# Obsessive atheists **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 22, 2013, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obsessive-atheists/666893 "2013-08-22T18:15:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![SirGalahad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/71c47a/32.png) [@SirGalahad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SirGalahad)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obsessive-atheists/666893/142 "2013-08-28T18:30:19Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Do you even know what an atheist is? Yes. Yes I do. Do you know what an effective argument is ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obsessive-atheists/666893/143 "2013-08-28T18:32:09Z")
> [@SirGalahad](#): > > This is my favorite part. The person engaged in a “scientific debate” defends his position with faith. That happens often, does it? When you talk to a Xtian on any subject that relates to God, (and what doesn’t?) they will apply tenets of faith to their discussion at will. If they are the moderate Catholics you referred to earlier, they may be more judicious, but that doesn’t reflect their Xtianity, it illustrates their dissent from same. Laughing at someone for a predictable display of faith may not be obsessive, but this board is full of threads where Atheists dutifully rehash the same tired argument that fall on the deaf ears of Xtians, who engage in the same repetitive witnessing. Both sides are guilty of obsession. That there are a few on either side that avoid this pattern of behavior in no way proves my main point to be erroneous. You are still doing the same thing of which I accused you in my last post. You equate the views of the extremes, (fundies of either camp), to the positions of those who are not fundies. The reason that you can point so easily to various discussions on this board is that the fundies have hijacked these discussions to the point where non-fundies rarely enter. That does not mean that your characterization was correct, only that the discussions to which you refer are dominated by fundies. And this > [@](#): > > If they are the moderate Catholics you referred to earlier, they may be more judicious, but that doesn’t reflect their Xtianity, it illustrates their dissent from same. is just silly. A Catholic scientist who engages in the study of Evolution is not in any way dissenting from Christianity. There is nothing in Christianity that arguesw against Evolution (unless one’s Christianity is limited to Evangelical or Fundamentalist Christianity–which is not the whole of Christian belief, being a relatively new belief within Christian tradition). ---
**Author:** ![SirGalahad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/71c47a/32.png) [@SirGalahad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SirGalahad)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obsessive-atheists/666893/144 "2013-08-28T18:45:58Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > For one thing, you submitted a binary claim that fails to actually describe the **overwhelming majority** of people on either side of the line. Had you begun your claim by noting that you were discussing only fundies of either stripe, you would have come closer to making a point. However, it is only the fundies that ascribe “evil” to the opinions or beliefs of their opponents or identify their opponents as “horrible persons.” **A large numbe** r of atheists posting to this board have demonstrated tolerance for the beliefs of theists–provided that the theists do not attempt to use those beliefs to impose specific actions or prohibitions on society that the atheists find intrusive. Similarly, **a large number** of theists on this board recognize the actual positions of atheists and make no assumptions regarding the “evil” or “horrible” nature of atheists. > > In that regard, your post did make a number of assumptions that were without merit. You’re using “overwhelming” and then “large number” to make a point, but I think you’re familiar enough with the threads on this board that start with religion as a subject for debate that you know the inevitable pile on that takes place in short order. I reject your characterization of the behavior and intentions of members of both sides of the subject argument … the usual suspects from either Atheist (poster boy; Detr Trihs) or Xtian camps engage in repetitive and strident dispute, with predictable outcome. That’s obsessive. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obsessive-atheists/666893/145 "2013-08-28T19:14:46Z")
> [@SirGalahad](#): > > You’re using “overwhelming” and then “large number” to make a point, but I think you’re familiar enough with the threads on this board that start with religion as a subject for debate that you know the inevitable pile on that takes place in short order. I reject your characterization of the behavior and intentions of members of both sides of the subject argument … the usual suspects from either Atheist (poster boy; Detr Trihs) or Xtian camps engage in repetitive and strident dispute, with predictable outcome. That’s obsessive. Your post #131 makes no claim that you are only describing posters on this board. It puts forth that “Believers” and “Atheists” (all inclusive), share the characteristics you describe. That is simply not true for the public, at large. Even on the SDMB it is not true for a majority of believers and atheists–only that small subset of the populations that enjoy hurling brickbats at each other. Note that few of these threads get more than a few dozen participants, with nearly half of those being one-post-drive-by ironic comments. The rest of the atheists and believers do not share the passions of the fundies and do not tend to participate. ---
**Author:** ![SirGalahad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/71c47a/32.png) [@SirGalahad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SirGalahad)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obsessive-atheists/666893/146 "2013-08-28T19:17:33Z")
**tomndebb** “You are still doing the same thing of which I accused you in my last post. You equate the views of the extremes, (fundies of either camp), to the positions of those who are not fundies. The reason that you can point so easily to various discussions on this board is that the fundies have hijacked these discussions to the point where non-fundies rarely enter. That does not mean that your characterization was correct, only that the discussions to which you refer are dominated by fundies.” > [@nearwildheaven](#): > > I’m curious. \*\* There is a subset of atheists \*\*who are always “preaching”, and my question is: Why are these people so obsessed with, and disdainful of, something they don’t even believe exists? > 😕 > [@SirGalahad](#): > > Think about what Believers and Atheists have in common. Both groups are convinced they know Right from Wrong … Good from bad; both groups think they are right about everything and if you disagree with them, you are Evil. Admittedly, the motivations are different, the Bible for the Believers and Science, logic and progressive talking points for the Atheist > > Points go to the Atheists on the subjects of Evolution and Global Warming, but when conversations turn to Abortion, alternative lifestyles, and the possible existence of a supernatural being, opinions and prejudices weigh against both parties. There aren’t any scientific facts that settle moral debates. > > Both Atheists and Believers think they are right … if you disagree, you’re a horrible person. They are very similar to one another. \*\*They can both be \*\*obsessive. **tomndebb** , kindly refer to the bolded sections in the two quotes I provided. As you’ll see **nearwildheaven** is inquiring regarding a “subset” of atheists. Did I need to specify that my reply was dealing with a subset, not the entirety of all atheists on the planet? You’ll also notice in my first post in this thread that I state: “They can both be obsessive.” Do you make a distinction between that and, for example: “They are all, everyone of them, obsessive …”? If it is your position that I didn’t respond to the OP’s initial question (?) and that I was not sufficiently vague in saying, “They ‘can’”, then I’ll happily rephrase my original reply for clarity, so as not to confuse you. "Think about what Believers and Atheists have in common. Many but not all, but a big percentage that could arguably be called the extremists, but maybe not a majority of both groups are convinced they know Right from Wrong … Good from bad; both groups think they are right about everything and if you disagree with them, you are a poopy-head. Admittedly, the motivations are different, the Bible for the Believers and Science, logic and progressive talking points for the Atheist Points go to the Atheists on the subjects of Evolution and Global Warming, but when conversations turn to Abortion, alternative lifestyles, and the possible existence of a supernatural being, opinions and prejudices weigh against both parties. There aren’t any scientific facts that settle moral debates. The most vocal and intolerant Atheists and Believers (a poll hasn’t been presented to ascertain exactly what percentage of people who self-identify as Atheist or Christian fall into this category) think they are right … if you disagree, you’re a horrible person. They are very similar to one another. A certain sub-set, (for which we have no firm numbers, but several of them are on display daily at the SDMB)of both parties can be obsessive at times … also nit-picky." Is that clearer? ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obsessive-atheists/666893/147 "2013-08-28T19:47:25Z")
> [@SirGalahad](#): > > **tomndebb** , kindly refer to the bolded sections in the two quotes I provided. As you’ll see **nearwildheaven** is inquiring regarding a “subset” of atheists. Did I need to specify that my reply was dealing with a subset, not the entirety of all atheists on the planet? Frankly, yes. > [@SirGalahad](#): > > You’ll also notice in my first post in this thread that I state: “They can both be obsessive.” Which can easily be read as all the members of both camps share the traits you describe. You did not quote the post to which you now claim to have been replying and you used no limited words. Your post, after 129 posts since the OP, looked as though it was simply a comment on the nature of the two groups, waving guilt around for everyone. If you meant to limit the discussion to fundies and fellow travelers, then it would have been less confusing had you indicated that in your post. ---
**Author:** ![SirGalahad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/71c47a/32.png) [@SirGalahad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SirGalahad)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obsessive-atheists/666893/148 "2013-08-28T20:04:13Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Frankly, yes. > Which can easily be read as all the members of both camps share the traits you describe. > You did not quote the post to which you now claim to have been replying and you used no limited words. Your post, after 129 posts since the OP, looked as though it was simply a comment on the nature of the two groups, waving guilt around for everyone. > > If you meant to limit the discussion to fundies and fellow travelers, then it would have been less confusing had you indicated that in your post. Word. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obsessive-atheists/666893/149 "2013-08-28T20:19:14Z")
> [@SirGalahad](#): > > **If we call a theist evil, it is not based on what he believes but on how he acts on those beliefs.** > > By we, you mean Atheists? **Voyager** , you and **For You** aren’t agreeing on the use of “Evil”, so why don’t we discard the spiritually loaded word and say “Stupid and Wrong”, or just “Wrong” for short? Are you saying that if a Xtian posts Xtian beliefs and points of view on this board, but you don’t have proof that Xtian has ever forced a school to teach Creationism or ever blocked an abortion doctor’s doorway, then that’s hunky dory? Because, I don’t think that’s what happens. The typical thread where some poster proffers a Xtian view or set of beliefs/ opinions, that poster is deluged with replies along the lines of: “You’re stupid if you believe in a Supreme Being”, “Xtianity is responsible for (list) of heinous crimes, and if you’re a Xtian you are wrong about everything and responsible by association, etc.” Check out most of the replies in these two active threads: > > [A message to all atheists, unbelievers, and lukewarm christians - Great Debates - Straight Dope Message Board](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=700466) > > [Are there believers here? - In My Humble Opinion - Straight Dope Message Board](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=700675) If a poster calls another poster stupid, feel free to report it, since that is against the rules. I see no such posts in either of those threads. In the first thread people were mostly laughing at the OP. In the second, more serious, the “worst” response I noticed was: > [@](#): > > Originally Posted by drewtwo99 View Post > I’d like to know how any semi-intelligent, middle-aged person could ever believe in a god. Yet I am constantly surrounded by a vast majority of people who do. Meh. Live and let live, I say. As long as your belief in your god isn’t infringing on my right and my life in any way, more power to you. If you believe that gay people are sinners who shouldn’t be able to marry or adopt children, then you can just go suck a lemon. (I bring up the gay thing as one of many issues that have soured me on most religious “believers”) which doesn’t sound very heinous to me. Also consider the thread started by Timo. Though people were frustrated at him posting Bible verses, for the most part they appreciated a real effort on his part to have a real discussion, so rare in drive by posters. > [@](#): > > Disregard the word Evil, let’s agree that posting as a believer garners condescension and criticism on the basis of being a believer. > > \*\*“Unlike Christians we don’t think that someone who believes differently from us is going to hell.” > \*\* > > Right … but since you don’t believe in Hell, why would you care? Being Jewish, I know that some of my co-religionists in the past were forcibly converted to protect us from hell. And Jews weren’t the only ones who suffered. It is also a snotty attitude, especially given that no one can demonstrate hell even exists. The criticism of believers mostly come from those who are witnessing but who cannot in the slightest defend their position. Or do you think they deserve special treatment? > [@](#): > > You’ve got that backwards, Atheists don’t own Science, but they certainly wield it as a club to berate Xtians. Re-read the end of the quote. You’re not concerned with the behaviors of our hypothetical Xtians, but with their beliefs. I gather Xtians like to post regarding their beliefs because they “believe” their Deity trumps Reality. That’s sort of the nature of a religion. It gets tedious when Atheists feel the need to constantly post, after a believer has made some completely irrational or impossible claim, “You’re wrong … that’s not scientific … you don’t have facts to back that up.” Well, no s\*\*\* sherlock … it’s a darned RELIGION, of course it’s not based on facts. Dur. I’d call that obsessive. I wonder if evolution accepting Catholics think that they are clubbed by evolution. I doubt it. Those who do feel clubbed are so committed to the Bible that they reject all evidence to the contrary and don’t even want to hear the evidence. Perhaps Fred Hoyle felt clubbed by Penzias and Wilson. Tough. Now two things about your second point. Some religions play a bait and switch. Ask them to demonstrate the correctness of their beliefs, and they will cry faith and say what you just said. But the next day they go out and push for laws based on their beliefs as if they were demonstrably true. Anti-SSM laws are a good example, since no one can show they harm anybody. They get a free pass on this, since no one in this culture wants to directly challenge religions. If you do you get called obsessive. Now there are some who do not do this. Deists like to believe in god but admit they have no evidence, and for the most part act in accordance to this realization. No Deist seems to think his god is concerned with my sex life. if all believers acted like that, we’d have a happier world. > [@](#): > > This is good. I agree it sucks when voters force the schools to teach Creationism or the Government to ban abortions. You’ve sort of got the motivation wrong here, though. While it sounds good, and may make for good press, for someone to argue when a fetus becomes a “Human”, I believe real Xtians are more concerned with when the “Soul” is attached to the embryo. If I’m not wrong, most serious Xtians think the “Soul” is imparted to the “Unborn Child” at conception … which is handy in that it pretty much cements their position and doesn’t allow for a lot of argument. I understand that. And I’d fight any effort to force anyone to get an abortion, or to do anything that violates their personal beliefs about their bodies. But the soul is a concept again without evidence backing it, so don’t expect me to support anyone wanting to ban abortion based on the supposed existence of souls in fetuses. Of fact I’d suspect that “human” in their arguments means “with soul” but that makes it a religious argument sure to fail in the courts. > [@](#): > > This is my favorite part. The person engaged in a “scientific debate” defends his position with faith. That happens often, does it? When you talk to a Xtian on any subject that relates to God, (and what doesn’t?) they will apply tenets of faith to their discussion at will. If they are the moderate Catholics you referred to earlier, they may be more judicious, but that doesn’t reflect their Xtianity, it illustrates their dissent from same. Laughing at someone for a predictable display of faith may not be obsessive, but this board is full of threads where Atheists dutifully rehash the same tired argument that fall on the deaf ears of Xtians, who engage in the same repetitive witnessing. Both sides are guilty of obsession. That there are a few on either side that avoid this pattern of behavior in no way proves my main point to be erroneous. I’ve been doing this a long time. In fact, most discussions of unresolved issues begin with faith. Anyone backing an undemonstrated hypothesis has a certain degree of faith in it, otherwise he would not put in the effort to show it. But religious discussions end with faith. Scientific ones do not, and the scientist knows, first he had better find evidence backing the hypothesis (and try to find evidence refuting it), and second, that if the evidence refuting it turns up he should change his opinion. The closest thing I’ve seen to evidence is the personal experience. Which isn’t very close to what is needed to demonstrate anything. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obsessive-atheists/666893/150 "2013-08-28T20:29:05Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > And this is just silly. A Catholic scientist who engages in the study of Evolution is not in any way dissenting from Christianity. There is nothing in Christianity that arguesw against Evolution (unless one’s Christianity is limited to Evangelical or Fundamentalist Christianity–which is not the whole of Christian belief, being a relatively new belief within Christian tradition). Just to show you don’t have to be a Catholic to agree with this, I went to school with a guy who is now a priest and is an astronomer at the Vatican. He is very smart, and by all measures an excellent scientist, and I somehow doubt he is dissenting from Christianity in any way. I suspect he does not agree with medieval cosmology, and I suspect this is not causing him problems with his boss. When I was at Bell Labs one of our managers was a nun. Creationism isn’t stupid because it is Christian (or Islamic,) it is stupid because it goes against known facts and evidence. Only those who read people out of Christianity by not being fundamentalists have a problem with this. ---
**Author:** ![hotflungwok](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/edb3f5/32.png) [@hotflungwok](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hotflungwok)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obsessive-atheists/666893/151 "2013-08-28T21:04:10Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > When I was at Bell Labs one of our managers was a nun. Seriously? I always thought of being a nun as kind of a full time job, like being a priest. Married to Jesus, etc. Did she live in a convent? Did she manage with a wooden ruler? ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 11:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obsessive-atheists/666893/152 "2013-08-28T23:53:06Z")
> [@hotflungwok](#): > > Seriously? I always thought of being a nun as kind of a full time job, like being a priest. Married to Jesus, etc. Did she live in a convent? Did she manage with a wooden ruler? She was in an um, division which encourage interacting with the world. I was in a different Lab from her, but my old boss once went out for dinner with her and her Mother Superior. Her Mother Superior cursed like a sailor. Clearly not all nuns hide away in convents. ---
**Author:** ![nearwildheaven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/90db22/32.png) [@nearwildheaven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nearwildheaven)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2013, 11:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obsessive-atheists/666893/153 "2013-08-28T23:58:13Z")
> [@hotflungwok](#): > > Seriously? I always thought of being a nun as kind of a full time job, like being a priest. Married to Jesus, etc. Did she live in a convent? Did she manage with a wooden ruler? Cloistered nuns are likely to be as you describe, but many nuns these days have “regular” jobs and do not wear a habit. I do personally know a nun who belongs to a Carmelite order, and works as a CNA at an upscale nursing home that’s run by the Carmelites. Room and board are part of her employment package; she lives in an on-site apartment with 3 other nuns. All the other employees live off-site. ---
**Author:** ![nearwildheaven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/90db22/32.png) [@nearwildheaven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nearwildheaven)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obsessive-atheists/666893/154 "2013-08-29T00:00:30Z")
Regarding this “science vs. religion” thing: For me, the more science I learned, the stronger my religious faith became! The “Eureka!” moment for me was, for those of you who have taken chemistry, the sp2 orbital. I don’t really remember what that is now, but to me, it was proof that this didn’t all just happen. My SIL has a mathematics degree, and for her, it was pi. Most mathematical constants are very ordered and have patterns, and the one which is used more than all the others put together is random, infinite, and nonrepeating. ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 1:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obsessive-atheists/666893/155 "2013-08-29T01:14:35Z")
> [@nearwildheaven](#): > > … Most mathematical constants are very ordered and have patterns … Interesting. I guess I must not be familiar with most mathematical constants. ---
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obsessive-atheists/666893/156 "2013-08-29T01:19:44Z")
So the upshot of this thread is, not all atheists are like **Der Trihs**. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Darth\_Panda](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ee7513/32.png) [@Darth\_Panda](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darth_Panda)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obsessive-atheists/666893/157 "2013-08-29T01:21:48Z")
> [@nearwildheaven](#): > > I’m curious. There is a subset of atheists who are always “preaching”, and my question is: Why are these people so obsessed with, and disdainful of, something they don’t even believe exists? > > 😕 Atheists believe that religion exists, and aren’t thrilled about it. I have no problem at all with god, given his nonexistence. eta: some don’t give a shit. ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 2:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obsessive-atheists/666893/158 "2013-08-29T02:13:44Z")
> [@nearwildheaven](#): > > Regarding this “science vs. religion” thing: For me, the more science I learned, the stronger my religious faith became! The “Eureka!” moment for me was, for those of you who have taken chemistry, the sp2 orbital. I don’t really remember what that is now, but to me, it was proof that this didn’t all just happen. > > My SIL has a mathematics degree, and for her, it was pi. Most mathematical constants are very ordered and have patterns, and the one which is used more than all the others put together is random, infinite, and nonrepeating. Which god did that science and math make you guys believe in? ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 3:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obsessive-atheists/666893/159 "2013-08-29T03:02:08Z")
> [@huck](#): > > I don’t do any preaching or “witnessing” in the sense of trying to get other people to become Christians. And yes, I know, to lots of folks that means I’m not really a Christian or as someone suggested above I’m afraid to lose an argument with some persuasive non-believer. Whatever. > > Anyway, the only witnessing I suppose I do is to do the best I can to follow Christ’s teachings. What about when Jesus taught you should preach the gospel to all the world? You just ignore that part, or excuse it away? ---
**Author:** ![nearwildheaven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/90db22/32.png) [@nearwildheaven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nearwildheaven)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 3:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obsessive-atheists/666893/160 "2013-08-29T03:37:08Z")
> [@Kable](#): > > What about when Jesus taught you should preach the gospel to all the world? You just ignore that part, or excuse it away? Huck said that s/he tries to live Christ’s teachings, and this is how s/he witnesses. It’s a perfectly legitimate way to do it. ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2013, 3:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obsessive-atheists/666893/161 "2013-08-29T03:51:39Z")
> [@nearwildheaven](#): > > Huck said that s/he tries to live Christ’s teachings, and this is how s/he witnesses. It’s a perfectly legitimate way to do it. Perfectly legitimate, I guess, if you ignore Jesus’ Great Commission. You didn’t answer what gods pi and the sp2 orbital made you believe in. Zeus, Thor? I can’t imagine it would be Yahweh as the Bible says that pi is a simple 3. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obsessive-atheists/666893.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obsessive-atheists/666893.md?page=9)