Theists, Atheists are NOT your enemy

[Zzyzx]

.
Theists, Atheists are NOT your enemy – they are not evil, wicked, immoral or any of the other negative traits your preachers or your imagination have instilled. They are “regular people� who do not share your religious beliefs. They do not necessarily share ANY characteristic, ideology or opinion with one another other than not believing in gods.

You can, however, MAKE them into enemies by attempting to coerce or force them to accept your beliefs.

YOU are the aggressor if you attempt to use ANY pressure (including threats and promises – but especially laws) to cause people to conform to your OPINIONS regarding “gods� or “what God wants�. Stop the coercion attempts and the “conflict� resolves to admission that the issue is simply a matter of OPINION that has no meaning outside the self.

Atheists, however, ARE a threat to the social status and livelihood of preachers – and to the domination of religion in society. Ever wonder why preachers are so adamant in condemnation of Non-Believers? As with other things “Follow the money (and the struggle for power or to hang on to power that is eroding)�.

[Bust Nak]

Atheists, however, ARE a threat to ... the domination of religion in society.

That alone is enough to make us their enemy, and them ours.

[JoeyKnothead]

From the OP:

Theists, Atheists are NOT your enemy

Where theists seek to restrict the rights and freedoms of others, I'm as much their enemy as is that guy that shoots Superman in the chest, there on the TV show.

Where theists seek to tell women what they can and can't do with their own bodies, I'm the Hatfield to their McCoy.

Where theists seek to pass of hoodoo in public science classes, I'm the lion to their gnu.

It's okay to be enemies, we just ain't s'posed to blow one another up, or to steal one another's horse and such.

...
You can, however, MAKE them into enemies by attempting to coerce or force them to accept your beliefs.

Oh, see now I hadn't read up to this part yet.

So yeah, not an enemy 'til we get to here I don't reckon.

YOU are the aggressor if you attempt to use ANY pressure (including threats and promises – but especially laws) to cause people to conform to your OPINIONS regarding “gods� or “what God wants�. Stop the coercion attempts and the “conflict� resolves to admission that the issue is simply a matter of OPINION that has no meaning outside the self.

Well said. No threats, no worries. Threats, worries.

Atheists, however, ARE a threat to the social status and livelihood of preachers – and to the domination of religion in society.

I can't even atheist right - I done built four churches in my career.

I'm a failure at everything but havin' me a big ol' pretty thing to cuddle up to anytime I want, long as she ain't mad at me when I do. And a son who's a Model American, and them two grandpretties.

But I gotta be the worst atheist who ever atheisted.

Ever wonder why preachers are so adamant in condemnation of Non-Believers? As with other things “Follow the money (and the struggle for power or to hang on to power that is eroding)�.

Yep. When preachers are jetting around in their luxury jets, they ain't frettin' the poor, 'cept to come up with their next great fleecin' of the flock.

[hoghead1]

[Replying to post 3 by JoeyKnothead]

Yes, but see, not all Theists behave the way you are describing them here. Some do, yes, but many, including myself, definitely do not. I think atheists are important because they often let us theists know where there are serious problems in theism that need to be corrected. I believe most people become atheists because of contradictory messages some churches have and still do preach about God.

[OnceConvinced]

[Replying to post 3 by JoeyKnothead]

Yes, but see, not all Theists behave the way you are describing them here. Some do, yes, but many, including myself, definitely do not. I think atheists are important because they often let us theists know where there are serious problems in theism that need to be corrected. I believe most people become atheists because of contradictory messages some churches have and still do preach about God.

The big problem is that Christians are unable to come to an agreement on what the correct messages are. This is why there are contradictory messages. You would think that a god... if he really did want to get messages to us would ensure that this mess didn't happen.

But it's not just the contradictory messages. Even the ones that most Christians agree upon do not add up and they often violate what we see in reality. As well as contradicting other messages that most Christians agree upon. For instance the whole idea of God being a loving God is rife with problems and contradictions. So even if the Christians could get their messages consistent with one another you'd still have those issues like that one, which are unresolvable for many of us.

[hoghead1]

[Replying to post 5 by OnceConvinced]

Yes, very true. There are major debates in the Christian community. That's why I cautioned you earlier, emphasizing that theists do not all think alike. It is also true most especially concepts of God's love have proved contradictory. The churches have often presented a contradictory or double-bind message whereby God is credited with saying in effect, "Love me, or I'll beat the tar out of you." However, not all theists hold with the notion of a coercive, punishing God. I sure don't. I and other contemporary theists have been very critical of the traditional images of God as Ruthless Moralist, Ruling Caesar, and Unmoved Mover. Viable alternatives have been suggested.
Given that God works in and through fallible human beings, there is no way God could rule out and one-hundred-per-cent guarantee that things won't get screwed up and mixed up along the way.

[Divine Insight]

Given that God works in and through fallible human beings, there is no way God could rule out and one-hundred-per-cent guarantee that things won't get screwed up and mixed up along the way.

But this a problem in two major ways.

One being that condemnation for misunderstanding is permanent therefore there's no room for error.

The other being that if this God truly is omnipotent then there is no excuse for him to have to work through fallible humans.

There's no reason this God would need to demand that people believe outrageously absurd hearsay rumors lest they be damned to everlasting punishment.

What you have just offered is nothing more than an extremely weak and indefensible Christian apology for an invisible God who would indeed be far less than omnipotent.

So it's not a compelling apology.

[hoghead1]

[Replying to post 7 by Divine Insight]

I noticed you say you are into panentheism. I am surprised, then, you didn't remember Hartshorne's argument that divine omnipotence is a major theological mistake.

[jgh7]

Hogwash, atheists and theists will be at each others heels till the rest of human time. They are natural enemies.

[Zzyzx]

.

Hogwash, atheists and theists will be at each others heels till the rest of human time. They are natural enemies.

That is the sentiment expressed by many Theists who regard Atheists as their enemies and oppressors (as taught by their preachers) because Atheists do not believe the god tales (and may poke fun at them).

Most Atheists seem to regard Theists as gullible, naive and perhaps a bit silly, but not as enemies UNLESS Theists attempt to coerce Non-Theists to conform to religious beliefs and opinions.

If Theists restricted their religious activities and opinions to their churches and to fellow believers, there would be little or no conflict. Many or most, however, seem intent upon performing in public and upon coercing or convincing others to join their club and abide by its rules.