Thou Shalt Not Test The Lord

[Davin]

I'm glad you do.  So when I'm not speaking of YOU specifically but others, I may use *you.  Don't be offended.

How am I going to be able to tell the difference between whether I'm included or not? I suggest you separate it out to a completely different post instead of making it look like you're responding to me.

[Guardian85]

[...]or that the belief is nonsense, delusion...

Incorrect.

I'll try and remember to quote this the next time I see an Atheist spout off that Christians are "so stupid and deluded" (to that effect) in thinking x or y...or that they hate that people cannot think when presented with "logic"...have no patience for...

Please do, then you'll understand that it's not about atheism, but what that specific atheist spouts.

Imagine taking resposibility for all theists. WBC, Islam, Judaism... and every other one. I keep in mind that not every theist speaks for all theists when a theist says, "Die you fucking piece of shit and burn in fucking hell for not believing in god. I hope god himself punishes you personally to the most extreme amount of suffering possible."

I'm glad you do.  So when I'm not speaking of YOU specifically but others, I may use *you.  Don't be offended.

Asking for clarification on a point is generally not the same as taking offence, AD.

[Sweetdeath]

Wait, what does " *you"  mean?

[statichaos]

If one's statements lead to numerous obvious questions regarding what seem to be inconsistencies and obvious fallacies, then perhaps that says more about the initial statements than it does about those who ask the questions.

If this is true, then everyone that is not an Atheist (according to the Atheist thinking) makes statements of inconsistencies and obvious fallacies. 

"Atheist thinking" covers a wide range of takes on that subject.  Yes, many atheists do believe that we are, as theists, deluded.  Others simply take no position on the matter.  Overgeneralizations regarding atheists coming from theists are no more useful or appropriate than overgeneralizations regarding theists coming from atheists.

Now what?  I believe in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior of my life.  Furthermore, I believe and state that God is the Creator of the universe.  Is that not a statement of inconsistency and a fallacy according to the disbelief of Atheism?  Basically according to Atheism, I believe in a fairytale as Truth.

Or there is simply no way to determine the truth or falsity of your assertions using empirical evidence.

[Davin]

Wait, what does " *you"  mean?

I would like some reclarification on this as well.

[AnimatedDirt]

I'm glad you do.  So when I'm not speaking of YOU specifically but others, I may use *you.  Don't be offended.

How am I going to be able to tell the difference between whether I'm included or not? I suggest you separate it out to a completely different post instead of making it look like you're responding to me.

Easy.  Decide whether you've actually done the "*you" that I'm speaking of or if it is a general *you that I think is the general happening here at HAF or in society.  I can certainly try and not use "you" so much if it really offends puts you on the defensive so much even with the *.

[Davin]

I'm glad you do.  So when I'm not speaking of YOU specifically but others, I may use *you.  Don't be offended.

How am I going to be able to tell the difference between whether I'm included or not? I suggest you separate it out to a completely different post instead of making it look like you're responding to me.

Easy.  Decide whether you've actually done the "*you" that I'm speaking of or if it is a general *you that I think is the general happening here at HAF or in society.  I can certainly try and not use "you" so much if it really offends puts you on the defensive so much even with the *.

Well, let's try it out:

*you theists think that no one can test the lord even to ask for a special feeling. *you theists think that all gays should be kicked out of the United States. *you theists keep wanting to put atheists to death.

[Will]

No position other than disbelief or that the belief is nonsense, delusion...

Atheism makes no claims about the beliefs of others. It's simply a declaration of skepticism toward a belief, not a judgment of any one else's belief. That's not to say some atheists don't think that believers are delusional, but that attitude is not a part of their atheism. To use a more extreme example, some people with mustaches like vanilla ice cream. That doesn't mean vanilla ice cream has anything to do with having a mustache. What I'm trying to say is I have ice cream in my mustache.

[AnimatedDirt]

*you theists think that no one can test the lord even to ask for a special feeling. *you theists think that all gays should be kicked out of the United States. *you theists keep wanting to put atheists to death.

Certainly a lot do.  I may not.  Do you wish to ask me a specific question on the matter?

[statichaos]

*you theists think that no one can test the lord even to ask for a special feeling. *you theists think that all gays should be kicked out of the United States. *you theists keep wanting to put atheists to death.

Certainly a lot do.  I may not.  Do you wish to ask me a specific question on the matter?

And now perhaps you see where I was coming from regarding overgeneralizations.

[AnimatedDirt]

No position other than disbelief or that the belief is nonsense, delusion...

Atheism makes no claims about the beliefs of others. It's simply a declaration of skepticism toward a belief, not a judgment of any one else's belief. That's not to say some atheists don't think that believers are delusional, but that attitude is not a part of their atheism. To use a more extreme example, some people with mustaches like vanilla ice cream. That doesn't mean vanilla ice cream has anything to do with having a mustache. What I'm trying to say is I have ice cream in my mustache.

Understood.  Atheism makes no claim.  I can say I should clarify and say that most of the outspoken Atheists on this forum seem to think and have stated (I've read many, I can't find each one now) they have no patience for Christians and their delusional thinking...or something to that effect.  Or my meaning is also to the persona someone like R. Dawkins portrays about the believer.

Does that make more sense?

Edit:  "most"...too much.  I should say some and since no one calls them on it, I assume all agree.  

[AnimatedDirt]

*you theists think that no one can test the lord even to ask for a special feeling. *you theists think that all gays should be kicked out of the United States. *you theists keep wanting to put atheists to death.

Certainly a lot do.  I may not.  Do you wish to ask me a specific question on the matter?

And now perhaps you see where I was coming from regarding overgeneralizations.

Sure.  However Davin seemed to think I needed to quote HIM or recant when clearly I wasn't speaking of HIM exactly...and further that a *you implicated him.  Not necessarily.

[Will]

Understood.  Atheism makes no claim.  I can say I should clarify and say that most of the outspoken Atheists on this forum seem to think and have stated (I've read many, I can't find each one now) they have no patience for Christians and their delusional thinking...or something to that effect.  Or my meaning is also to the persona someone like R. Dawkins portrays about the believer.

Does that make more sense?

I think so. I don't know that it's any more complicated than thinking someone who disagrees with you is wrong, though, which doesn't seem particularly controversial. The 'delusional' part is really just an extension of the degree to which they think other people are wrong.

Let's say I pick something you and I both agree on: parents that involve their children in child beauty pageants like those on Toddlers and Tiaras are wrong. Would you stop at just "I disagree with them"? Or would you go so far as to say they're insane for sexualizing children? I'd probably go that far. Calling someone insane, in that instance, is simply a reflection of the degree to which you disagree, colored with an expected emotional reaction. Atheism is diametrically opposed as a worldview to Christianity, so, from the atheist perspective, one could conclude that the other side is delusional. Is this constructive? Not in the least, but expressing that someone else is wrong rarely is constructive. I just don't see it as being that big of a deal. I don't really think it's a big deal when a Christian says I'm going to hell, because I don't agree with their line of thinking. On the flipside, a Christian doesn't have to take any stock in being called delusional by someone he or she fundamentally disagrees with.

[AnimatedDirt]

Understood.  Atheism makes no claim.  I can say I should clarify and say that most of the outspoken Atheists on this forum seem to think and have stated (I've read many, I can't find each one now) they have no patience for Christians and their delusional thinking...or something to that effect.  Or my meaning is also to the persona someone like R. Dawkins portrays about the believer.

Does that make more sense?

I think so. I don't know that it's any more complicated than thinking someone who disagrees with you is wrong, though, which doesn't seem particularly controversial. The 'delusional' part is really just an extension of the degree to which they think other people are wrong.

Let's say I pick something you and I both agree on: parents that involve their children in child beauty pageants like those on Toddlers and Tiaras are wrong. Would you stop at just "I disagree with them"? Or would you go so far as to say they're insane for sexualizing children? I'd probably go that far. Calling someone insane, in that instance, is simply a reflection of the degree to which you disagree, colored with an expected emotional reaction. Atheism is diametrically opposed as a worldview to Christianity, so, from the atheist perspective, one could conclude that the other side is delusional. Is this constructive? Not in the least, but expressing that someone else is wrong rarely is constructive. I just don't see it as being that big of a deal. I don't really think it's a big deal when a Christian says I'm going to hell, because I don't agree with their line of thinking. On the flipside, a Christian doesn't have to take any stock in being called delusional by someone he or she fundamentally disagrees with.

Respectfully.  I disagree.  Being called delusional etc. speaks directly to the intelligence of a person and instead serves to disparage and/or derogate.  Being told to go to or "you're going to" hell speaks nothing of a persons intelligence.   

[Tank]

There is no relationship between IQ and if a person is delusional or not. A delusional person continues to assert a patently inaccurate view when provided with incontrovertible evidence the the view is inaccurate. For example asserting a mouse is a car when shown a mouse.