Facebook & Twitter

To follow BoreMe on Facebook, click 'Like'

To follow BoreMe on Twitter, click 'twitter'

Follow BoreMe on Twitter
Tags

Atheism,  Discussion,  God,  Miscellaneous,  Opinion,  Politics & Society,  Religion, 

Know something about this post? Email us

Report fault
<< Back to listing

Atheism is hatred of GodAtheism is hatred of God

(6:36) Christian Answers examines atheism arguing that it is a religion, stupid and hateful.

Add your comment

Submit as guest (your name)
Submit as member (username / password)
Samsgimp Samsgimp (519 days ago)
Hang on a minute if you bring what you claim is 'god' (according to your criteria) to the lab, as it were, to stand 'in front of all manner of scientific measuring apparati' are you asserting that god stands like a human? and if so, then the apparati would 'see' a human form and 'hear' this entity talk - like a human etc etc and we could all agree that the results suggest that what stands before us is actually a human - end of story. Conversely you could drag your invisible 'god' down to the lab and neither I or my equipment detect anything we could all agree that the results suggest that nothing is there and your claims for the existance of god are met with derision. Third scenario is that you bring your claim of god into the lab and I see a human form but the equipment detects nothing then, I personally, would say that I was hallucinating, or the equipment was faulty or I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS but it still does not prove the existence of god by your criteria. The last scenario is where the equipment detects and I don't is just as inconclusive. Whilst it is philosophically more rigorous to be agnostic - to varying degrees, the science vs belief is, at least, a battle of probabilities and the score so far is science 1 - believers 0.
ReplyVote up (1)downSpam?
Guest: wtf (516 days ago)
dude, I'm ******* tripping balls right now. this is dildos
ReplyVote updownSpam?
Guest: chris (521 days ago)
I will prove to you that there is no god, but first you prove to me that there IS. And dont say its written in the bible cause I will show you a book about leprechauns.
ReplyVote updownSpam?
    
Guest:  (521 days ago)
I'd like to see you try - but unfortunately, the hypothesis of the existence of god is neither verifiable nor falsifiable.
ReplyVote updownSpam?
        
Guest: V (520 days ago)
It must be added that for some no evidence would ever be sufficient. For anyone who says they "rationalized their way to atheism," there would be one of two outcomes to God standing in front of all manner of scientific measuring apparati. If the machines measured nothing, they would say it was a trick because they should have been able to measure SOMEthing or, if they could measure something, they would argue it wasn't God nor supernatural because the machines -did- measure something. The "I have the answer and will not allow contradictions" mentality is present whenever one holds ideas with "religious" intensity. Atheism is as much faith as any other belief system. The rational mind, untouched by subjective proof of God's existence, must scientifically conclude that agnosticism, not atheism, is the rational approach -- i.e., God may exist, or may not, but I have yet to see conclusive evidence either way.
ReplyVote updownSpam?
            
Guest:  (518 days ago)
V completely misunderstands the atheist position. If the machines measured nothing, then it would be just another in the ever-growing list of observations that are consistent with there being no God. If god were observed (suppose by some "supernatural" event, such as walking on water) then he/she would become part of science. The atheist would say "OK, we were wrong - there appears to be something in this universe that is beyond our current understanding". This would not prove the existence of the Christian god (unless appropriate observations were made). It's a common fallacy of the religious to think their theory stronger because it is unfalsifiable, but rather it is weaker. If there was a way of disproving god, but scientists had not once made the necessary observation, then it would be remarkable. Contrast that with the rational atheist position where "for some no evidence would ever be sufficient".
ReplyVote updownSpam?
Guest:  (520 days ago)
Dear oh dear. This is a really good collection of evangelist crap. I love the ending. But one or two questions remain. As an atheist, apparently I really do believe in god - but which one? And if these guys really are Xian, why have they not sold all they possess and given the money to the poor? I find that question demands an answer.
ReplyVote updownSpam?
Guest: Max (442 days ago)
Latest comment: These people are completely retarded.
ReplyVote updownSpam?
Guest: badger47 (521 days ago)
I like Dennis Diderot's take on democracy, kings and priests. Straight from Age of Reason that gave us the American Constitution.
ReplyVote updownSpam?
Guest: pablo W (521 days ago)
utter utter Bollocks! And very badly put I might add!
ReplyVote updown (2)Spam?
Guest: DeltaWhisky (521 days ago)
Oh, wow. God, Satan and demons, too. This is a list of fantasy figures and atheist-hating bull. As an atheist, I don't give a crap what religious types believe in as long as they keep it to themselves and stop threatening nonbelievers with damnation and eternal suffering. Save it for someone who cares and stop scaring your kids with it.
ReplyVote updown (2)Spam?
Guest: Steve (521 days ago)
The reasons listed at around 5.30 perfectly describe religion. Ironic.
ReplyVote updown (1)Spam?
Guest: MentallyMitigatedMexican (521 days ago)
How can you hate something that doesn't exist?
ReplyVote updownSpam?
Guest: Paul (520 days ago)
And this is why im an atheist.
ReplyVote updown (1)Spam?
Guest: Al (520 days ago)
If I was god I wouldn`t want these morons defending me lol
ReplyVote updown (1)Spam?
Samsgimp Samsgimp (521 days ago)
Firstly atheists are 'without belief', so, by definition, aren't god-haters (and i'm sorry to have to state the bleedin obvious here) cos they don't don't believe in god in the fist place! duh!! O.k. the two clowns here are a soft target for ridicule so one does not need to waste too much time one pulling their tissue-thin, hackneyed arguments to pieces and I'm pretty certain Hitch wouldn't have bothered with these pair of light-weights either.. BUT the one thing that stands out for me at about 6.30 is the 'false for several reasons' list - just replace the terms atheism and atheist for Christianity and Christian respectively and enjoy the ride. Note the delightfully twisted little threat at the end. Utterly pathetic!
ReplyVote updownSpam?
    
Guest: Z.E. (520 days ago)
Atheists are not "without belief," as they hold the idea, sans scientific proof, that God does not exist. Ideas held without proof are faith / belief. And, in their oratory and actions, prove themselves as hostile toward people of faith and symbols of faith and, in general, act toward the heretics (people of faith) with all the bitterness and antagonism as they wish to portray against all religions or any faith but their own. These non-believers are, in the words of many, fodder for persecution, denigration, and ridicule. They act with a lack of tolerance that the vast majority of Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Wiccans, [long list goes here], find astonishingly vile and incomprehensible. It is very hard to take people seriously when they are hypocrites of such enormous proportions. And, now that I think about it, when a Christian wants to persuade you that God does exist, he does it because he cares about what he believes is your immortal soul. When an Atheist wants to persuade you that God does not exist, what is the motivation other than that of the Aesop fable regarding the fox who lost his tail? Simply put: people of all faiths -- including the "atheists," whom we should properly call "Fatheists" for believing in something they can't prove -- should be respected and given gentle tolerance.
ReplyVote updownSpam?
        
Guest:  (492 days ago)
A Hindu does not believe that your God exists. Does that mean you think that Hindus are atheists?
ReplyVote updownSpam?
        
Guest:  (519 days ago)
Christians like to trip themselves up over the double-meaning of words, so that staggering back their feet in a dizzy haze they can point the finger and say "hey, your beliefs are just like ours". A typical argument will go, "can't disprove god, therefore atheism is a belief, and belief without proof is a religion" Z.E. is no different in this respect, and uses "without belief" (note the original inverted commas) to mean something that was never intended in the first place.
ReplyVote updownSpam?
            
Guest:  (519 days ago)
Just to re-iterate high-school level understanding: atheism, whether you want to call it a religion on not, is not a belief without the base rational as (say) Christianity. Even if you want to ignore the weight of observations that have failed, not once to verify the unfalsifiable (which is absurd, as no-one seriously believes in the Loch Ness monster), then you still have to admit that there's no reason to believe in the Christian god, ahead of all the infinite number of alternative non-Christian, anti-slavery, homosexual-loving alternative gods. Atheism is the rational conclusion of scientific observation - that it is extremely unlikely that there is an interventionist god, and even if there was, then we do not know what form he/she would take. Thus any belief in a particular god is irrational and absurd.
ReplyVote updownSpam?
                
Guest:  (519 days ago)
As to the lengthy diatribe on supposed persecution (like the Westboro Baptist church, some, like Z.E. are desperate to be subjected to oppression, without the slightest idea of what that would truly be like), if you could find any example of atheists going beyond comments-on-a-youtube-vid eo persecution, be my guest, and most atheists will denounce it (having a rational, flexible humanist moral code always helps with such things). It's not atheists who are calling for all infidels to be burned, or who are persecuting homosexuals, simply because a book tells them to, just as it orders death upon adulterers and parent-cursers (a fortunate blind-spot on the part of Christians, but who could accuse them of being rational and consistent?). George Bush, who was the most powerful man in the world was elected by the Christian majority of the most powerful country country in the world, did not believe that atheists should even be considered citizens. He even waged war because his imaginary friend told him to, and apparently most of America doesn't find this utterly astonishing. How's that for religious intolerance? Suddenly, being ridiculed because you can't justify your ridiculous beliefs does not seem so bad after all.
ReplyVote updownSpam?
        
Samsgimp Samsgimp (519 days ago)
Believers have never been able to prove the existence of god (regardless of criteria) so why is the onus often given to the non-believer to prove that is doesn't exist or worst still dis-prove, thats funny!! Not believing is, by definition, not a belief. Atheists can 'believe' that, in the absence of evidence for the claims for the existence of god, that god does not exist according to the criteria put forward by any flavour of believer. Its all a matter of probability.
ReplyVote updownSpam?
Guest: Beau Guest (521 days ago)
This is so unfair, as it was obviously recorded in the seventies. The fifteen seventies.
ReplyVote updownSpam?
Crowd Ignite  (opens in new window)
Related Posts