Originally posted by twhitehead
And they do exactly that. It is theists that dodge questions left right and centre as you are doing now.

"put up" or "shut up" is in no way equivalent to "be willing to risk your life for you beliefs" or even "be willing to risk any loss whatsoever" for your beliefs. All "put up" or "shut up" means is that if you have a big mouth then be ready to defend what comes out of it, or keep it shut.

Yes, and that is EXACTLY what I was saying. I SAID "put up" or "shut up". It is FMF who has twisted that into "How is it hypocritical? Unless atheists have told you that you should be willing to die for your beliefs, then how is it hypocritical? When did an RHP atheist ask you to lay down your life for your theism?"

WHO is dodging the question? I wouldn't have to "dodge" by refusing to answer an inane question if that question wasn't pulled out of thin air.

You know, if atheists cannot participate in a discussion without twisting and pulling at what I say, then I'd rather they not even read what I write at all.

Originally posted by Suzianne
You know, if atheists cannot participate in a discussion without twisting and pulling at what I say, then I'd rather they not even read what I write at all.

Okay, I did it again.

I believe FMF has told me numerous times he is not an atheist, yet I clump him in with atheists again in this comment.

Mea culpa. I'm sorry.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Yes, and that is EXACTLY what I was saying. I SAID "put up" or "shut up". It is FMF who has twisted that into "How is it hypocritical? Unless atheists have told you that you should be willing to die for your beliefs, then how is it hypocritical? When did an RHP atheist ask you to lay down your life for your theism?"

WHO is dodging the question? I woul ...[text shortened]... y refusing to answer an inane question if that question wasn't pulled out of thin air.

Well either redhotpawn is busy substituting words, or mis-attributing posts, or you said exactly what FMF quotes you as saying ie:

If he's not willing to die for his beliefs, then maybe he needs to re-examine his beliefs and ascertain whether he still believes them.

I think you need to go back and read through your own posts and either clarify them (as we may be misinterpreting what you said), or correct them. But as they stand, you appear to be trying very hard to dodge the question that initially was nothing more than asking you to clarify what you meant. Instead of clarifying you started trying to shift the focus onto something else you said.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Well either redhotpawn is busy substituting words, or mis-attributing posts, or you said exactly what FMF quotes you as saying ie:

If he's not willing to die for his beliefs, then maybe he needs to re-examine his beliefs and ascertain whether he still believes them.

I think you need to go back and read through your own posts and eithe ...[text shortened]... eant. Instead of clarifying you started trying to shift the focus onto something else you said.

That was before he started mixing up what I said. Yes, I said what you quoted, but then later I said:

Originally posted by Suzianne
You don't want to know what I "reckon".

Who are the ones constantly asking theists to put up or shut up?

Don't you think atheists should follow their own advice?

To which FMF replied:

Originally posted by FMF
You reckon RHP atheists advise you to lay your life down? When was this? I missed it. Which thread?

Do you see how it doesn't follow?

Originally posted by Suzianne
Do you see how it doesn't follow?

Actually it does kinda follow. Which is why he asked for clarification and you started dodging.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Actually it does kinda follow. Which is why he asked for clarification and you started dodging.

I didn't say atheists advised me to lay my life down. I said atheists should put up or shut up like they say to theists.

Originally posted by Suzianne
I didn't say atheists advised me to lay my life down. I said atheists should put up or shut up like they say to theists.

Which you said in response to being challenged over your previous comment - strongly implying that there was a relation. As I said, go through your posts again and you will see.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Au contraire, mon frere...

I fully expect to not only be incarcerated for my beliefs eventually, but to be put to death for them*. You forget, I believe that both the Tribulation and the AntiChrist are coming.

I don't think he should merely accept his incarceration. He should hire a lawyer and fight this with everything he's got. His incarceration ...[text shortened]... ulin, like some natural disaster where access to drugs is cut off, I'm basically screwed.

When you ask why people say your a fundamentalist...

Stuff like this is why...

Just saying.

Originally posted by Suzianne
I didn't say atheists advised me to lay my life down. I said atheists should put up or shut up like they say to theists.

As an atheist I am curious as to what you mean by telling theists to put up or shut up...

The only context I can see it as applicable is where atheists ask theists to supply evidence
backing their claims or stop making them.

Which is not only reasonable but also something any rationalist or skeptic worth their salt
will happily apply to themselves and their arguments.

I am not sure of any atheist telling theists that they should be more willing to die for their
beliefs... In fact I would say that the contrary would be much more true.
I would rather like theists to stop dying for their beliefs, and more to the point taking other
people with them.


I see no problem with someone believing something (or in this case not believing something)
but if faced with torture and or death if they don't claim to change position (beliefs) then they
say that they have changed to avoid torture and death.

It would only be hypocritical if they had previously stated that people should die for their beliefs
if faced with this situation.


BTW, with your Antichrist scenario... I have no idea of the details of your imaginary Armageddon
But if faced with torture people can and will say anything to make it stop.

Which makes anything a person says when threatened with such things meaningless.

Originally posted by Suzianne
So, in other words, you'll be joining up with the Anti-Christ when he comes and proclaims himself God and threatens to kill everyone who does not worship him?

Yeah that's gutsy. So you have zero commitment to your convictions?

If the Antichrist arrives and Armageddon happens that would be actual evidence for the existence
of god.

At which point the rational for being an atheist would no longer apply.

Whether or not belief in gods existence would result in actual worship from particular atheists is a
separate question.

Given that in the Christian system death causes your soul to get sent to either heaven or hell,
and that non-worshippers go to hell, the rational reaction to the Antichrist from atheists and all non-Christians
would be to declare war on him and his supporters.

If you lose or die fighting then you go to hell, just as you would by joining him, but you keep your integrity intact.

If you win, then bonus, now time to turn your attention to the bugger orchestrating the whole thing.

Originally posted by FMF
What are the forum's thoughts on Alexander?

Alexander is a poor bastard cursed with critical thinking skills who finds himself living amongst barbarians.

"Coordinating Agency to Supervise Religion and Beliefs" --- Mmmm, American Teabagistan would likey likey that very, very much!

Originally posted by Suzianne
I didn't say atheists advised me to lay my life down. I said atheists should put up or shut up like they say to theists.

Well, it's 2012, and though there are still no jetpacks, flying cars, or cities on the moon, I'd rather hoped you'd at least start making some sense by now.

Originally posted by googlefudge
If the Antichrist arrives and Armageddon happens that would be actual evidence for the existence
of god.

At which point the rational for being an atheist would no longer apply.

Whether or not belief in gods existence would result in actual worship from particular atheists is a
separate question.

Given that in the Christian system death cause ...[text shortened]... ou win, then bonus, now time to turn your attention to the bugger orchestrating the whole thing.

Lol!!

Originally posted by Suzianne
So, in other words, you'll be joining up with the Anti-Christ when he comes and proclaims himself God and threatens to kill everyone who does not worship him?

Yeah that's gutsy. So you have zero commitment to your convictions?

So, in other words, you'll be joining up with the Anti-Christ when he comes and proclaims himself God and threatens to kill everyone who does not worship him?

Yeah that's gutsy. So you have zero commitment to your convictions?
I don't believe there exists an "Anti-Christ" (indeed I lump that belief in with talking snakes and a 6000 year old Earth). As such if I came across someone who proclaimed himself to be "God" and it wasn't obvious he was taking the piss then I'd assume he's crazy. Moreover, I'd (rightly or wrongly) assume *dangerous* and crazy - so much so that interacting with this so called "Anti-Christ" would be the last thing on my mind.

As for what's gutsy or not I don't make any claims to being gutsy - I don't even imply it; and as for convictions and commitment to them I don't see how you draw your conclusion -indeed I don't even see where I have a commitment. I see belief in your version of "God" is irrational ergo I don't believe it exists - but I'm not about to put my life on the line for this, nor do I see any reason why I should!

Originally posted by twhitehead
Its funny how religions stick together even though their beliefs are contradictory. A Christian would rather another person be Muslim than atheist and vice versa.
It is OK for another religious person to tell you he doesn't believe in your God, after all, he is just as deluded as you are, so you cant really complain. But if someone says "I don't believe en that is blasphemy, and must be punished. He's a threat to the whole concept of religion.

This is a big generalisation, probably completely incorrect and is certainly not my view.