Posted on 11/16/2010 10:21:55 AM PST by pastorbillrandles
The Law of the Jungle.
What is your rebuttal to this? That everybody is right? That is not possible. There can only be one true faith.
BTW, as far as atheists claiming they don't need religion to be good, how many of them donate to charity, and in what amount? I haven't seen many hospitals built by atheists to serve the poor and needy. Or even thrift stores.
That is why they have risen as the far left has risen in the US. Soros is god.
The Left is open to Stalin’s, Hitler’s and the Aztec’s “diverse” values.
Atheists are accustomed to Christians being polite as they attack them. I match their energy and they run like wounded dogs. They freak out when a Christian puts down the Bible and looks ‘em straight on. I don’t want to convert activist atheists. I want to crush them.
Which of course is the main reason you almost never see any atheist attack islam.
Sam Harris is an interesting case, because he really doesn’t think science is the end-all and be-all. He thinks we need drugs and Eastern mysticism to fill in the gaps where science doesn’t.
http://www.rationalresponders.com/sam_harris_rational_mysticism
You know, pretty much anything but believing in a real God.
“I don’t understand the need for “New Atheists” to attack religion. If the rest of us are simply worshipping something that to them doesn’t exist, why care SO much about it?”
Because they are self-centered tyrants who want everyone to bow down to them.
That's exactly what Hitler thought too.
“The pro-abortion movement murdered tens of millions of souls already.”
Excellent Point! And to come to think of it, the New Atheists have death panels in store for those of us on the other end of the age spectrum.
So what is the connection between atheism and totalitarian governments? There are no limits to what government can do to people if there is no belief in the sacredness of human life. But those who seek to rule by decree find religious belief to be a pain in the arse, much as the American left goes ballistic when the bitter clingers push-back against reproductive “rights”, gay “marriage”, or health care “entitlements”.
I promise I’ll only butcher the communists and my death camps will only be staffed by non-union labor in right-to-work states :)
Christians need to stand up to them and not with Bible verses.
I noticed that too.
Cheers!
That puzzled me for many years also.
Then I heard a speaker who was as ex-atheist Christian, and he said that there are really very few TRUE athests, most of them are agnostics that hate the idea of an ultimate authority to which we're accountable.
They sense eternity in their hearts, and they also sense their original sin, so they must evangelize, because the only thing that loves company more than misery is guilt.
I prefer to call them "militant secularists."
The messiahs of materialism who are all knowing. LOL
I don't think that Atheists realize that the more aggressive they get the more they prove the Thiests' theory of good and evil.
...same as the old atheists. the new ones speak with more pride & boldness. At one time it was almost a closet issue. No it is like a badge of honor for many
Basically, I might be willing to listen to a theory which required one or two probabilistic miracles in the entire history of the planet, but evolutrion requires a transfinite series of zero-probability events and that just stands everything we know about modern mathematics and probability theory on its head. You can either believe in modern mathematics or in evolution, but not both at the same time.
I mean, the fools who believe in that bullshit even talk about "climbing Mount Improbable", which is the title of one of Dawkins' books if memory serves. It isn't like they don't know the whole thing is fubar.
That makes no sense. All events had some probability. The contention is that the combined probability to reach the current state is too small.
Here's an experiment. Take a fair coin, flip it 10 times. What is the probability you end up with HHTHTHTHHT? The answer is of course 1:2^10, or 1:1024.
Now take the same coin, flip it 10 times with NO predetermined desired result. Let's say you end up with THHTTTHHTH. What was the probability you ended up with that? The answer is the SAME probability that you ended up with any other result, and 1:1 that you would get A result. Get it? Cumulative probabilities only apply if you establish a desired result.
Or, to put it another way, the probability of YOUR numbers being picked in the lottery are very small. What is the probability that A set of numbers will be picked? 1:1 of course. People do win the lottery because there are millions of possible outcomes chosen, a significant chunk of all possible outcomes, so it is quite probable that one of them will be picked occasionally. The odds only stack up against you when you choose ONE of them to be the one you think will get picked.
Creationists falsely think that in natural selection, the current state was the desired end result, but nobody bet the evolutionary equivalent of HHTHTHTHHT or picked lottery numbers before it all started. We end up with what we get, probability 1:1.
This of course completely ignores the fact that natural selection does NOT propose a series of random, unconnected events, throwing that standard probability model creationists like to improperly use out the window.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.