Hate Group Atheism Continues to Spread it's Lies

 on carm 6/21/10 by Paradoxical
post 361

Hate Group atheism has not gone away. The garbage this demoniac throws up (literally) on everyone has gone on unabated for 361 posts, filled wtih lies. slander back lgoic and twisted facts.

Meta, you have it all backwards. Christianity is evil for a whole host of reasons, one of which is that it makes mental midgets out of humans, as can readily be seen by reading any number of the posts here written by christians. How many christians in the entire world, meta? 30% of the worlds population? thus god creates a race knowing that only 30% will be saved? What kind of sadism is that? Can't your god get it right? He had to destroy an entire human race because he screwed up one time. Like some star ship that zapped out all of the inhabitants on a planet because the inhabitants displeased them and didn't believe the invaders could really do it.

Atheists are far more intelligent and courageous than any christian alive, metacrock. 

 we all know that's a sack of shit. The studies are 17 to 6, 17 showing either no correlation between intelligence and belief or that religious people are smarter.


Counting all the studies together, both those presented as negative and those presented by Francis which are either neutral or positive, 17 to 6 in favor of the thesis being unproven. But more importantly, Hoge was listed wrongly, so what else can we not trust about those studies? Moreover, the sample size for the positive or neutral correlations are much larger in many instances. None of the negative sample sizes come close.

negatives: 1448, 532, 354, 315, 613, 400 (not all listed)

Largest positive or neutral:381, 1400, 200, 158, 165, 44, 2272, 711, 3040, 1194, 362.

The Positive or neutral studies would tend to be the better studies since they have more with larger samples sizes, and Francis controls for the Freudian bias which taints all the negative studies. Poythres (1975) sets the differences within the context of psychoanalytic theory.(Francis 188). We also notice that the negative studies tend to be older, ranging mainly form the 1930s to 1968, while all of the positive or neutral studies tend to be set in the 1960s to the 80s and one as recent as 98. This is explained by Hoge in terms of increasing socioeconomic status and greater exposure of religious people to new ideas at a younger age.

"The long discussed shock of freshmen encountering Atheistic professors at college and the transition problems from childhood beliefs to intellectually defensible beliefs have been reduced in recent years. Today the shock comes earlier and with less force than in decades past."(in Francis 188). (This capitalization is a matter of mild controversy. If Atheism is a religion, then it is capitalized as Buddhist, Moslems and Christianity are.)

We really have to ask ourselves, in studying students, especially freshmen in college, they are getting kids when they are the most rebellious? For those in early college they are going off to school for the first time, away from home, no longer under the strictures of Mom and Dad, they tend to rebel against Mom and Dad. It's a time of experimentation. Naturally we should expect to find that bright kids are experimenters, that they are willing to try new ideas.

Secondly, how long did these kids remain unbelieving? How many are no in middle or even old age having had a life time of religious commitment gained in graduate school or beyond? Not a single one of these studies gave any indication of being longitudinal! That is extremely important, because it makes sense that students in late high school and early college will be rebellious and more inclined to question their upbringing. How many of them were actually still atheists 20 or 30 years latter? We don't know and not a single one of the studies even tried to find out. For all we know the vast majority of them might have become believers in 10 years out of college! In fact we have good reason to suspect that this is the case; after they got married and started raising families, they probably began to believe again, and this seems to be the pattern. That conclusion would also be supported by the quotation form Hoge above, the shock of leaving home, encountering atheist professors, dealing for the first time with serious challenge of new ideas could for time lead the unwary into doubt, but latter they recover.

ranting slander of the hate group continues:

Why? It's because they heard the story, they have weighed the evidence and lack thereof, and have decided that your god doesn't exist. They made this decision with the full knowledge (based on what Christians tell them) that they will either go to hell, or be excluded from the kingdom upon death. This decision takes the utmost bravery, meta. It says that you have used your brain (that christians assert god gave them) and deduced that the bible god is a complete fabrication wrought from the tortured and feeble minds of fearful men, probably illiterate goat herders. These brave humans are taking their chances, and not even hedging their bets, knowing full well what is in store for them if they are wrong.

Could an atheist believe as you and others do to save his royal hide? He could if he wanted to fake it. If he had this false belief, your god would know it, because he is all knowing. Thus, if an atheist COULD believe, he would meta. But a true atheist cannot make himself believe. there is no magic clicking of the heels that would turn a non believer into a believer. And, for this choice, you contend that it is THEY who are the evil ones.

Of course that's a straw man argument. Christians don't believe just to save themselves, that's ignorance of truth based upon what the carnal mind would assume. It's not based upon the facts of actual belief.

You have your bdoubts yourself, meta. I know it. Other christians here have their doubts, too. This is why you go to such lengths in your thirst for any little tidbit of knowledge, no matter how mundane or obscure so that you can do battle with the non believers. It's because you have very grave doubts. But, let's just assume for the moment that you are perfectly 100% sure of this bible god. That gains you entry, right? Whereas a non believer doesn't get in because he couldn't force himself to believe. You either do, or you don't, right? And for this a creator of all that is says NO...you made a mistake. You didn't believe. are we living in the Wizard of Oz movie or saomething where we have a creator that is so insecure he requires a belief?

of course this is further straw man bravado based upon the hateful warped understanding of people who know nothing of Christianity. They imagine that belief in god is some pristine state divorced from doubt, so if one feels they think that''s the think end of wedge. All believers have doubt, of course they do, that's human nature. That's not an undermining of truth of Christianity its just a natural part of being human it's also a prelude to stronger faith. Faith that survive debut is strong faith. Therefore, doubt is merely a part of the faith process.

For this, and many other reasons, i find your religion so preposterous that I think many believers are insane. they toss out all rationale in order to save their skin. In the ultimate, THAT is why you believe, meta. You are afraid, and you want to save your skin. How much courage does that take...to save your skin? It takes not one bit of courage, and on the part of many christians, it takes forced and fake beliefs just so they can get in. If you tell me this is not true, and these believers all believe with 100% certainty, then it's real easy for them, right? They get in. God gives em a pass because they said the magic words. Whereas the atheists that used the reasoning power they were born with to conclude it's all a bunch of bunk, they are excluded because of that non belief.

Highly illogical, and foolish, IMHO.

Look at the anger. The things he's saying are clearly propaganda becasue all he's doing is spitting out hateful bromides to slander a whole group of people. this is what atheists think is courage and brave and intelligent? I think even really stupid people can see hwo one sided this is. If this theri concept of courage they are in real  trouble.