Extreme Atheism - leads to a Proxy God by default.

Politics is based on identity. You identify as an atheist (or anything else), and suddenly you have friends and enemies.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Just a few questions that come to mind for now...

Do you believe denigrating a Christians beliefs to the level of pure fiction is going to help your cause?

Do you believe you know enough about the way reality works to make any claim what so ever?

Why do you consider that there is nothing unknown to you? Are you a Proxy God?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

No I am not. Read Darwins biography.

I could not care less if a scientist is theist as long as his science is not cloaked in theism, like Behe's ID, which he insists should be taught in school.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

How sweet.

LOL. Sure, I am so well known and respected my words sway many minds to the evils of atheism.
Ad Hominem after ad hominem is your only defense of your belief system. Shame on you.
You want to hear from other theists? Here is another perspective on Newton's theism.

https://www.uufhc.net/sermons/s080427.html

That's from a fellow theist.

Your memory loss of history is glaringly obvious and so convenient when discussing factual evidence.

There is no such thing as extreme atheism. OTC, my atheism is consistent and certainly not confused. That is glaringly obvious to all who read my posts objectively. I am not saying that I am infallible, but I can make a scientifically supported case that my concept of a mathematical universe is a logical and possible, if not plausible concept.

I have even been accused of presenting theist concepts, because I speak of a universe that functions in a quasi-intelligent mathematical manner and because of that fact God is a superfluous concept, a left-over from early hominid assumption that natural phenomena are being caused by gods.

I even presented proof that modern chimpanzees still react to thunderstorms as being caused by "an unseen enemy" in the sky, i.e. a god.

Early Nordic European Humans gave this god the name Thor.

But then there is this additional and still persistent theistic belief.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_thunder_gods

So what happened to Thor? You do know don't you, and that fact makes you feel very insecure about your own naive interpretation of origins. Deal with it.

I am not extreme. On the contrary, I am very comfortable with my concept of a mathematical universe. But I will defend my position with the best possible information and as much verbal skills as I can muster, being that my schooling was in Holland and English is my second language.

but unlike you I can present factual evidence of universal mathematical values and functions.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

do you really believe filling a thread with irrelevant information to avoid dealing with the fact that you lied is helping your case?
dodge #2
duck #2
Straw man #1

Here I will post your lie again:

then once you realize your mistake of including Isaac Newton as one of those theists you attempt to cover it up with irrelevant posting...to avoid embarrassment.
hence you are lying... simple, easy to see and a good example...

 

Right, I consider Scientists as intelligentsia. Theists do not impress me intellectually at all. As I posited before, mythology and fairytales are amusing and interesting, but of little scientific value.

Tell that to the theist who wrote that scathing indictment of Newton. I provided the link.

 

Why doesn't Newton Impress you?

 

There is a way out for you to save face, you know, but you have to have the courage to acknowledge what you have done and take responsibility for it.

 

Someone must be in the wrong forum, or else someone has just equated atheism to politics. So now, a lack of belief in Leprechauns racing Unicorns is nothing short of a political identity. This just keeps getting wierder by the minute.

 

The Christian denigrates his own beliefs and his cause by making claims that have no evidence to support them. As a mere observer, I have no influence in this process one way or the other. The Christian brings it all on themself.

If I made a claim, which I held as a belief but couldn't support it in any way, much like a Christian, I would be ignoring reality and how it works especially when such claims tends to ignore reality as well.

There is much unnknown to me, just like there is much unknown to everyone else. The key is not to make claims of having special knowledge of God when no such knowledge exists. That might be a Proxy Liar.

 

Do you believe in free will and self determination?

 

How does Sir Isaac Newton, being a theist, fit in with your "unicorns"?
He claimed to have special knowledge of God, if I recall, called Gravity.(among many things)

 

Red herrings are red herrings, whether you want to justify them or not. But I hope they're a tasty treat 'cos that's all you're supping on here.

 

Be honest, for once.

So you don't deny that you linking people to Hitler, Stalin, Mao etc was not just imagination on their part. Thank you for being honest, even a sentence after trying to claim it was just imagination. But you think that you linking them to such people is an issue they have to deal with?

I would think you forfeited any ability to claim victimhood, and certainly the ability to claim the moral high ground, when you created this thread. You can dress it up however you want, but when you explicitly define people who hold a certain philosophy as "extreme atheist" and then define that "extreme atheism" in rather unglowing terms regarding actions, double down by linking "extreme atheism" to a rather troubled man, and then triple down by equating the holders of that philosophy to the likes of Hitler, Stalin etc, you have simply removed any semblance of fires being started accidentally. And no, it really wasn't their imagination doing the linking.
If you walk into a building carrying a gallon of petrol and a lit match, you don't have much justification for complaint when either the building burns down around you or if you get burnt on the way out.
But maybe you can tell the fire marshalls afterward that people were really just imagining you pouring petrol on everything before dropping your match on it.

 

Always honest as I have absolutely no reason to lie. The cost of lying is way too high IMO.

a deliberate distortion of what was posted... another fine example ... thanks Sarkus. btw which one do you think you are, Hitler, Stalin or Mao (all atheists) by association... which ones do you associate your atheism with ( if any)?

but you are an extreme atheist IMO who believes in a proxy God by default, because of your beliefs... so go figure...

Why you are not proud of what you are, I really don't know...

Perhaps it is because YOU believe that YOU are an illusion and don't really exist in the first place..

any way another post about your self-esteem issues...

the use of the term extreme, (In the context of this thread) is to differentiate between atheist who believe that free will and self determination exists and atheist that don't
It would be extremely unfair to reasonably minded atheists to include your extraordinary beliefs in their more moderate atheist belief systems.

 

not true.... take it up ...start a thread.. let's have at it...
I am sure we will have a great readership all waiting with baited breath to see you make your point...
Seriously , it's about time for a Rohingya thread especially given the recent events over there any how...

 

OK I posted to the old thread that you are quoting.
It can be found here: http://www.sciforums.com/threads/aung-san-suu-kyi-the-fall-of-a-human-rights-icon.159909/

I look forward to it...

 

No reason, I agree, yet you are dishonest by word and by deed, and seeminly oblivious of it.

No distortion. The attempt at association is clear with your use of the term "extreme" and the examples you have subsequently given. If no association was intended, why example them at all? It's not rocket science.

I have no idea what their particular philosophical and metaphyscial beliefs were, religious or otherwise, beyond their actions and their well document political ideologies. Do you? No, of course you don't.

That's at least what you believe of me.

"How I would define it is thus:
Atheistic extremism is a belief system that requires a person to evangelize deterministic fatalism. Claiming the belief to be about natural law and that there is no alternative to that belief.
That those who believe in self determination are deluded or inclined towards theism.
Those that abhor any belief in anything associated with theism.
Those that are proactive in attacking verbally or in print any one with religious thoughts or sentiment."​

Given that you have now explicitly stated that you think me an extreme atheist, in nearly the same breath as you example other "extreme atheists", I'm sure you can provide one example, just one, of where I have satisfied any of your definitions above? Just one? Please? Pretty please? Can you do that?

More ignorance on your part, QQ. Ah, well. Should we have expected anything less? Simple answer: no. And foolish us for thinking otherwise.

You are ignorant of my, and likely most, atheists' belief systems, whatever they may be. Yet you link me by association to abhorrent people, simply because you opine both of us to be "extreme atheists". You are just proving that this thread had nothing to do with discussion and was just a desire to flame and insult those who you haven't been able to keep up with in other threads.
Objective achieved, it would seem. Congratulations. Can we have a big ol' round of applause for QQ!

But seriously, please don't respond unless it is accompanied by an apology to me and the other atheists you have tried deliberately to insult, attempting to associate them with abhorrent historical figures, simply because you think we hold a philosophy (not that you actually know that we do or not) that you don't understand and which you have in no way linked to those others. And an apology to everyone else for your rampant dishonesty throughout. Even just an apology by way of PM, if you're too embarassed to do it in public?

 

so what... the fact is Sir Isaac Newton was a devout Christian who was also a theologian.
Write4u has stated explicitly :

Then back peddled when I pointed out that the "father of science" was in fact a theist.
He has since lied at least twice since to avoid loosing face.
simple really.
So how is your comment relevant?

 

Oh really, I can save face "if I repent"? That sounds vaguely familiar. Ever heard of the Inquisition?

If you believe you can play Inquisition with me, you have another thing coming. I think it is high time that theists muster the courage to acknowledge the heinous things they have done individually and collectively to discredit science and intimidate scientists in the name of, and as proxy for god, and take responsibility for trying to stifle all scientific inquiry which threatens the scripture.

As a six year old child I was beaten up by four ten year olds because I had just learned that people and everything else were made from atoms and told everybody about my great new discovery.

These bullies demanded that I take it all back because God made people and everything else. I never did in spite that I often had to run home in order avoid further beatings. NO MORE!

People and everything else are still made from atoms and if that insults your creationist belief system, deal with it.

Theists started this religious persecution, but I'll surely finish it intellectually.
I don't need to be physical, I'm quite capable and willing to destroy your puny pseudo-scientific theist arguments.

I have given religious zealots (extreme theists) plenty of leeway in acknowledging that religion has some positive psychological aspects.
But if my generosity results in theists spouting their nonsense and their self-pity of perceived attacks on what they hold sacred in my face (such as calling my wife the anti-christ) You will taste my righteous intellectual wrath.
So......boooohooooo......cry me a river!

If you want to tangle with me intellectually about the existence of something you cannot even define and have it replace science, be prepared to have your fallacies destroyed with as many scientific facts I can find on the entire internet.

I will never submit to theist intimidation, ever! That's not extreme, that is sanity.

AFAIK, scriptural theism is a form of extreme insanity.