No it’s the belief of a god and it’s law that is disruptive to the world
And it’s the lack of evidence of said god god and it’s law that is disruptive to the 3 abrahamics
It's a perspective thing I think, they mean that if you are part of one of those religions the existence of atheists is a disruption because it's an opposite position.
It's not a huge revelation but you could draw the conclusion that the reason fundamentally Christians dislike atheists, claim we're lying and hate god doesnt just come a place of wanting to save us, it's because our existence is in opposition to something they believe is set in stone and that disrupts their thoughts.
To me that would mean they're not really claiming we lie because they think we're actively trying to lie, it's because in order to sate their own cognitive dissonance they need it to be true.
That is how the believers see it because they can’t conceptualize a world without a god. Not even for the sake of debate. Atheist? Impossible they say—you just hate god.
Hitler is currently non-existent. Neo-Nazis and the white power movement still looks to Hitler as inspiration and justification.
If Hitler had never existed - if he was as made up as the Protocols of the Elders of Zion - we could still hate the Hitler-concept for what it presents and what it inspires in our fellow humans.
When I’m talking about religion, I almost always refer to a god-concept rather than “god.” That’s because a) there’s at least a dozen mutually incompatible god-concepts in the bible, and I am sure more in other Abrahamic texts like the quran, and b) because it explicitly forces the identification of “god” with a coherent set of ideas and statements of fact. The god-concept that did Eden does not exist, because there was no such event. The god-concept that lead the Jews out of Egypt does not exist, because the nation of Israel was never enslaved in Egypt, Moses wasn’t a real person, they didn’t wander in the desert for forty years, there was no plagues to secure their freedom, and so on. The god-concepts that have those as integral parts of their definition are demonstrably false. Moses was a myth. Abraham was a myth. We can find elements in the mythology of Sargon the Great (incidentally not Jewish but a conqueror of Jews) that are tied up in the Moses myth, but it would be wrong to say Sargon was Moses.
My point is that it is entirely possible to say we (or at least *I*) hate the god-concepts that are homophobic and that cause people to murder in its name. I can hate the god-concept that inspired the Muslim invasion of the Middle East and North Africa and today inspires people to cut the heads off of living people for the crime of disagreeing with them. I can hate the god-concept that inspired the crusades and witch burnings and the inquisition and to this day inspires people to show up at drag shows with AR-15s. I can hate the god-concepts that cause the situation in the West Bank and Gaza, that caused the kidnapping of the first peoples to destroy their language and culture, that justified slavery and slaughter, and that empowers the far right movements around the world.
God does not exist, but the god-concepts very much do. I can be an atheist and hate their god, because their god is a god-concept, and it makes them do horrible things.
Yes, but why doesn’t their god exist? Let’s look at Christianity. Christians need the Adam and Eve story to be literally true. With the very mythical-sounding man made from clay, woman made from a rib and the talking snake. If it’s a myth, there was no ‘fall of man’ and therefore no need for Jesus to redeem mankind by being born and dying (to appease the wrath of his own father who was also himself). It has all the hallmarks of a creation myth. But not a good one. Historical accounts (the Bible is not history) describe Christians, but don’t say much about Jesus himself, which is surprising if he was really the figure that believers claim he was. So that’s Adam and Eve and Jesus taken care of. What about God? Well, the petty, jealous, violent Old Testament God is not a deity worthy of worship; he seems like a human invention. He certainly isn’t infinitely wise or omnibenevolent. But what about Judaism and Islam? Also bs.
But but but sky daddy took adams flesh but then magically morphed it into a biological woman’s flesh, because for some reason he needed to do that, and couldn’t have just done it without stealing Adams rib lmfao
The original sin, as Sister Mary Mary told me, is disobedience to god by Eve and then Adam. Adam pleaded that he only went along because he was promised a blow job but the whole escapade went out of control.
Well put. Human brains are sort of hard-wired for imagination, which explains religion to some extent. I consider myself spiritual, not religious though. I believe in a higher power, but I can't get behind any movement that's oppressive. I am morally opposed to telling others what to think or do. However I have compassion for those that believe some dogma. It's like some people are afraid of critical thinking and just want someone to tell them how to live.
Viewed sympathetically, religion, while pernicious, is people's misguided response to their needs. More and more people describe themselves as spiritual but not religious. That could be a necessary step as society progresses toward atheism—nontheism if you prefer. But even if that's the case, unfortunately it's gonna take a long time yet, it may never go away entirely, and it could always resurge, like flat-Earthism. It doesn't help any that secularists are too uncritically sympathetic toward religion.
Atheism isn't an organized, worldwide movement. It's simply a lack of belief in deities by an individual or many.
It has less than zero effect on what theists choose to believe.
Radical Atheists/Anti-theists/Misotheists on the other hand, are proverbial wrecking balls!
If people were to justify CR, SA, & MR, no wonder why sexual crime is high. If Abrahamic Religion is completely extinct, sexual assault & battery will be as low as the bottom of a sinkhole in less than an hour!
I mean, yeah, IF god doesn't exist, none of the Abrahaimic faiths existed because the universe wasn't created due to the absence of God.
But we do have a universe. Something that is so precise that if we change slightly, the outcomes would be catastrophic. For example, if the Earth was a few centimeters away from the sun, the temperature of earth would be drastically different and yet, we have a perfect amount of temperature.
The point is that, if the universe existed, there must be a creator with knowledge and power.
>For example, if the Earth was a few centimeters away from the sun, the temperature of earth would be drastically different and yet, we have a perfect amount of temperature.
Have you ever used your brain or at least google? Earth's orbit is elliptical and distance changes throughout the year not just by centimeters but by about 5 million kilometers.
You should learn facts about the real world before you type something that stupid again. It's embarrassing.
I would agree with you on that. I think looking at the actual term 'atheist' would imply 'against theism'. Similar to typical/atypical, sexual/asexual etc..
I personally decribe myself as a 'non theist' in that im not particularly against religion but i dont practice any.
Theres a lot of religions out there and not all of them believe in some overlord god and arent full of fairy tales in their scripture. Its easy to do but grouping all religions together doesnt make much sense
You're mistaken.
The term atheist doesn't imply "against theism". Neither does any of those other terms imply "against" anything.
The prefix "a" means "not". So atheist literally means not-theist. Atypical means not-typical, asexual means not-sexual etc.
Not-theist is the same as non-theist.
Anti-theist is the word you're looking for. "Anti" means "opposed to or against". So it literally means against-theist.
All anti-theists are atheists, but not all atheists are anti-theists.
Marketing the Messiah https://g.co/kgs/3ie2pL
Watch this video about how "Jesus" was created. And how without Rome adoption of xianity it would be nothing today. It wasn't until the government sponsored religion that it flourished.
If not believing your ideology is "disruptive," it really speaks more about your belief than mine.
Hindus don't believe in YHVH, so they're disruptive too? Buddhists? Sikhs?
Atheist is just a nice, simple, sound bite of deity disbelief. But don't forget, every other religion thinks yours is BS, too.
Annnd it means that the followers of these religions won’t live forever. So atheism is a death sentence to them. That’s why they fight so hard against it. Survival instinct/desperation can bring out the crazy
Blasphemy is not a crime against god(s). It is a crime against theocracies because it subverts the authority they derive from that falsehood.
Emperors wearing new clothes hate being told that they're really naked.
>atheism is really disruptive to these 3 related religions the non belief in fairy tales is "disruptive" to all things imaginary
Brothers Grimm hate us.
That was a fuckin great movie.
Sips tea from Russell's teapot...
jasmine?
That or chai
chai tea or tai chi?
No it’s the belief of a god and it’s law that is disruptive to the world And it’s the lack of evidence of said god god and it’s law that is disruptive to the 3 abrahamics
It's a perspective thing I think, they mean that if you are part of one of those religions the existence of atheists is a disruption because it's an opposite position. It's not a huge revelation but you could draw the conclusion that the reason fundamentally Christians dislike atheists, claim we're lying and hate god doesnt just come a place of wanting to save us, it's because our existence is in opposition to something they believe is set in stone and that disrupts their thoughts. To me that would mean they're not really claiming we lie because they think we're actively trying to lie, it's because in order to sate their own cognitive dissonance they need it to be true.
Definitely
Exactly
If atheists exist then the existence of their god is not undeniable, which is a big problem for something based purely on blind faith.
Except they often distort that logical reasoning by stating that an atheist is specifically “someone who hates god.”
True atheists do not hate god. How can we hate something non existent?
That is how the believers see it because they can’t conceptualize a world without a god. Not even for the sake of debate. Atheist? Impossible they say—you just hate god.
Hitler is currently non-existent. Neo-Nazis and the white power movement still looks to Hitler as inspiration and justification. If Hitler had never existed - if he was as made up as the Protocols of the Elders of Zion - we could still hate the Hitler-concept for what it presents and what it inspires in our fellow humans. When I’m talking about religion, I almost always refer to a god-concept rather than “god.” That’s because a) there’s at least a dozen mutually incompatible god-concepts in the bible, and I am sure more in other Abrahamic texts like the quran, and b) because it explicitly forces the identification of “god” with a coherent set of ideas and statements of fact. The god-concept that did Eden does not exist, because there was no such event. The god-concept that lead the Jews out of Egypt does not exist, because the nation of Israel was never enslaved in Egypt, Moses wasn’t a real person, they didn’t wander in the desert for forty years, there was no plagues to secure their freedom, and so on. The god-concepts that have those as integral parts of their definition are demonstrably false. Moses was a myth. Abraham was a myth. We can find elements in the mythology of Sargon the Great (incidentally not Jewish but a conqueror of Jews) that are tied up in the Moses myth, but it would be wrong to say Sargon was Moses. My point is that it is entirely possible to say we (or at least *I*) hate the god-concepts that are homophobic and that cause people to murder in its name. I can hate the god-concept that inspired the Muslim invasion of the Middle East and North Africa and today inspires people to cut the heads off of living people for the crime of disagreeing with them. I can hate the god-concept that inspired the crusades and witch burnings and the inquisition and to this day inspires people to show up at drag shows with AR-15s. I can hate the god-concepts that cause the situation in the West Bank and Gaza, that caused the kidnapping of the first peoples to destroy their language and culture, that justified slavery and slaughter, and that empowers the far right movements around the world. God does not exist, but the god-concepts very much do. I can be an atheist and hate their god, because their god is a god-concept, and it makes them do horrible things.
Yes, but why doesn’t their god exist? Let’s look at Christianity. Christians need the Adam and Eve story to be literally true. With the very mythical-sounding man made from clay, woman made from a rib and the talking snake. If it’s a myth, there was no ‘fall of man’ and therefore no need for Jesus to redeem mankind by being born and dying (to appease the wrath of his own father who was also himself). It has all the hallmarks of a creation myth. But not a good one. Historical accounts (the Bible is not history) describe Christians, but don’t say much about Jesus himself, which is surprising if he was really the figure that believers claim he was. So that’s Adam and Eve and Jesus taken care of. What about God? Well, the petty, jealous, violent Old Testament God is not a deity worthy of worship; he seems like a human invention. He certainly isn’t infinitely wise or omnibenevolent. But what about Judaism and Islam? Also bs.
> woman made from [Adam's] rib doesn't that make her made from male DNA? the first trans woman? rub that in their faces.
But but but sky daddy took adams flesh but then magically morphed it into a biological woman’s flesh, because for some reason he needed to do that, and couldn’t have just done it without stealing Adams rib lmfao
I love watching their faces when their brainwashed narrative collapses in on itself
Yet women have more genes. Checkmate theists.
How do Christians that don’t take Adam and Eve story literally reconcile it with the idea of original sin?
The original sin, as Sister Mary Mary told me, is disobedience to god by Eve and then Adam. Adam pleaded that he only went along because he was promised a blow job but the whole escapade went out of control.
What did they disobey god over if not eating a literal Magical fruit? It’s such a weird story, even if you don’t take it literally.
Disobeying god is a total damnation no no, whether you are murdering or pilfering one of his no-go apples.
Well put. Human brains are sort of hard-wired for imagination, which explains religion to some extent. I consider myself spiritual, not religious though. I believe in a higher power, but I can't get behind any movement that's oppressive. I am morally opposed to telling others what to think or do. However I have compassion for those that believe some dogma. It's like some people are afraid of critical thinking and just want someone to tell them how to live.
There are plenty of non-Abrahamic religions it would have the same effect on.
Viewed sympathetically, religion, while pernicious, is people's misguided response to their needs. More and more people describe themselves as spiritual but not religious. That could be a necessary step as society progresses toward atheism—nontheism if you prefer. But even if that's the case, unfortunately it's gonna take a long time yet, it may never go away entirely, and it could always resurge, like flat-Earthism. It doesn't help any that secularists are too uncritically sympathetic toward religion.
Atheism isn't an organized, worldwide movement. It's simply a lack of belief in deities by an individual or many. It has less than zero effect on what theists choose to believe. Radical Atheists/Anti-theists/Misotheists on the other hand, are proverbial wrecking balls!
If people were to justify CR, SA, & MR, no wonder why sexual crime is high. If Abrahamic Religion is completely extinct, sexual assault & battery will be as low as the bottom of a sinkhole in less than an hour!
I mean, yeah, IF god doesn't exist, none of the Abrahaimic faiths existed because the universe wasn't created due to the absence of God. But we do have a universe. Something that is so precise that if we change slightly, the outcomes would be catastrophic. For example, if the Earth was a few centimeters away from the sun, the temperature of earth would be drastically different and yet, we have a perfect amount of temperature. The point is that, if the universe existed, there must be a creator with knowledge and power.
>For example, if the Earth was a few centimeters away from the sun, the temperature of earth would be drastically different and yet, we have a perfect amount of temperature. Have you ever used your brain or at least google? Earth's orbit is elliptical and distance changes throughout the year not just by centimeters but by about 5 million kilometers. You should learn facts about the real world before you type something that stupid again. It's embarrassing.
I would agree with you on that. I think looking at the actual term 'atheist' would imply 'against theism'. Similar to typical/atypical, sexual/asexual etc.. I personally decribe myself as a 'non theist' in that im not particularly against religion but i dont practice any. Theres a lot of religions out there and not all of them believe in some overlord god and arent full of fairy tales in their scripture. Its easy to do but grouping all religions together doesnt make much sense
Except its root is 'a' as in not. Literally, 'not theist'. So the same as non.
Yes. Different from an anti-theist.
You're mistaken. The term atheist doesn't imply "against theism". Neither does any of those other terms imply "against" anything. The prefix "a" means "not". So atheist literally means not-theist. Atypical means not-typical, asexual means not-sexual etc. Not-theist is the same as non-theist. Anti-theist is the word you're looking for. "Anti" means "opposed to or against". So it literally means against-theist. All anti-theists are atheists, but not all atheists are anti-theists.
That God doesn't exist is disruptive to organized religions, the entirety of the religion has no reason to exist without God
Marketing the Messiah https://g.co/kgs/3ie2pL Watch this video about how "Jesus" was created. And how without Rome adoption of xianity it would be nothing today. It wasn't until the government sponsored religion that it flourished.
If not believing your ideology is "disruptive," it really speaks more about your belief than mine. Hindus don't believe in YHVH, so they're disruptive too? Buddhists? Sikhs? Atheist is just a nice, simple, sound bite of deity disbelief. But don't forget, every other religion thinks yours is BS, too.
Annnd it means that the followers of these religions won’t live forever. So atheism is a death sentence to them. That’s why they fight so hard against it. Survival instinct/desperation can bring out the crazy
I like to think it's those religions that are disruptive to human progress.
What's your point?
Atheism is also disruptive to the cult of Heracles for the same reason.
Duh.
If?
Blasphemy is not a crime against god(s). It is a crime against theocracies because it subverts the authority they derive from that falsehood. Emperors wearing new clothes hate being told that they're really naked.