What is the equivalent of a bible basher...

Post Reply New Topic

If they are an athiest and preach their beliefs to you? Is there a name for them?

Strident atheist?

I've just looked that up. Question answered.

AKA an "atheist thumper".

Ignorantly Sacrilegious Athiest?

Euphoric Fedora.jpg

That is typically called a militant atheist. But there are others like that, aside from atheists. There are Laveyan Satanists, people who believe in scientology, New Age folk and Wiccans, etc. who are obnoxious about their beliefs as well.

It's just that you get athiests who like to say things like, "It doesn't exist. That's that" believing that they are actually adding a point to a discussion. You're like...yeh, OK, I know you think that. I don't care. It may as well be me saying to them, "God exists. Fact". It's meaningless. They're not proving anything by stating those things, especially when they keep doing it. That's just preaching.

Yeah, it's amazing how they complain about the same behavior from religious people too. Sheer hypocrisy. It seems that people on all sides of the aisle show a lack of interest in assessing or discussing things in any meaningful and productive way. So many times I wait while an atheist tells me how stupid I am, and how science has proven my position to be false beyond a doubt. And then we actually get into a discussion of why and how science supports that idea and they can't even properly explain to me things like cosmology, the half-life of carbon, ancient history, etc. because they never even took the time to come to a rudimentary understanding of it all. I don't know how many times I've had carbon dating waggled in my face by a person who didn't even understand what it was or how it worked.

Lots of times I just end up thinking to myself: "You've probably never even heard of a c14 molecule, special relativity, the CMB (cosmic microwave background radiation) or the planck temperature." I really doubt that a lot of people could countenance the fact that theism is not only alive and well in the academic world, but flourishing. They've got to read their fringe authors like Crossan, Ehrman, Dawkins, Sagan, etc. who aren't even respected by their academic peers. How is it that popular science and popular academics in general turned into the fringe? I wonder how people would take it if they learned that the majority of physicists aren't atheists.

Strident strong atheists exist and it's really not that different from the way monotheists dismiss all of the other gods. But not all strident atheists are strong atheists. I doubt most are. They might have no faith in gods (weak atheism) but allow for the possibility and then focus a more atheistic analysis on specific religions that have actual records to examine.

Which is why you usually see Judeo-Christian and Islamic accounts challenged and less interest in saying much about deism or pantheism. Believers use the same shorthand. When they say god they usually don't mean an abstract prime mover. They mean Yahweh-Christ or Allah. Those are very specific gods.

Lukecash12: Wow. They don't know about that stuff because it's a lot of information to take in. Unless you've a brilliant memory, not many people are going to try to learn it.

All I remember about carbon dating is well, not much! I found even the simple concept intimidating, and tiring to learn. So I got a D in that for Geology. My interest in Palaeontology got it up to a C.

As for the first part of the paragraph you wrote: It's easier for someone to call you stupid and place blame on you for their lack of argument, rather than them thinking, "Hey, you know, I think I might be wrong!".

And yes, a lot of atheists are hypocritical. What surprises me are the people who think that the world would be more peaceful without religion. Religion is just a fraction of it. We're animals, of course we're all going to fight each other and form hierarchies.

I'm going to have to write some sort of fedora apologia at some point. All these Nice Guys and Strident Atheists ruining it for me. And everyone else.

I don't even know what carbon dating has to do with the issue. It only reliably goes back a few tens of thousands of years. Radiometric dating is a broader term that involves other decay processes that can date much older material. Why would carbon dating be involved in any religious discussion that didn't involve YEC belefs?

Lukecash12, are you a YEC?

Ooh, my thread is becoming all scientific.

Am not sure what TheGoggles meant.

Its "Bible thumper".

Not a Bible BASHER.

A "media basher" is someone who attacks/blames the media. So a "bible basher" would be someone who beats up on the Bible. Not someone who beat YOU over the head with it (like a Bible Thumper).

But yeah- the equivalent for atheism for "bible thumper" would be "militant atheist", or "evangelical atheist".

I believe that the term "strident atheist" is peculiar to the wrongplanet PPR crowd, and not a widely used term.

But dont use the term "Fundamentalist Atheist".

A 'Fundamentalist' is someone who adheres to the foundations of the "Fundamentals" of scripture. Since atheist dont have a 'scripture' that is equivalent to the Bible they cant be "fundamentalists". Though Atheists can be "evangelical" about "spreading the good news" about their creed- in much the same way that Christians Evangelicals can.

Delusion-dummy?

The term is used widely over here to mean someone who heavily promotes the bible, such as a Jehovas Witness.

Still, I like your reasoning.