Atheists Are Fools

[JoeyKnothead]

I see the Bible verse about 'the fool has said there is no god' bandied about by some of the forum members and it really does appall me. This kind of teaching is among the most insidious of all the Bible teachings, and it leads to the worst kind of beliefs. When a person holds this view, that those who disagree with you are evil, Satan, or fools, it really stops all attempts at understanding one another. To this atheist it is seen as a clear attempt to insult, and to slander. It prevents the theist from being able to accept new ideas, or ideas that clearly disprove a given biblical concept. It is no better than using the 'n' word, and no better than a child throwing a tantrum. When logic and reason can be short circuited by a simple phrase, then what is there left to debate?

What is even a bit sadder about the use of this term, its usually the ones holding the most foolish of ideas who dare claims someone else the fool. There is no shame in saying you think someone is wrong, and there should be no shame in being called wrong. But declaring an opponent in a debate forum a fool is the height of hypocrisy. What bigger fool could there be than one who would debate a fool?

The Christian religion uses these demonizing terms to stop debate. To stop honest discussion. To stop the honorable seeking of truth. Only a scared individual, or a scared ideology would use such tactics to defend itself. Only an ideology that knew it was questionable would dare try to stop someone's asking questions. A religion which has in itself a history of abuse, torture and murder of anyone who challenges it? And the atheist is the fool? What fool is there that would blindly adhere to something which he disagrees with?

I see often, in life and these forums, the Christian who will skirt around, under, or totally avoid discussion of the issue at hand. Many will resort to rhetorical trickery before they will discuss the issues, but they will call anyone who disagrees a witch. A fool. A demon. Who is so righteous they can make this declaration? Can we not agree that our differences are just that, differences, not demonic possessions? Why must someone who tries their best to understand this wonderful life we share always be a fool?

I'll tell you what a fool is. A fool is the person who has stopped learning. A fool is one who would declare they have the answers before they are even asked the question. They have stopped trying to understand people, and instead they want a chance to feel superior. How better to feel superior than to use the internet to call someone a fool. A faceless, otherwise anonymous debater, who comes in here to seek knowledge, and share their own. You would call them a fool? Have you never heard the expression, "You catch more flies with honey"? If you have, and you continue to call those you are debating with a fool, then really, what is there left to say to you?

What is it going to take the Christian religion to realize that differences of opinion can actually be a good thing? They can lead to new discoveries, to new ideas, and to better understanding. Even wrong opinions have value, because they allow us to discuss why they are wrong, how to correct them, and how to prevent them in the future. Why is it foolish to take the sum total of all available information and come to a conclusion based on that information? You are wrong about believing there is a God. But you're not a fool. You're not evil. You're just wrong. Surely we can get along long enough to debate why I am correct, or you are, without having to declare one another fools, or worse.

I will declare all who believe in a God wrong. But a fool? I have only been in these forums for a short time, but I will tell you this, there are some highly intelligent folks here, from atheist to theist, and I have learned from them. I learned from them because I know if I keep my mind open, I can learn. If I try to understand a person's point, even if I don't agree with it, I can learn about that person. And let me tell you, knowledge gained is good. It is good for the theist and the atheist alike. It is good because through understanding one another we can hopefully see that we are all wrong about something, we are all right about something, we are all bad for something, and we are all good for something. We are humans, each and every one of us, and we deserve a certain level of respect.

Atheists have families they love and care for. We have jobs we like, and jobs we hate. We have fears and dreams and wants and needs. We bleed red blood when we are cut. We have goals, and hopes, and we fail and we succeed. We do all of the things the religious do but one. Should the one single thing that separates us make us evil, or fools? Just because a book declares it? Just because one can hide behind a biblical passage, and deny a certain responsibility for declaring it? Are we really that bad that our lives are no better than a dog's? Really? Is there not some way we can be thought of as worthy of this life? Just because we don't believe a book? Just because we don't believe your book?

Ultimately I suppose I am here to 'preach atheism', but surely there can be a greater, more noble dialog.

[JoeyKnothead]

I see no reason why I should be held to only the words others have written when using a signature. I am fully capable of thinking for myself, and responding using my own words. Problem seems to be that it upsets the delicate eyes and ears of folks when I do.

[Beto]

That's a bit too close to an insult for my tastes.

I agree. I wouldn't use it either.

Of course, since it's only Hemingway, not the Holy Holy Holy Book, I doubt the admins would give it the same free pass.

Evales said she was going to ask the moderators about recognized atheist quotes as signatures. I'm curious as to the response.

[Beto]

I see no reason why I should be held to only the words others have written when using a signature. I am fully capable of thinking for myself, and responding using my own words. Problem seems to be that it upsets the delicate eyes and ears of folks when I do.

The moderators have made it perfectly clear insulting others with our own words is against the rules, be it theist or atheist. Implied insults in quotation signatures are obviously difficult to moderate, but there are plenty of derogatory signatures in the atheist "side", so there's really no double standard to complain about.

[Fallibleone]

but the mods are so in love with the Bible that they refuse to accept restrictions on users abusing it.

[byofrcs]

I see no reason why I should be held to only the words others have written when using a signature. I am fully capable of thinking for myself, and responding using my own words. Problem seems to be that it upsets the delicate eyes and ears of folks when I do.

The moderators have made it perfectly clear insulting others with our own words is against the rules, be it theist or atheist. Implied insults in quotation signatures are obviously difficult to moderate, but there are plenty of derogatory signatures in the atheist "side", so there's really no double standard to complain about.

Yes,

I prefer to let the other party simply insult our intelligence in their own words but of they have to use a quote from someone else then so be it.

[Evales]

That's a bit too close to an insult for my tastes.

I agree. I wouldn't use it either.

Of course, since it's only Hemingway, not the Holy Holy Holy Book, I doubt the admins would give it the same free pass.

Evales said she was going to ask the moderators about recognized atheist quotes as signatures. I'm curious as to the response.

The response was not a flat out no. It was more like the response that was posted here about how petty it makes us look. So I assume that is a yes within reason. The problem is whilst the Bible is a fairly obvious guideline where do atheist texts stop being credible etc?

What if one simply posted "The God Delusion"
(Just so you know have never read the book and from the name don't think I would like to)

[Beto]

That's a bit too close to an insult for my tastes.

I agree. I wouldn't use it either.

Of course, since it's only Hemingway, not the Holy Holy Holy Book, I doubt the admins would give it the same free pass.

Evales said she was going to ask the moderators about recognized atheist quotes as signatures. I'm curious as to the response.

The response was not a flat out no. It was more like the response that was posted here about how petty it makes us look. So I assume that is a yes within reason. The problem is whilst the Bible is a fairly obvious guideline where do atheist texts stop being credible etc?

Knowing the moderators I trust they would be quite reasonable in deciding whether or not a particular atheist quote is permissible.

What if one simply posted "The God Delusion"
(Just so you know have never read the book and from the name don't think I would like to)

I think Dawkins has more than earned the right to be quoted. As for the name of the book, funny thing really. You wanna know how they translated it to Portuguese? "God's disappointment". Mislead by the title, and not knowing what it's about, more theists will be buying the book. They're in for a treat.

[JoeyKnothead]

I seem to be in a position for debating for my right to be rude, so I will defer to some of the posts which explain that just because someone else acts like a jerk does not mean I too should.

[msmcneal]

Jesus said that anyone who says to another "you fool" is in danger of hellfire. So the quote from Proverbs "the fool says in his heart, there is no God" would seem to me to be a contradiction, either that, or Solomon and/or God was unaware that Jesus would say such a thing. I'm serious about the contradiction, however, I said it to lighten the mood of the post. But it's a valid point. Jesus said anyone who says to another "you fool" is in danger of hellfire. To make the claim that atheists are fools for not believing in God, seems to me to be endorsing a point of view that goes against the teaching of Jesus.