Do you really care that I am going to hell?

[Cmass]

I don't think you really believe I will fry in Hell for being an Atheist. I don't think you really truly believe any of your non-believing family will either. I think deep down, you know it just isn't true.

If you do believe they will all fry and are not doing absolutely everything in your power to stop it, I would suggest that you are a very cold, dispassionate person. If you really believed your dearly beloved mother was going to burn in hell right next to Cmass and Charles Manson then you would stop at nothing to convince her to accept Jesus. You would not just gently encourage, you would be emotionally and perhaps even physically engaged on a daily and hourly basis. You most certainly would not be reading this silly OP right now. Not if you REALLY cared.

Think about it. If you saw your mother being beaten by someone on the street, would you stop to help save her? Would you put your own life at risk to keep her from drowning? Is there anything you would not do to help her? OK, what about eternal torture in hell? Doesn't this concern you? What about all the other people in your life who are going to hell? Doesn't this leave you feeling devastated? If I believed there was a hell and that so many people would be going - especially any of my friends or family - I would be in constant agony myself and would devote my life to stopping it. Or, I would be numb.

Does your knowledge that so many people will be in eternal torture bother you very much on a daily basis?

This OP came about after reading commentary by some of our more conservative Christian friends in here. Some seem to have no real problem with all us atheists burning in hell forever. Granted, there are probably some personal anger issues involved but still, I have always been uneasy with how casual many Christians are when it comes to discussing eternal damnation. Some get more upset over running over a kitty than the eternal torture of their best friend.

Nonetheless, I give most the benefit of the doubt: I don't think they are really that cold. I just don't think they really believe as much in the hell concept as they report.

[Flail]

A 'believer's' Religion is less a product of intelligent thought and choice than of circumstance. If 'Pakistani Pete' were born in Indiana to Christian parents and 'Baptist Bob' in Pakistan to Islamics, they would most likely be reversed and become just as dedicated to Islam or Christianity as the other. So the dogma is just that....ridiculous that people are killing each other over such silly concepts as Religion.

Recently, I read where Christian leaders are calling for more religion and blaming the decline of morals in society around the world on too little religion. Religion has been at the forefront of moral and ethical standards for centuries and our morals and ethics do not improve....so I say we need zero Religion...Religion is evil....just another form of witchcraft for the mindless.

[Easyrider]

A 'believer's' Religion is less a product of intelligent thought and choice than of circumstance. If 'Pakistani Pete' were born in Indiana to Christian parents and 'Baptist Bob' in Pakistan to Islamics, they would most likely be reversed and become just as dedicated to Islam or Christianity as the other. So the dogma is just that....ridiculous that people are killing each other over such silly concepts as Religion.

Not what Jesus taught, is it now? Love your neighbor, love your enemies...

Recently, I read where Christian leaders are calling for more religion and blaming the decline of morals in society around the world on too little religion. Religion has been at the forefront of moral and ethical standards for centuries and our morals and ethics do not improve....so I say we need zero Religion...Religion is evil....just another form of witchcraft for the mindless.

See above. Also, the greatest mass murderers in the 20th century were atheists. Doesn't speak well for the anti-religion crowd!

[Scrotum]

See above. Also, the greatest mass murderers in the 20th century were atheists. Doesn't speak well for the anti-religion crowd!

I do not know if you do this on purpose or ignorance, either way: What atheist do have nothing to do with Atheism.

Atheism do not have a Doctrine that tells the mwhat to do. IF a Christian do something bad, they have a DOCTRINE that tells them so, that is the difference.

Saying that an Atheist did this and that, hence atheism is bad, is like saying A guy eating chocolate did someting bad therefore Chocolate is bad. Christianity on the other hand has a SET DEFINED OF RULES, and Christianity is a violent aggresive hateful religion, so, therefore you cna depict the bad in it.


How many times do you need to be educated. Cheezes.

[twobitsmedia]

See above. Also, the greatest mass murderers in the 20th century were atheists. Doesn't speak well for the anti-religion crowd!

I do not know if you do this on purpose or ignorance, either way: What atheist do have nothing to do with Atheism.

Atheism do not have a Doctrine that tells the mwhat to do. IF a Christian do something bad, they have a DOCTRINE that tells them so, that is the difference.

Saying that an Atheist did this and that, hence atheism is bad, is like saying A guy eating chocolate did someting bad therefore Chocolate is bad. Christianity on the other hand has a SET DEFINED OF RULES, and Christianity is a violent aggresive hateful religion, so, therefore you cna depict the bad in it.


How many times do you need to be educated. Cheezes.

Take that comment off your sig that is out of context please.

[FinalEnigma]

See above. Also, the greatest mass murderers in the 20th century were atheists. Doesn't speak well for the anti-religion crowd!

I do not know if you do this on purpose or ignorance, either way: What atheist do have nothing to do with Atheism.

Atheism do not have a Doctrine that tells the mwhat to do. IF a Christian do something bad, they have a DOCTRINE that tells them so, that is the difference.

Saying that an Atheist did this and that, hence atheism is bad, is like saying A guy eating chocolate did someting bad therefore Chocolate is bad. Christianity on the other hand has a SET DEFINED OF RULES, and Christianity is a violent aggresive hateful religion, so, therefore you cna depict the bad in it.


How many times do you need to be educated. Cheezes.

I've ranted about that more than once. They are not going to get the picture. (although i must disagree with one of your sentences.

IF a Christian do something bad, they have a DOCTRINE that tells them so

They don't neccesarily have such a doctrine. it depends on what they are doing that is bad.

You do have a point, of course. attacking atheism based on one atheists actions is about as realistic as attacking christianity for the atheists actions. After all, the christians are humans too.

There is no such thing as a radical atheististic terrorist. It is impossible to be a radical atheist because atheism doesn't exist, in the same sense that cold doesnt exist. Cold is the lack of movement of particles in a given area. It isn't actually something; it is just a label for a lack of something.

[twobitsmedia]

There is no such thing as a radical atheististic terrorist. It is impossible to be a radical atheist because atheism doesn't exist, in the same sense that cold doesnt exist. Cold is the lack of movement of particles in a given area. It isn't actually something; it is just a label for a lack of something.

You have no argument from me: atheism = lack of something (or plenty of nothing). I think some theists have been trying to tell you all that for awhile now.

[justifyothers]

See above. Also, the greatest mass murderers in the 20th century were atheists. Doesn't speak well for the anti-religion crowd!

I do not know if you do this on purpose or ignorance, either way: What atheist do have nothing to do with Atheism.

Atheism do not have a Doctrine that tells the mwhat to do. IF a Christian do something bad, they have a DOCTRINE that tells them so, that is the difference.

Saying that an Atheist did this and that, hence atheism is bad, is like saying A guy eating chocolate did someting bad therefore Chocolate is bad. Christianity on the other hand has a SET DEFINED OF RULES, and Christianity is a violent aggresive hateful religion, so, therefore you cna depict the bad in it.


How many times do you need to be educated. Cheezes.

I've ranted about that more than once. They are not going to get the picture. (although i must disagree with one of your sentences.

IF a Christian do something bad, they have a DOCTRINE that tells them so

They don't neccesarily have such a doctrine. it depends on what they are doing that is bad.

You do have a point, of course. attacking atheism based on one atheists actions is about as realistic as attacking christianity for the atheists actions. After all, the christians are humans too.

There is no such thing as a radical atheististic terrorist. It is impossible to be a radical atheist because atheism doesn't exist, in the same sense that cold doesnt exist. Cold is the lack of movement of particles in a given area. It isn't actually something; it is just a label for a lack of something.

I disagree....... atheism exists as an idea in the NON BELIEF of God in any sense.

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source
a·the·ism /ˈeɪθiˌɪzəm/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ey-thee-iz-uhm] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun 1. the doctrine or belief that there is no God.
2. disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Origin: 1580–90; < Gk áthe(os) godless + -ism]


NON belief exists as strongly as BELIEF to me. Each is extremely significant to the one involved. Now, if one were radical in either, it would be socially offensive and bad for the cause. But I would say for sure that "atheism" is as much a concept as any "theism". Indifference may be a different subject, however.

[FinalEnigma]

There is no such thing as a radical atheististic terrorist. It is impossible to be a radical atheist because atheism doesn't exist, in the same sense that cold doesnt exist. Cold is the lack of movement of particles in a given area. It isn't actually something; it is just a label for a lack of something.

You have no argument from me: atheism = lack of something (or plenty of nothing). I think some theists have been trying to tell you all that for awhile now.

...


Please don't deliberately misinterpret me when I say something. I have enough trouble communicating effectively as it is.



What I was trying to say was that using 'atheist' as a group label to determine/place blame is not valid. For an atheist, morals are based upon their philosophy rather than their religion. Atheism is not the end-all classification just as theism is not. Linking me to stalin's actions because we are both atheists is about as valid as linking you to the actions of muslim extremists because you are both theists. I do not share philosophies with Stalin. For an atheist, philosophy takes the place of religion.(by that I mean that what you get from your religion, I get from my philosophy(morals, value, etc)) Therefore, linking two atheists of different philosiphies is about as sensible as linking two theists of different religions.

I don't use Osama Bin-Laden's actions againt christianity. don't try to use stalin's actions against me.

[twobitsmedia]

There is no such thing as a radical atheististic terrorist. It is impossible to be a radical atheist because atheism doesn't exist, in the same sense that cold doesnt exist. Cold is the lack of movement of particles in a given area. It isn't actually something; it is just a label for a lack of something.

You have no argument from me: atheism = lack of something (or plenty of nothing). I think some theists have been trying to tell you all that for awhile now.

...


Please don't deliberately misinterpret me when I say something. I have enough trouble communicating effectively as it is.



What I was trying to say was that using 'atheist' as a group label to determine/place blame is not valid. For an atheist, morals are based upon their philosophy rather than their religion. Atheism is not the end-all classification just as theism is not. Linking me to stalin's actions because we are both atheists is about as valid as linking you to the actions of muslim extremists because you are both theists. I do not share philosophies with Stalin. For an atheist, philosophy takes the place of religion.(by that I mean that what you get from your religion, I get from my philosophy(morals, value, etc)) Therefore, linking two atheists of different philosiphies is about as sensible as linking two theists of different religions.

I don't use Osama Bin-Laden's actions againt christianity. don't try to use stalin's actions against me.

It's applying your own logic to your own logic based on the information you used. OK, your expanded version sounds better but I know atheists who do not even replace it with a "Philosophy" and do seem to adhere to "nothing." (existentialism, nihlism, etc). But at least you are aware that not all theists are alike.

[adlemi]

You SAY many things about gods and eternal life; however, you are a little short on providing justification acceptable to those with whom you converse.

The Lord commands to scatter words that He utters/ed to us so that people may come to Him and that they may get from Him the proofs of His being the real and alive God. It is not our job to provide justification of the words we shared to you guys much more on condition that same is acceptable to you. Yours is to chose or not to chose, to believe or not to believe in God, that is at stake.

Biblical quotes do not convince Non-Christians much as Koran quotes do not convince Christians. (Is that a difficult concept?)

That is why I do not use the bible in sharing God's words but the words literally utters/ed to us by God. To us, the bible is not God.

Being "subservient to the lord" may become very difficult at any time in life. I personally knew quite well a VERY, VERY Christian man whose life "went to pieces" and he "lost his faith" (wife died, cheated out of retirement, friends turned away, lost his health, etc). He died as a bitter, resentful old man who was very angry at the god that he had wasted time worshiping all those years -- and the church to which he had donated large amounts of money that he needed later in life.

But how sure are you that he is really subservient to God when he was in the church established by men? Are you sure he was under the custody of God or just under the custody of a denominational church established by men?

The same sort of things can happen to anyone -- and few can say how they will respond under adverse circumstances that might be overwhelming.

God does not fail in that instance and rest assured that He will help that anyone should same is really under His custody.

Faith may NOT get one through and "heaven" may not await (though wishful thinking must be comforting for those who need comforting).

Right faith in God can only get us through and heaven is surely awaiting us when Jesus returns here on earth to judge all.