23% in 1985. On the same page in Gallup and Lindsay, 39% of the British do not believe in God or a “Higher Power,” up from 24% in 1979.

According to Beyer (1997), 12.5% of Canadians chose “none” when presented with a plethora of religious identity options in 1991, up from 7% in 1981 – a 90% increase of “none’s” in one decade.

According to CUNY’s 2001 American Religious Identification Survey, 14% of Americans claim “no religion” in terms of self-identification, up from 8% in 1990.

Although not all atheists are so, atheism does in fact contain the most fanatical nutbags of all religions.

First, you would have to demonstrate how "atheism" is a religion. Religion, is one or more social systems whose participants avow belief in a supernatural agent or agents whose approval is to be sought. That was never done, so unless you have additional data, your still on the limb for that one.

References

Beyer, Peter (2003). Social Forms of Religion and Religions in Contemporary Global Society. Handbook of the Sociology of Religion, edited by Michele Dillon. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 45-60.

CUNY (2001) American Religious Identification Survey. Graduate Center, City University of New York.

Gallup, George and Michael Lindsay (1999). Surveying the Religious Landscape. Harrisburg, PA: Morehouse Publishing.

 

[superluminal]

Wow! Look! SW provided some facts! He MUST be an atheist.

 

[NEMESIS]

Does anybody know the full story or a site that has the full story about Lucifer's fall from heaven before creation?
No Atheists (Unless they can provide the information).

I think the problem is remarks such as if God is all powerful, why did he create Satan? In my opinion, it misses the point of the war in heaven.

Say you were married and had a family. A lovely wife or husband and two children, ages 2 and 3. Now these kids are adorable, but their reasoning ability is a little limited due to their tender years. The 2-year old decides to "take over" the family and try to make decisions for you and your wife/husband. Now does someone say to you, the head of the household or co-head, "If you know what you're doing, why would you create such a little monster?" No, because it would be inappropriate. The kid is perfectly fine being a kid, but not as being the head of the household. Thus to be the true leader, in that you know what's best for all, you put the kid in his place - that is, being a kid. So, too, with this "Satan" creature. He tried to "take over" heaven and was thrown out and locked away. And when Jesus had dealings with him, he told him to "get behind him," in other words, to follow not lead.

Logically, we can deduce at least three things:

1. The Satan was created for a reason.
2. That when this Satan stays in his place he's not a problem.
3. That he has a purpose, but the purpose is not to lead but to follow as in not using this part of self to make decisions. They're always going to be disastrous to self and others.

 

[SkinWalker]

I agree with Baumgarten, calling kewl skill an idiot is uncalled for. We must let his words define that status not ours.

 

[lixluke]

How dare you "atheists" accuse ANYONE of being fanatical, wacko, or arrogant regarding their worldview? Atheists are not the least bit humble before nature and do not let the actual objective, demonstrable FACTS guide them. You dare to presume you know the TRUTH based on literally nothing but a feeling and some dogma from ancient texts and then take other religions to task. Atheists are the most arrogant assholes on the planet. You are blind to anything but your own self-importance. You deserve to be ridiculed, laughed at, and otherwise humiliated for your childish behavior at every opportunity. Face it. Belief of any kind, without some modicum of supportable evidence if just formalized and socially condoned stupidity.

Now, prove me right by not addressing one single piece of objective support for your atheist theories. Let's hear your standard dance of ignorance as you stumble and sputter your way through your self justifications for your own stupidity. C'mon. It'll be fun!

It sure will be fun. Lots of fun.

 

[superluminal]

Nemesis:

What a nice example. I'm going to take my 2yr old daughter (who's being a real pill right about now) and throw her out and lock her away.

 

[Crunchy Cat]

Holy kewl.
I was reading the through the first few sections of the site where it talks about all the cubits and such. But I don't understand what it means.

Cubits are a unit of measurement from long ago:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cubits

 

[superluminal]

I agree with Baumgarten, calling kewl skill an idiot is uncalled for. We must let his words define that status not ours.

Ok. I was going to call you an intelligent human with a high quotient of rationality and objectivism. But since name calling is clearly not good, I wont.

 

[lixluke]

I think the problem is remarks such as if God is all powerful, why did he create Satan? In my opinion, it misses the point of the war in heaven.

Say you were married and had a family. A lovely wife or husband and two children, ages 2 and 3. Now these kids are adorable, but their reasoning ability is a little limited due to their tender years. The 2-year old decides to "take over" the family and try to make decisions for you and your wife/husband. Now does someone say to you, the head of the household or co-head, "If you know what you're doing, why would you create such a little monster?" No, because it would be inappropriate. The kid is perfectly fine being a kid, but not as being the head of the household. Thus to be the true leader, in that you know what's best for all, you put the kid in his place - that is, being a kid. So, too, with this "Satan" creature. He tried to "take over" heaven and was thrown out and locked away. And when Jesus had dealings with him, he told him to "get behind him," in other words, to follow not lead.

Logically, we can deduce at least three things:

1. The Satan was created for a reason.
2. That when this Satan stays in his place he's not a problem.
3. That he has a purpose, but the purpose is not to lead but to follow as in not using this part of self to make decisions. They're always going to be disastrous to self and others.

Those deductions do not follow reason, but I see how you compare the father and child to the events of satan's fall. The only flaw is you are approaching the matter with too many preconveived notions that your are jumping to conclusions without any real effort towards understanding the questions involved.