Christian Fundamentalist Pouts Out Loud @ Atheists
Responding to this fake-humble, religious grandstanding at Mythvision Facebook forum:
"I deeply apologize if my previous post has caused any offense or discomfort. It is regrettable that you feel there is no God, and I respect your right to hold that perspective. Over the years, I have observed how various content can be misleading or distorted, leading to debates and misunderstandings about the Bible. While individuals like Michael Jones, Eric Manin, and others offer compelling arguments, I want to clarify that my faith does not depend on their content. They do, however, present counterarguments that engage with a public largely opposed to theism, and that diversity of perspectives is important.
It is unfortunate that there can be a prevailing consensus among atheists that theists are somehow intellectually inferior. Such judgments and assumptions are not productive for meaningful dialogue. I personally transitioned from atheism to theism due to a significant personal experience, although I won't delve into the details here. I acknowledge the existence of powerful negative forces that can influence humanity, but I am determined to move forward without engaging in divisive discussions that hinder genuine exploration of the possibility of God's existence.
While I do not possess a scientific background, I have worked alongside scientists, physicists, chemists, and biologists throughout my career in biotechnology. It is worth noting that approximately half of these professionals held theistic beliefs, while others identified as agnostic. The presence or absence of belief in a higher power does not inherently reflect one's intellectual capacity. My sincere hope is that, at some point in your life, you may encounter a deeper understanding of the truth, which includes the need for salvation and the existence of spiritual entities that seek to harm our souls.
Having been a part of this group for around two years, or thereabout, I have come to the decision to step away from it. I leave the work of apologetics to others who are better suited for it. I wish you all the best on your personal journeys and quests for truth. "
William Taylor · ·
With this in mind, most Christians are "agnostic"; because their position is faith-based.
It's called "faith"
specifically because it's not knowledge.
You really can't have it both ways.
If you have "faith", then you don't "know".
If you don't know, then you're agnostic.
Most atheists are also "agnostic".
Whereas, I recognize that the word "god" doesn't have any standard meaning. So nobody should be using it.
All it does is invite misunderstanding when "theists" inject that word into their religious assertions.
Beyond that, when religious people capitalize it, ... that's just obnoxious. Because it's a way to plant a flag in the word, to claim it in the name of their Mad King.
That's what colonizers do.
Try to realize various ideas about what a "god" is ... far predate the existence of Abrahamic religions.
That word isn't yours.
You don't call to call dibs on it, like "oh, that's the name of our one true creator".
Ancient Jews have been a very bad influence on you; about this and about so many more things.
--
Meanwhile, capitalizing the word "God" when speaking of the generic idea of "a creator" is a very dishonest tactic.
It's a mental slight of hand.
It's a way to smuggle YOUR idea of a deity into discussions where it doesn't belong.
The basic idea of a pre-existing, super-creator is NOT the only invoked meaning of "god".
NOR is it synonymous with your way more specific and exclusive ideas about it.
--
As for scientists identifying as "theists", ...
the higher the prestige a scientist accomplished among their peers,
* the less likely they are to believe in something they call a "god"
and
* the less likely they are to be fundamentalists (which is what Mike Jones, Eric Manning, etc are).
Higher education results in lower rates of theism.
Higher achievement in scientific fields corresponds significantly with lower rates of fundamentalism.
The Academy of Science (elite scientists) has something like 6% of people who pray to a "god".
--
As for intelligence, there are many types of intelligence.
Someone can be very smart in some ways and yet very remedial in other ways.
All (yes; all) religious fundamentalists lack emotional intelligence.
They can break through that limit.
Sometimes, people grow the fuck up.
More and more do, every day.
But for sociological and psychological reasons, countless many never will.
William Lane Craig recently admitted this about his own faith.
Psychologically he is a lost and lonely little boy.
He needs a daddy to love and parent him.
He never outgrew that.
That's the mentality that lures and traps the occasionally pathetic adult into it.
At the same time, there is a statistically signficant (negative) correlation of basic intelligence.
SOME fundamentalists are very high in academic intelligence; of course.
However,
the highly intelligent fundamentalists fall into two groups:
1. People who WILL eventually grow out of it.
and
2. People who won't because of being covertly clinical Narcissists.
Now, I don't know if Mike or Eric are covert Narcissists.
BUT they have absolutely been trained by their religious culture to aggressively emulate that disorder.
That's what makes it (usually) impossible to know which Christians are Narcissists and which are just emulating that disorder.
---
As for the part where you said "you may encounter a deeper understanding of the truth,"
...
You people keep using that word.
I don't think it means what you think it means.
And as for
"which includes the need for salvation"?
Honestly, it shouldn't even be LEGAL for you to say that.
It's literally an attempt at psychological abuse and extorsion.
But the laws which ALREADY forbid those behaviors ... aren't applied to Christianity.
Why?
Because your sick cult infiltrates and hijacks governments; to make sure it can keep being a mafia.
It will also cry "persecution!" if any government tries to hold Christians to the same damn standards everyone else must live by.
As for
"the existence of spiritual entities that seek to harm our souls."
Yea.
Those are called religious fundamentalists, narcissists, and authoritarians.
And you represent a concentrated NEST of those vipers.
Good luck with that.
Lastly, in regards to " I leave the work of apologetics to others who are better suited for it":
It disrespects everyone here and our host to attempt such missionary work in this setting.
I don't mind it, personally.
I enjoy counseling antisocials in public spaces.
But it's still messed up that you were here for that reason.
Your religion is evil.
Nobody needs you cultists to grow up A LOT.
We just need you to grow up enough to start leaving everyone alone about it.
Share that stupid shit at church; where it belongs.
"I deeply apologize if my previous post has caused any offense or discomfort. It is regrettable that you feel there is no God, and I respect your right to hold that perspective. Over the years, I have observed how various content can be misleading or distorted, leading to debates and misunderstandings about the Bible. While individuals like Michael Jones, Eric Manin, and others offer compelling arguments, I want to clarify that my faith does not depend on their content. They do, however, present counterarguments that engage with a public largely opposed to theism, and that diversity of perspectives is important.
It is unfortunate that there can be a prevailing consensus among atheists that theists are somehow intellectually inferior. Such judgments and assumptions are not productive for meaningful dialogue. I personally transitioned from atheism to theism due to a significant personal experience, although I won't delve into the details here. I acknowledge the existence of powerful negative forces that can influence humanity, but I am determined to move forward without engaging in divisive discussions that hinder genuine exploration of the possibility of God's existence.
While I do not possess a scientific background, I have worked alongside scientists, physicists, chemists, and biologists throughout my career in biotechnology. It is worth noting that approximately half of these professionals held theistic beliefs, while others identified as agnostic. The presence or absence of belief in a higher power does not inherently reflect one's intellectual capacity. My sincere hope is that, at some point in your life, you may encounter a deeper understanding of the truth, which includes the need for salvation and the existence of spiritual entities that seek to harm our souls.
Having been a part of this group for around two years, or thereabout, I have come to the decision to step away from it. I leave the work of apologetics to others who are better suited for it. I wish you all the best on your personal journeys and quests for truth. "
William Taylor · ·
-----
My thoughts about that mess:
"Agnostic" is anyone who doesn't claim to "know".
With this in mind, most Christians are "agnostic"; because their position is faith-based.
It's called "faith"
specifically because it's not knowledge.
You really can't have it both ways.
If you have "faith", then you don't "know".
If you don't know, then you're agnostic.
Most atheists are also "agnostic".
Whereas, I recognize that the word "god" doesn't have any standard meaning. So nobody should be using it.
All it does is invite misunderstanding when "theists" inject that word into their religious assertions.
Beyond that, when religious people capitalize it, ... that's just obnoxious. Because it's a way to plant a flag in the word, to claim it in the name of their Mad King.
That's what colonizers do.
Try to realize various ideas about what a "god" is ... far predate the existence of Abrahamic religions.
That word isn't yours.
You don't call to call dibs on it, like "oh, that's the name of our one true creator".
Ancient Jews have been a very bad influence on you; about this and about so many more things.
--
Meanwhile, capitalizing the word "God" when speaking of the generic idea of "a creator" is a very dishonest tactic.
It's a mental slight of hand.
It's a way to smuggle YOUR idea of a deity into discussions where it doesn't belong.
The basic idea of a pre-existing, super-creator is NOT the only invoked meaning of "god".
NOR is it synonymous with your way more specific and exclusive ideas about it.
--
As for scientists identifying as "theists", ...
the higher the prestige a scientist accomplished among their peers,
* the less likely they are to believe in something they call a "god"
and
* the less likely they are to be fundamentalists (which is what Mike Jones, Eric Manning, etc are).
Higher education results in lower rates of theism.
Higher achievement in scientific fields corresponds significantly with lower rates of fundamentalism.
The Academy of Science (elite scientists) has something like 6% of people who pray to a "god".
--
As for intelligence, there are many types of intelligence.
Someone can be very smart in some ways and yet very remedial in other ways.
All (yes; all) religious fundamentalists lack emotional intelligence.
They can break through that limit.
Sometimes, people grow the fuck up.
More and more do, every day.
But for sociological and psychological reasons, countless many never will.
William Lane Craig recently admitted this about his own faith.
Psychologically he is a lost and lonely little boy.
He needs a daddy to love and parent him.
He never outgrew that.
That's the mentality that lures and traps the occasionally pathetic adult into it.
At the same time, there is a statistically signficant (negative) correlation of basic intelligence.
SOME fundamentalists are very high in academic intelligence; of course.
However,
the highly intelligent fundamentalists fall into two groups:
1. People who WILL eventually grow out of it.
and
2. People who won't because of being covertly clinical Narcissists.
Now, I don't know if Mike or Eric are covert Narcissists.
BUT they have absolutely been trained by their religious culture to aggressively emulate that disorder.
That's what makes it (usually) impossible to know which Christians are Narcissists and which are just emulating that disorder.
---
As for the part where you said "you may encounter a deeper understanding of the truth,"
...
You people keep using that word.
I don't think it means what you think it means.
And as for
"which includes the need for salvation"?
Honestly, it shouldn't even be LEGAL for you to say that.
It's literally an attempt at psychological abuse and extorsion.
But the laws which ALREADY forbid those behaviors ... aren't applied to Christianity.
Why?
Because your sick cult infiltrates and hijacks governments; to make sure it can keep being a mafia.
It will also cry "persecution!" if any government tries to hold Christians to the same damn standards everyone else must live by.
As for
"the existence of spiritual entities that seek to harm our souls."
Yea.
Those are called religious fundamentalists, narcissists, and authoritarians.
And you represent a concentrated NEST of those vipers.
Good luck with that.
Lastly, in regards to " I leave the work of apologetics to others who are better suited for it":
It disrespects everyone here and our host to attempt such missionary work in this setting.
I don't mind it, personally.
I enjoy counseling antisocials in public spaces.
But it's still messed up that you were here for that reason.
Your religion is evil.
Nobody needs you cultists to grow up A LOT.
We just need you to grow up enough to start leaving everyone alone about it.
Share that stupid shit at church; where it belongs.
Comments
Post a Comment