That man Dawkins

On the subject of different types of atheists, whether moderate, healthy or militant, I was amused to read that Dr Sachs called that man Dawkins a Christian atheist as opposed to a Jewish atheist. His argument was that Dawkins was being anti-Semitic when he described the god of the Old Testament as being the nastiest figure in fiction. He claims that this viewpoint is from a Christian perspective as Christians think that their New Testament is better than and supersedes the Old Testament. He adds that this is why so many Jews were persecuted in the Middle Ages – presumably by Christians not atheists of any sort. That Man's reply was that he wasn't anti-Semitic just anti gods and points out some example of the OT god and his endless smiting – Amelkites, I think.

I thought the OT and NT god were supposed to be the same one. Ditto god and Jesus (plus Holy Spirit). From the Christian, not Jewish point of view, of course.

Thanks. I'll try that.

If you go to community - that's the forums, you will find they are divided into various sections. The one called 'Dead Horses - endless no resolution discussions' is the place where matters such women's equality, all matters relating to gay life and homophobia, civil partnerships, abortion, rape and so on are hotly debated. There are also some threads in Purgatory which would be of interest. It's a huge site and quite fast moving and many interesting threads are now in Limbo but still accessible.

I feel that it's well worth spending a bit of time on here if only to see the range of opinion from Quaker to Orthodox to Atheist and all points in between.

No, Elf, I admit I didn't look further than the first page. It was off-putting to me. Perhaps you could highlight a few of the articles most interesting to you? I'd have a go at reading them if you did. When you're typing in the gransnet comment box on a thread, if you scroll down a bit you'll see a bit entitled "Links". It tells you how to make a link for posting in the box. Essentially, you just put two square brackets either side of the link text ...

Did you bother to search the forums and find those which discuss serious matters? Anyone could say the same thing about this site after taking a superficial glance. There are light hearted sections, serious sections, support sections, reports and much more. The level of debate on theolological matters by believers and non believers is much more in depth than anything to be found elsewhere.

yuck. Wish I hadn't bothered.

No, it wasn't me either. Never heard of ship of fools. Might go and have a look though.

Http://ship-of-fools.com

Not me. I will look for it though.

Looking at the same link:
www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?terms=Militant%20Atheist
it appears the atheists on here are either moderate atheists or healthy atheists but none are militant atheists. Perhaps we can lay that one to rest.

Was it bags or anno who introduced us to Ship of Fools some time ago? Can't remember now.

Respect When! I think there's some cross posting going on here. I do but jest.

Enjoy your sober cuppa. Cheers!

I'm a bit tech challenged but at the bar at the top of the page is written

www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?terms=Militant%20Atheist

But do look at The Ship. We aren't all po faced, humourless God botherers.

Yes, been introduced to Ship of Fools previously. Can't think why I'd want a militant atheist mug? Are you reading us atheists right MiceElf? I'm not interested in hostility towards those who believe in their god, nor do I want to promote my atheism to anyone. Just have intelligent debate. Live and let live

It's in the section called Gadgets for God.

Can you put a link to the page you are reading, please, MiceElf. I've just read both militant and militant atheism on Urban Dictionary, and neither contains the reference you gave to a 'person who holds a particular set of beliefs and is prepared to challenge those who disagree.' They use words like attack, hostile, combative. Totally confused

You can, if you want, buy Militant Atheist mugs. And if you go to The Ship of Fools website you can buy mugs and other Christian tat which is much more mocking of the excesses of some aspects of religious practice than you will find here. Go look.

Just checked again. It was definitely Urban Dictionary. First definition. The rest are really quite funny. Read them.

Conservapaedia - an American conservative, Christian website, which describes militant atheism:

'Militant atheism which continues to suppress and oppress religious believers today (see also: Atheism and communism).'

Huh?!

One sugar for me!

Ah, now you're talking - cup of tea coming up!

When, there is a confusion of definition. Militant is indeed as Great nan defined it. Militant Atheism is a term like Guardian Reader which is different from 'Guardian' and 'Reader'. I've just flicked on to my Google search and cannot find where the definition came from, I thought it was Urban Dictionary. But I may be wrong. There is a site called Conservapedia which may be where I found it. Whatever we mean by these terms, I don't get the impression that anyone using this term did it in a hostile or combative way. It seems to me to be just a description of those who vehemently state their position.

Words are emotive. Each word we use carries resonances far beyond dictionary definitions, and clearly the use of those words touches some nerves. I'm sure that no one here wishes to hurt or to suggest malign motives to those who use words which have triggered responses in the reader which were not intended by the writer.

And as for a cup of tea. For me it's something far stronger. Sharing wine for me is central to what I believe.

Can we reach an agreement that whether or not some Gransnetters are atheists, none are militant in terms of being hostile, prepared to attack, or to propagate such beliefs to the masses as a doctrine? Hell's bells....I can only muster up the energy to make a cup of tea these days!

MiceElf the online Urban Dictionary veers more towards Greatnan's definition of being militant, using words like hostile, resorting to verbal or physical attacks. Militant atheism is defined as being hostile to religion and says it should not be respected but attacked. Confused about the definition you have quoted? I can't find anywhere where it says militant atheism is just about being prepared to challenge those who disagree.

Good idea. I am not sure I have anything more to say about religion, though. It doesn't seem to matter how often we repeat that we are not critical of individual believers but just don't share their beliefs. I don't want to convert anyone to atheism, and I am very sure nobody will turn me into a believer, so it is all beginning to feel a bit pointless.

Perhaps we could agree terms before any further debate?

It depends which dictionary you use. Mine defines 'militant' as being prepared to use vigorous or extreme means to achieve an end, usually political, but also to mean aggressive and combative.
I don't think anybody here has been agressive - we have just stated our sincerely held beliefs that there is no supernatural being.