BELIEFS Regarding "God" are FORMED Differently Than Christians Assume

Brian Considine

It was not my intention to return to your cesspool of religious fundamentalism.

But here I am; specifically called by name
to return and engage once more.

But for what?

To attempt to reason with the willfully unreasonable?

If I made several points you couldn't refute,
you'd just do what Otangelo does;
skipping silently past those,
with zero willingness to engage on points he can't afford to engage on, ...

while skimming for statements he has a ready-made apologetic counter for;
something/anything
that he can either intentionally misunderstand, or offer false-facts and logical fallacies for.

But let's at least understand one thing:

My point about how beliefs don't form in the brain
the way his/your religion(s) pretend/assume they do, ...

wasn't specifically in defense of atheism, or antitheism.

Although,
to give credit where credit is due,
at least you used the correct word for where I stand about theism.

That point was in defense of EVERYONE outside of your hateful cult.
 I'm even defending people in OTHER hateful cults, along with people on more respectable paths.
 
Catholic, JW, Mormon, Deist, Pagan, Pentecostals, Native/Indigenous Spiritualists, energists, etc etc ...
whose "beliefs"
which are not-sufficiently-compatible with any of your beliefs ....
form as a result of:
* considering
what they perceive as evidence,
and
* reasoning to:
what they consider to be a logical conclusion;
to:
the best of their individual abilities.
--

Them not getting the allegedly "important question" correct ENOUGH to satisfy your ilk's doctrinal narratives,
so that they aren't yet technically qualified to evade your narrative's "Hell", ...

has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with:
rejecting (your) "God";
nor
failing,
nor
refusing,
nor
being lazy about,
nor
being dishonest about
their attempts to DO
what you-and-I BOTH say is the method which results in "beliefs" (or "perceptions of reality" and how those perceptions are valued).
--

Forgot about agnostic and gnostic atheists for a moment.

The point I made isn't specific to them.

 It's a defense
for probably about 98% of other Theists too.

Because no matter how harsh SOME non-believers are
about various religions (or all religions), ...

They can't hold a candle
to how harsh you lot are
about EVERYONE who believes/perceives differently than you about the "God" questions.

When the average militant anti-religion
and anti-God-ist
judges/assesses/forms opinions about:
the lacking merits of:
American, Protestant, disingenuously-label-evasive, Conservative, Evangelical, Christian-Fundamentalists, ...

That critic (in most cases) will just say:

 "It's factually wrong,
logically fallacious,
antithetical to the health of humans,
destructive to societies,
a danger to humanity's ability to avoid causing our own extinction,
abusive to children,
and abusive to pretty much everyone, ...

and very ORWELLIAN in the way you lot play games with the meaning of words, so that those words end up meaning the opposite of what dictionaries (and sane people) use those words to mean".

But then they'll say "but I'd fight and die to protect your right to be joyfully wrong. I just wish you'd stop hurting people and pretending you aren't hurting people".

---
Whereas, ...
when one of you fundamentalists
sits in judgement over everyone whose views about "God" are mutually-exclusive (incompatible) with yours, ...

You pretend they secretly know your views are correct,
and
secretly have evil character traits and dark motivations,
as "the real reason" people come up with different answers to the "God" question.

And you HAVE TO assume that, because otherwise your ideas about the CONDITIONS for Heaven-Vs-Hell can't be defended. 

And so you add "for which, of course, My God says they have rejected HIM and thus are "choosing" the "Hell" that all "unforgiven" people are DUE.
---

Militant anti-God-ists don't think you lot deserve to DIE nor be tortured forever;
not even if you died right now *as you are right now*. 

So they aren't nearly as harsh in their views of you
compared to
your views of everyone who isn't one of you.

And again,
they understand that people who arrive at different conclusions about the "God" question(s)
are:
 DOING 
THE 
BEST 
THEY 
CAN.

Catholics aren't "rejecting (your) God".
 Neither are pagans, or Deists, or agnostic-atheists, nor anti-Theists. 
--

As for me, ...
I am an anti-theist.

More specifically,
I am an anti-God-ist and an anti-Authoritarian. 

 Any religion which is NOT authoritarian 
is merely "troubling" and "risky" for cognitive health. But they are in a different category. 

Meanwhile, ...

I have ZERO opinion about whether or not some pre-existing Super-Intelligence(s) had hand(s) in
creating, designing, starting, tweaking, etc.
our world or our species.

I know the Genesis creation myth is ... a myth.
It can't be "literally true". 
Science and logic have proven this, conclusively. 

I also reject the morally-themed ideals the writer(s) present. 

But the reason I say "there are no Gods", 
DESPITE the fact that some people worship trees, and trees exist, and therefore their "God" exists, ... 

is that those THINGS 
are not a "God" ... to me.

It's a matter of STANDARDS. 

Out of all the things that are KNOWN to exist,
and 
out of all the things that are POSSIBLE to exist,
none could be worthy of the title of "God" ... per my personal standards. 

So ALL arguments for Intelligent Design, Rainbows, Love, etc...
 are irrelevant. 

No Being who DESIRES worship
is worthy of worship.

No being worthy of worship 
would allow shit like THIS to happen. 

And this:

So if "A" Super-Being (or many) exist, ...
 then:
 so what?
 I don't care.

 

I'd still be a non-God-believer 
and an anti-God-ist, 
and an anti-authoritarian, 
out of a healthy self-respect

AND
an equal respect and compassion for all other humans ... who aren't fucking with other people's lives. 
 

 If you ever TIRE of the endless sociopolitical WAR between your KLAN and the rest of humanity, 
then just remember:

"Don't Start nuthin'
and then there won't be nuthin'.

You can stop being everyone else's problem
at any time. 
----
 [In further reply]
He responded with:

And I then responded with a summary what I said above:

[Here are the scientific reason why]

[But here is one of the more specific reasons for your conclusions] 

[And here's another] 

[And here is a respected religious historian
quoting a respected bible scholar
about:
exactly how that makes you UNQUALIFIED to even partake in any related discussion] 

-----------------
He then continued to troll me, with Narcissistic reflex to his bruised religious ego.

The "read" count on the blog continues to show he never even opened it;
-even though he claimed to be responding to it (but only with vague insults). 

From there, it continued:

He literally hit the laughter emote on the 2nd post, as I posted it; within 1 literal second.

He then got even more aggressive.
And refused to actually address what I said.
Instead, he ranted about how those other religions are wrong; 
without actually addressing my point about WHY they are wrong.  

So I decided to stop feeding the troll. 

But this is exactly what I (and science) have been saying about the type of personality that is drawn to religious fundamentalism
and becomes the most "on fire" for it. 

They have given a grand platform to their malignant clinical narcissism and psychopathy; so that they (and everyone else)
would be "wrong" to ever question it.