An Open Letter to Atheists

Professor

Irrelevant
Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2023
Messages
3,123
Reaction score
2,305
Location
Another World
What a complicated and sophisticated OP, what is to be specifically considered?

Surely Gods existence is true for some people but also untrue for others.

So as an ex-atheist I can confidently say that God certainly exists in the minds of some men/women but not others - agnostics, atheists etc

Of course the term God is quite ambiguous and originates from a time when we didn't know the world and universe as we do today. Back then God filled in the unknown and gave us reason.

Today we Know the Reason and have made ourselves God.
 

Myles O'Reilly

Well-known member
New
Joined
Feb 3, 2022
Messages
7,012
Reaction score
5,423
Indeed, and that's where good ole common sense comes in. There is a world of difference related to the historicity between the vedas and the gospels . I recommend Fr John Hardon's books on comparative religion
Is it a coincidence that out of all the religions, the one you say is the only true one is also the one you were raised in Sir?
 
F

Fam Shox

Guest
Is it a coincidence that out of all the religions, the one you say is the only true one is also the one you were raised in Sir?
I used to think the same. Now I see God actually became human to put an end to 'religion' and all confusion. And to free us from the bonds of sin. He gave us His mother on the cross too.
 

Professor

Irrelevant
Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2023
Messages
3,123
Reaction score
2,305
Location
Another World
One cannot blame atheists for some of their doubts. Calling God a "He" is a world away from being a universal creator, but it is significant and not to be ignored . . .
 

Myles O'Reilly

Well-known member
New
Joined
Feb 3, 2022
Messages
7,012
Reaction score
5,423
One cannot blame atheists for some of their doubts. Calling God a "He" is a world away from being a universal creator, but it is significant and not to be ignored . . .
Yeah, he should be called "they" or "trans-inclusive non-binary Creator."

You sure you wouldn't feel more at home over on Gaychat Love?
 

scolairebocht

Moderator
Staff member
Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2021
Messages
1,161
Reaction score
1,432
In the aforementioned book each being proved by the proofs is simply called X, and then you consolidate the Xs and the end of the proofs.
 

Tiger

Well-known member
Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2023
Messages
2,455
Reaction score
2,373
I only recently heard about an interesting phenomenon were millions of Muslims claim that Jesus appears to them in their dreams and instructs them to speak to someone who can guide them in converting. When they follow the instructions, they appear to be legitimate to what was said in the dream.

This phenomenon doesn’t just happen with Muslims, there are people of all religions claiming the same thing





https://www.quora.com/Why-do-I-keep-dreaming-of-Jesus-even-though-I-am-Muslim

https://www2.cbn.com/news/cwn/missi...s-dreams-levels-we-have-never-seen-1400-years
 
A

A Man Called Charolais

Guest
Easy answer - Christian values are Human values, have become Godly & Devilish values to the point of mostly overriding God, bar the hopeful reassuring bit.

Holland is a bit obscure (although I don't think he realises it) when he talks about the bifurcation of the religious and the secular.

Now, I await correction, but I think that the secular could also be described as the materium where mechanical forces predominate. This is why we describe scientism as a reductionist approach - it reduces the human to a biological mechanism.

Christianity also revealed the individual as universally applicable, which has had a profound impact on how we understand what it is we are - it ensouled all the peoples of the earth with the equal potential for dignity in the plane above the mundane. Here we find the difference between above and below the salt not in asset classes but in the adherence to the call to personal holiness. Thus, the possible observation that one of the highest social rank is a scumbag if they are ethically corrupt, and that someone with frugal means is noble in bearing if they abide by these same ethics.

So, the ceremonies around the communion with God are distinct to the things of Caesar. Nevertheless, to be Christian, one's conduct should be pursued according to Christian ethics - the proper expression of one's faith in matters profane. The point that Holland is making is that, in the late Modern era, it is these ethics that are trying to be sustained without Christianity through Communism or Progressivism etc.

Humanism, then, is merely an articulation of Christian values in the material sphere, Secular Humanism posits human intelligence as the highest form of being in the universe placing us (and particularly the most clever or powerful of us) at its centre. The Ego becomes Superego displacing an absent God in a disenchanted world as the connection to the Divine atrophies

He also talks about the falling away of the infrastructure of Christianity back into the savagery of paganism. Can Christian ethics be sustained without the root stock? Here's a piece about that. It runs for a number of minutes and gains momentum along the way.





It should be noted that the barbarians - particularly the Germanic tribes - admired Roman Law and sought to preserve it after the empire fell so it can't be said that the Romans were singularly brutal (although it had been Christianised by then in fairness). Instead they were merely an example of the way things were across every society at the time, although at a higher level of sophistication.

Now, returning to the present danger - here are some thoughts from the mighty Harari.





Do you see the fate that so many are alarmed about? There are some that are trying to change the civilisational coding to enable a free hand to pursue their own manias at the price of the reduction of the rest of us. And the carrot for the donkey of acquiescence is the illusion of existential supremacy.
 

scolairebocht

Moderator
Staff member
Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2021
Messages
1,161
Reaction score
1,432
Very interesting, you can see the way Harriri is working his way around to thrashing nationalism, as the globalist agenda has to do. Also the importance of humans, over other species, is a very Christian concept, without Christianity the specialness about humans is apt to fray.
 

Professor

Irrelevant
Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2023
Messages
3,123
Reaction score
2,305
Location
Another World
Do you see
Thanks for the wonderful post, I had a few points in regard to a quick skimming of Hollands original vid, but you have served up a banquet of thought here to study and learn anew.
I've briefly read some of the earlier famous christian philosophers some years ago and now coupled with this new post of yours is going to take a while to understand accurately and adequately enough to engage in a satisfactory reply/conversation.😳 Cheers☺️

What originally came to mind when Holland was comparing Humanist V Christian values I thought "Hold on a minute" what are these christian values? - Did he say?? Because as he continued to talk all I could think of was "Which Christians"?? Meaning that I'm aware that there are thousands of different christian sects in existence and many are quite opposed to the doctrine of other Christians.

Look, I appreciate the good things he had to say but I'm also aware of the darker sides of some sects such as early Spanish Dominicans, church of jesus of latter day saints, CNK of the KKK etc and the powers they wield from their doctrines. Sorry for hitting on the low points but they are a questionable part of Christianity.

In addition there is the question of Blasphemy and all it entails especially in the context of applying the doctrine to those outside the church, and in too I guess.
Another one is how an invading countries church will enforce their spirituality, doctrine and rules on an other population, even cancelling banning prohibiting the local religions in the occupied territories.

So, I didn't even get a chance to consider much outside of just how different to itself is Christianity.

Oh and there's Christian Humanism to consider as well . . . 😇
 
A

A Man Called Charolais

Guest
Thanks for the wonderful post, I had a few points in regard to a quick skimming of Hollands original vid, but you have served up a banquet of thought here to study and learn anew.
I've briefly read some of the earlier famous christian philosophers some years ago and now coupled with this new post of yours is going to take a while to understand accurately and adequately enough to engage in a satisfactory reply/conversation.😳 Cheers☺️

What originally came to mind when Holland was comparing Humanist V Christian values I thought "Hold on a minute" what are these christian values? - Did he say?? Because as he continued to talk all I could think of was "Which Christians"?? Meaning that I'm aware that there are thousands of different christian sects in existence and many are quite opposed to the doctrine of other Christians.

Look, I appreciate the good things he had to say but I'm also aware of the darker sides of some sects such as early Spanish Dominicans, church of jesus of latter day saints, CNK of the KKK etc and the powers they wield from their doctrines. Sorry for hitting on the low points but they are a questionable part of Christianity.

In addition there is the question of Blasphemy and all it entails especially in the context of applying the doctrine to those outside the church, and in too I guess.
Another one is how an invading countries church will enforce their spirituality, doctrine and rules on an other population, even cancelling banning prohibiting the local religions in the occupied territories.

So, I didn't even get a chance to consider much outside of just how different to itself is Christianity.

Oh and there's Christian Humanism to consider as well . . . 😇

Difficult time to discuss the political segregation of those granted the dignity of Christian status precipitated by the fragmentation of Christianity into different circles of 'elect'. We've seen this in secularism but it has generally been a result of material or ideological distinctions - racialism, for example, is a thoroughly secular notion "based on science".

That's a heavily compressed couple of sentences that doesn't make a lot of sense, so forgive me for them but there's a little skirting around that question that needs to be done presently.

More directly to the point I was trying to articulate from Holland is the following observation from Shellenberger in conversation with Peterson. This is an example of the new coding - or rather the collapse of a previously higher operating ethical field into a baser one. If you listen on, Peterson drops a Tsarbomba about the repercussions of the universal franchise which is quite the most fissile material I've seen him address. It would make for an interesting topic in the Oxford Union.

Specifically, this is a conversation about the perverse vandalisation and surgical infantilisation of youths through "gender affirming care". Shellenberger has the receipts and has picked through them like an archivist in 1990s Russia. The reason it's posted here isn't to do specifically with tranny chopping but to do with the repercussions of a post-Christian ethical environment. This is exactly what Hariri is talking about enacting - there are to be no guardians of scientific whim. It slows down due to an ad but there's plenty there for anyone interested in the subject.





Here's another interesting bit about toddlers - I've won't link to the fissile bit as it may attract the attention of the censors and the crew in FR24 will get ever more alarmed at the smell of paint stripper in the air.

Remember the first social institutions that the Soviets targetted were the Christian Churches and one of the principal reasons that the Nazis were obsessed with Jews was an attempt to undermine the Christian faith so their neo-Paganism could become the unopposed Weltanschauung of their perfectly evolved chosen race. This undermining wasn't simply an effort to contaminate by association but also to incriminate society in acts that were unthinkable to the Christian sense.

I recommend Political Ponerology by Andrew Lobaczewski. It's a revelation.
 

Professor

Irrelevant
Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2023
Messages
3,123
Reaction score
2,305
Location
Another World
Difficult time to discuss . . . . . . . That's a heavily compressed couple of sentences that doesn't make a lot of sense, so forgive me for them but there's a little skirting around that question that needs to be done presently. . . . etc etc
Please pardon the edit above. Another great, interesting and worthy presentation you treat us to, good to see and it deserves proper attention to understand in context and engage with.

Have been so busy in concentrating on totally unrelated stuff which I must actively seek to park away for a while and then take the chance to study the subject matter you recommend and allude to.

Cheers🙏
 

Mad as Fish

Well-known member
Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2023
Messages
4,211
Reaction score
5,771
I only recently heard about an interesting phenomenon were millions of Muslims claim that Jesus appears to them in their dreams and instructs them to speak to someone who can guide them in converting. When they follow the instructions, they appear to be legitimate to what was said in the dream.

This phenomenon doesn’t just happen with Muslims, there are people of all religions claiming the same thing





https://www.quora.com/Why-do-I-keep-dreaming-of-Jesus-even-though-I-am-Muslim

https://www2.cbn.com/news/cwn/missi...s-dreams-levels-we-have-never-seen-1400-years

Does he appear in the dreams of atheists as well?
 

Tiger

Well-known member
Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2023
Messages
2,455
Reaction score
2,373
Does he appear in the dreams of atheists as well?
Perhaps? But I’d imagine it’s rare if it happens at all.

A quick google search shows some people claiming it.


View: https://www.reddit.com/r/Jung/comments/14z3kxk/as_an_atheist_i_have_had_a_dream_of_jesus/


https://www.quora.com/What-does-it-mean-when-an-atheist-saw-Jesus-in-their-dream

https://revwords.com/encounter-god-akiane-kramarik/

From a theological standpoint, it could be argued that receptivity would make people of any faith more fertile ground than atheists. I would speculate that if Jesus was appearing to people in dreams, that various factors such as faith (belief in a higher power), spiritual readiness might play a part in a divine plan.

“Seek and you will find” sort of a thing.

There is a theological perspective that proposes spiritual blindness, where individuals are unable or unwilling to recognise spiritual truths even when presented with them.

It would also make sense that God respects the free will of individuals to choose whether to believe in Him or not, and therefore may not impose spiritual experiences upon those who have consciously rejected belief in Jesus.
 
Last edited:

PlunkettsGhost

Well-known member
Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2023
Messages
3,929
Reaction score
3,765
 

PlunkettsGhost

Well-known member
Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2023
Messages
3,929
Reaction score
3,765
Poor old Dawson, rage posting into the void today as one of his philosophical heroes becomes compost. :sneaky:

Imagine getting so upset at being a cosmic accident? Mental altogether. I'm reminded of those atheistic family members who rage at the God they don't believe in, when a friend or family member returns to mere accidental atoms. They're a barmy lot really.
 

PlunkettsGhost

Well-known member
Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2023
Messages
3,929
Reaction score
3,765
lenin.png
 
Z

Zipporah's Flint

Guest
Poor old Dawson, rage posting into the void today as one of his philosophical heroes becomes compost. :sneaky:

Imagine getting so upset at being a cosmic accident? Mental altogether. I'm reminded of those atheistic family members who rage at the God they don't believe in, when a friend or family member returns to mere accidental atoms. They're a barmy lot really.

The thing is that Western Nationalist movements often run into a lot of internal strife because of conflict between not just Christians and "Neo-Pagans" but also between with mainstream science worshipping atheists and both (though often the atheists understandably from their point of view prefer the "neo-Pagans"). So it is a political thing as much as anything else.
 

PlunkettsGhost

Well-known member
Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2023
Messages
3,929
Reaction score
3,765
Atheism is objectively worse for society:

[There is] ...consistent and mounting evidence suggesting increasing religious commitment or involvement helps individuals avoid crime and delinquency... ...I recently completed the most exhaustive systematic review conducted to date of the relevant research literature on religion and crime. This review located 273 studies on religion and crime that were published between 1944 and 2010. Ninety percent of the studies (247 of 273) find increasing religiosity to be associated with decreases in various measures of crime and delinquency. Only two out of 273 studies report religion was associated with a harmful outcome

 

PlunkettsGhost

Well-known member
Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2023
Messages
3,929
Reaction score
3,765
Did you catch that? In 2002, sexual predator Jeffrey Epstein flew Richard Dawkins out to California to give a talk entitled, “Militant atheism,” something TED now describes as a seminal moment for the New Atheism. In essence, it was the spark that started the New Atheist movement.
athesim.png


 
Z

Zipporah's Flint

Guest
View attachment 5570


Well a lot of the drive behind the "New Atheism" came from the need to give ideological backbone to the "war on terror", the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, etc- hence why Epstein and Maxwell as Zionists of not unimportance would have probably given it their backing. I doubt though they would have been crude materialists themselves.
 

Professor

Irrelevant
Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2023
Messages
3,123
Reaction score
2,305
Location
Another World
This is dedicated to low intellectual failures in life like Jambo.


View: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/vMPPUpklwRw

I'll play at being Jambo for the moment, until he reads this and obviously steps back in to do what he does best:ROFLMAO:, Just being himself👍

Anyway, just for an alternative pov. (Feels like stating the obvious so . . .) Murderers, I'm sure you'll agree that where the law fails and a relative succeeds in punishing a killer in revenge, then 'the wrong' is not so bad and perhaps even subjectively necessary - neutralising the guilt/debt.

Second, pedophilia. - It depends on where & who - afaik??
For example, France, Germany & Italy have AOC at Fourteen yrs. - What's "absolutely wrong" in Ireland is legally acceptable abroad.
Secondly as @Myles O'Reilly suggested . . . Any young lad of 14-15 would love to spend time with his older woman teachers, there'd be no wrong in that for him, you know?
 

PlunkettsGhost

Well-known member
Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2023
Messages
3,929
Reaction score
3,765
Atheists Discover Consequences

It’s always mildly amusing to recall that they used to call themselves “brights” because they genuinely believed that they were smarter than Christians. Never mind that the island nation that developed a world-spanning empire under Christendom now can’t even offer token resistance to the imperial dar al-Islam:

I am getting scared of the rise of Islam in the UK and Europe. I study philosophy at university in England…. Oh boy my homeland is being overrun by Islam.

One guy legit told me the other day on a Friday that “I should be at the mosque” and shouted at me for not being so. I know plenty of Christians, and whilst I myself am atheist, none have ever tried to convert me or call me a heretic- whilst the only homophobes I know have been Muslim. Someone also said my degree, philosophy was “devil worship because asking questions about the universe and truth is evil-this is especially true because I focus in logic and game theory. They said it was not “real” and satanic…

The fascinating thing is that even when they are in terror for their lives and their lifestyles, they still do not have the intellectual flexibility to admit that they were wrong, that inclusivity is evil and destructive, and that a nation that ceases to be a Christian nation will soon cease to be a nation at all

 

PlunkettsGhost

Well-known member
Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2023
Messages
3,929
Reaction score
3,765
It's hilarious to see atheists squirm when it comes to the fruits of their ideology. Some go as far to make the absurd claim that the fruits of their worldview aren't their fault because atheism isn't a thing and cannot be either identified or defined by the behavior and the rhetoric of vocal adherents to this nihilistic ideology.

Here's a news flash for the atheists: We have the receipts. We have decades of your writings and your opinions, and your very public efforts to undermine the foundations of Christendom. By your fruits you shall be known. This is how we define you, by your own actions and words. You are hoisted by your own petards. No amount of verbal gymnastics and rhetorical squirming can undo the facts of what you have attempted to initiate.

You are what you say and do. We see you. We can easily identify you.

Atheists (like the ones who haunt this thread) don't have the courage of their convictions. They will scream to high heaven that they are not responsible for societies ills because atheism cannot be defined, as it is a negative position and not an actual active worldview that its adherents seek to establish as normative. We know otherwise of course. Atheists are famously active and verbose in promoting their dis-civic immorality.
 
Last edited:

PlunkettsGhost

Well-known member
Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2023
Messages
3,929
Reaction score
3,765

PlunkettsGhost

Well-known member
Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2023
Messages
3,929
Reaction score
3,765
An outside follower of this thread asks the following question:

'What's the plan here exactly. Atheists should "give up atheism" - Zippy, 'convert' to your religion? '

Just disappear from the social discourse is the answer. You're not clever, and Star Trek is not in our future. You've done enough social damage and have no answers for the existential problems you've created. Cultural nihilists cannot fix cultural issues, obviously.
 

Tiger

Well-known member
Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2023
Messages
2,455
Reaction score
2,373
An outside follower of this thread asks the following question:

'What's the plan here exactly. Atheists should "give up atheism" - Zippy, 'convert' to your religion? '

Just disappear from the social discourse is the answer. You're not clever, and Star Trek is not in our future. You've done enough social damage and have no answers for the existential problems you've created. Anti-culturists cannot fix cultural issues, obviously.

Presumably this ‘outsider’ is a lonely unemployed alcoholic?
 

PlunkettsGhost

Well-known member
Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2023
Messages
3,929
Reaction score
3,765
Another obtuse question posed, manifesting extreme lack of social awareness: 'lol Why should atheists "disappear from the social discourse ?'

For your own safety is the answer. The tolerance for your dis-civic nonsense is rapidly fraying. You will be a hunted and hated class soon enough
 

jpc

Moderator
Staff member
Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2022
Messages
3,209
Reaction score
4,464
A Plea that they approach the question of God’s Existence in a scientific and rational manner.
View attachment 4139

After a friendly discussion with atheists recently it struck me that many people of that opinion pride themselves on their scientific and level headed approach to the question of religion. They stand for logic, and mathematical scientific reasoning, none of the mumbo jumbo associated with religion.

I welcome that wholeheartedly, your brains are God given and I think they should be used a lot in deciding between theism and atheism, very much so, but is that actually what happens? Consider a few things that flow from this level headed approach:

a) Obviously you will have to put aside any question about the (vastly exaggerated, and some completely hoaxed) scandals involving the Catholic Church in Ireland, that can have nothing now to do with your cold hard logic sense of reason here? If 10,000 geography teachers were imprisoned in the morning for whatever, it still does not follow that the Shannon isn’t a river in Ireland or Malawi a country in Africa. You are clearly going to be putting all this hype to one side as you consider the philosophical question of the existence of God, and, in truth, is that what you actually do?

b) You can have no sense of fashion here, or your own presumptions about what is likely to grow or decline in the future. You are not in the market for a handbag at this point, it should have no impact on you any sense in which older people might have been more religious in the past, and that the Churches are now not as full, and you would prefer to be with the younger hipper in-crowd, etc! If you are now this logical sort of fellow all that is not interfering with your decision here, right?

c) No sense of pride or a feeling that religion is a kill joy is impacting your new logical scientific self, is it? None of us like to be told what to do, and for example if one borrows a huge sum of money for a great new car, we don’t like people reminding us that we have to pay all that money back? Its a kill joy sure, but its also saying the hard truth, and thats what religion sometimes has to do, but of course you aren’t thinking of anything like that when deciding if God exists or not? There is no sense in which you would like to continue your lifestyle free of ‘judgementalism’ coming into your logic here is there, because obviously that would be very far from a logical and scientific approach to this question wouldn’t it?

d) Do you have the level of knowledge to decide this question? Obviously if I was to decide if I believe a physicist when he says they can explode a giant bomb by crushing two tiny atoms together, I need some knowledge of physics to know if he is lying or not. Logically, its not just about your own intelligence, clearly its that added to education in the subject which will give you, hopefully, the right answer.

But what is your level of knowledge of theology, or even of specifically the philosophical Proofs of God’s Existence as outlined by Aquinas say? I hear so many atheists proudly saying that at the age of 7 they knew it was all bunkum etc etc, imagine if you said that to the physicist in that question above? At the age of 7 how much knowledge could you reasonably have of theology or its related disciplines of logic and philosophy? Have you studied it all properly as an adult, reading a few selective quotes by people like Dawkins does not make you a theology expert, or give you anything like enough education here to be able to decide this question. Anyway if you like you can read something like this text which might help you at least to know the main theist arguments: http://www.orwellianireland.com/proofs.pdf .

In any case just a few thoughts on the subject...
How many of the logical science grounded atheists stood up and publicly said that the covid farce was a totally anti science and based on flawed premises and unproven treatment.?
Just to pick a single relevant subject for them.
 

Latest Threads

Popular Threads

Top Bottom