Joined: Jan. 2007
DaveScot thinks this is funny:
Actually, it's just poorly thought out argument by assertion by Mr. Giles. Let's take a look:
|I think the atheists believe in not believing, however, not because they’re intellectual little dandies but because they want to be autonomous, loose and randy.|
Yet atheists have lower divorce rates than their born-again counterparts. But I realize Mr. Giles isn't interested in facts; and neither is UncommonDescent.
|Look, I’m not buying that the atheists’ altruistic self-professed pursuit of reason is what undergirds their conclusion that God does not exist;|
We each see in each other what is in ourselves.
|I believe it’s because they want to believe that they’ll never be called into eternal accountability for their temporal actions by a holy God. Talk about an opiate for the masses!|
The opiate is now "death and worm food"? Christians promist everlasting life, and eternal pleasure, and atheists believe we become worm food. Ask yourself honestly - if an atheist genuinely believed in God, heaven, and hell, how opiatic does worm food sound? Unfortunately most atheists consider the evidence and conclude that the places Mr. Giles is so certain we are antsy to avoid thinking about just aren't there.
I can't comment on Mr. Giles overall intelligence, but he certainly argues like one.
|You remember Epi, don’t cha? His whole goal was to “get rid of the gods.” He and his other pre-Socratic “thinkers” like Lucretius and Democritus didn’t like all that duty and responsibility to higher powers and fellow mortals crap.|
Epicurius was convinced that the myths of the Greeks involving the gods coming to earth and impregnating humans giving rise to super-humans was sheer folly. I can see how his rejection of the myths of ancient Greece might be infuriating to Mr. Giles. Or is Mr. Giles' point that Epicurius was right to reject the myths of his time?
Edit: <i> to quote, forgot I'm not on Fark.