Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Hey I'm certainly fallible and can be wrong about things, but wrong 100% in every single sentence I write? It doesn't matter what I post. Your side will always argue with me. And the same for every other Christian who defends the faith? That's not an honest position.
So I think on this topic you ARE wrong. I am not going to point to your rightness when you have not yet posted something I think is right. If we were to meet over in the recipes forum and you opined that beef stew is yummy, I would agree. If you opined that you left your house through the front door not the second story window cuz gravity, I would say gee you're right.
Typical belittling tactic. The truth is atheists are one of the most close minded group out there.
The truth is that you're not telling the truth.
In a country like the United States where everyone is inundated with Christianity even before they start Kindergarten, it takes an open mind to actually consider, and then adopt, a different way of viewing the world, especially one that directly opposes a belief in the Christian deity. It is nigh impossible to be both closed-minded and an atheist in a place like this.
Now, I'm not saying that all Christians are closed-minded. Not at all. But it is very easy to be closed-minded while still becoming a Christian because, for a lot of children, Christianity is the only choice they think they have. They don't really have to think about other options in an honest way. By the time they are old enough to learn about other options and are capable of critical thinking, it's far too late.
Thus it takes an extremely open mind to begin questioning your own beliefs, to consider that perhaps those beliefs are wrong, and to adopt a contrary belief like atheism which flies in the face of everything you've been taught.
I know it is in your best interest to perceive atheists as closed-minded, and everyone is closed-minded about something-or-another, but to call them "one of the most closed minded [not 'close' minded as distance has nothing to do with this topic] group out there" is unmitigated falsehood.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
Atheists continue to prove to me daily that they are simply incapable of every admitting that they can be wrong about ANYTHING!
And when was the last time a fundamentalist ever even considered that their beliefs might be wrong, much less admitted it to anyone?
Yet you expect atheists to second-guess their own beliefs and admit to being wrong even when they're not -- and then you get angry when they stick to their guns.
What gives you the right to demand from atheists that which you won't even do yourself?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
Atheists think they are the supreme experts of every single field of knowledge in the universe and everyone else is just intellectually inferior.
First of all, I don't recall discussing every single field of knowledge in the universe. I can't remember the last time I had a debate with a fundamentalist about 18th Century cabinet-making in colonial Virginia or the consistency of bat guano dropped by the Peruvian silver-throated fruit bat. Perhaps if we discussed those kinds of topics, myself and many other atheists would be willing to admit our ignorance.
Secondly, many of the subjects that frequently come up in religious debates are subjects many atheists make doubly certain they understand: evolution, cosmology, the law and the Constitution, the Bible, religion in general and, perhaps most importantly, logic and critical thinking. No one here is going to pretend to be stupid or ignorant just to give their opponents the false feeling that they're right even when they're not. You're certainly not going to do that. Why should we?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
"I, the POTUS, have an issued an executive order eliminating income tax."
Why should that ever happen? The country needs money the same as any person does.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
"You know what, that Christian person actually made a good point!"
Christians make good points all the time, Jeff. But what YOU want is for we atheists to start making concessions about our own beliefs. You want for US to back down and concede arguments to the fundamentalists even when it isn't deserved. Most of what you say on this forum has to do with Christians being persecuted, complaining about personal attacks, how offended you are that an atheist would dare challenge the Christian faith, and posts like this one where you all but demand that we atheists falsely admit that we're wrong.
I'm not going to admit that there is Christian persecution when there isn't any. I'm not going to involve myself at all in the discussions about personal attacks since your skin is thicker than you let on else you would have left the forum months ago, I don't really care if you're offended by a billboard considering there are plenty of reasons for atheists to be offended by Christian billboards, and I'm certainly not going to concede a religious argument if I believe that my argument is both sound and unchallenged (and many of my points go unchallenged and unanswered).
By and large, the liberal Christians are the ones who make the most good points, but I've even agreed with Vizio a time or two, and if I agree with something even a fundamentalist says, I'll say so. As you said, no one is wrong 100% of the time on every subject.
But I think you're expecting too much from atheists in these debates; complaining that we always think we're right is rather ridiculous. Do you think we're going to write a post that we think is wrong?
I never type a single letter on this forum that I can't back with logic, examples, quite often historical and statistical facts, and informed opinions. If you see a post with my name next to it, it means that I believe it and stand behind it.
I am an atheists, I do not believe that there is a god. How in the world can an fundamentalists want me to claim that I might be wrong in what I believe or not believe in? I could be wrong about there not being a god but I am not wrong in knowing what my current state of mind is on the subject.
I strongly believe that you can be a good person if you do not believe in a god the same as you can be a good person and believe in a God or goddess. I think for one group to make the claim that their worldview is the correct one and therefore they can say and do whatever they want to support that worldview but the other group's worldview is incorrect and therefore they cannot say or do anything to support their worldview because it would be against the first group's worldview is extremely self centred and selfish.
If one type of Christians believe that they can put out into the public messages that tell atheiest that they are wrong, they are evil and that they will burn in hell or that they only because they do not accept this type of Christian's belief that they are enemies of the country and are quilty of treaon and should be freely allowed to do so without atheists even being allowed to feel annoyed by it but that if the atheists put up a message to fellow atheists that it is OK not to go to church it is an attack on all Christians, should anyone take that group of Christians serious? No, absolutely not as it is extremely selfish to think you can verbally attack with inpunity but no one else should have any say.
As far as always being against Christians I remember putting out favourable reponses to Euesibus, who I hardly can agree with any of his posts as he posted something I thought was thoughful and he responded with a thumbs up. I have given comments to some on the Christianity forum such as Janelle for a good post. I think I might of even liked a post by Jeff once. On the other hand OP seems to search each response to his posts to look for something he can be offended by. I have seen more than once his response to a post that had both positive and negative comments on what he posted and only respond to the negative ones and totally ignored the postiive ones. But if he thinks people like me are traitors and deserve to be treated like such, are his feelings important to me? Absolutely not, anyone who defends that one billboard or ignoress the Evolution is a Fairty Tale as also being against so many Christians is not one whose feelings I am concerned about.
If one wishes to claim that my worldview should have limited rights to express themselves, that gays can be discriminated against by business and government and that I cannot be a good person because I do not believe in their God let alone that the Bible is a literal history of the earth do not expect me to agree with them.
I remember now , Jeff spoke of his music therapy and I complemented him on his efforts and told him about my wife and I taking our dogs to the hospital on a pet theraphy program. Doing that is good, basing atheists and gays as much as you can, not good.
In a country like the United States where everyone is inundated with Christianity even before they start Kindergarten, it takes an open mind to actually consider, and then adopt, a different way of viewing the world, especially one that directly opposes a belief in the Christian deity. It is nigh impossible to be both closed-minded and an atheist in a place like this.
Now, I'm not saying that all Christians are closed-minded. Not at all. But it is very easy to be closed-minded while still becoming a Christian because, for a lot of children, Christianity is the only choice they think they have. They don't really have to think about other options in an honest way. By the time they are old enough to learn about other options and are capable of critical thinking, it's far too late.
Thus it takes an extremely open mind to begin questioning your own beliefs, to consider that perhaps those beliefs are wrong, and to adopt a contrary belief like atheism which flies in the face of everything you've been taught.
An extremely open mind would also keep open the possibility that their new position of atheism could be wrong too. It's one thing to have doubts about a faith that you were raised in. It's another thing to proclaim as fact that God is a fairy tale or the Bible is just a book of myths. A person with an open mind would be out there seeking the truth, not spending their time in fruitless fighting with Christians. But the door is shut so tightly that anything a Christian brings to the table is immediately dismissed. A person with an open mind would be able to have a discussion without it turning into ugly personal attacks.
Here's an interesting study that examines different classes of atheists. I'm pretty sure that the vast majority I encounter here fall into the anti-theist group.
When you come into the discussion with this kind of attitude then the only reason is your side gets even more angry and defensive when the theist refuses to back down and accept your "education".
And when was the last time a fundamentalist ever even considered that their beliefs might be wrong, much less admitted it to anyone?
Yet you expect atheists to second-guess their own beliefs and admit to being wrong even when they're not -- and then you get angry when they stick to their guns.
What gives you the right to demand from atheists that which you won't even do yourself?
Well you are essentially asking me to be open minded to the equivalent of accepting the possibility that my parents might murder me in my sleep. It's possible in the realm of possibilities but highly unlikely. Likewise, it's highly unlikely that everything I've experienced in spiritually is just a figment of my imagination. How could my imagination tell other believers my exact problems and to pray for me? That's just one example of my experiences. Are we going to try to scientifically prove that mental thoughts can be transferred between people now?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirina
First of all, I don't recall discussing every single field of knowledge in the universe. I can't remember the last time I had a debate with a fundamentalist about 18th Century cabinet-making in colonial Virginia or the consistency of bat guano dropped by the Peruvian silver-throated fruit bat. Perhaps if we discussed those kinds of topics, myself and many other atheists would be willing to admit our ignorance.
I'll believe it when I see it. I haven't. Not once.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirina
Secondly, many of the subjects that frequently come up in religious debates are subjects many atheists make doubly certain they understand: evolution, cosmology, the law and the Constitution, the Bible, religion in general and, perhaps most importantly, logic and critical thinking. No one here is going to pretend to be stupid or ignorant just to give their opponents the false feeling that they're right even when they're not. You're certainly not going to do that. Why should we?
I just find it a little too convenient that every atheist online has a PHD level education in science, but that's the air that is given off here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirina
Christians make good points all the time, Jeff. But what YOU want is for we atheists to start making concessions about our own beliefs. You want for US to back down and concede arguments to the fundamentalists even when it isn't deserved. Most of what you say on this forum has to do with Christians being persecuted, complaining about personal attacks, how offended you are that an atheist would dare challenge the Christian faith, and posts like this one where you all but demand that we atheists falsely admit that we're wrong.
If you can't admit to being wrong then why should a Christian bother responding in defense? Your side can not even admit that mockery and being rude is wrong or that they have done it even when I clearly point out specific examples like last week when I was called a hypocritical fool.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirina
I'm not going to admit that there is Christian persecution when there isn't any. I'm not going to involve myself at all in the discussions about personal attacks since your skin is thicker than you let on else you would have left the forum months ago, I don't really care if you're offended by a billboard considering there are plenty of reasons for atheists to be offended by Christian billboards, and I'm certainly not going to concede a religious argument if I believe that my argument is both sound and unchallenged (and many of my points go unchallenged and unanswered).
By and large, the liberal Christians are the ones who make the most good points, but I've even agreed with Vizio a time or two, and if I agree with something even a fundamentalist says, I'll say so. As you said, no one is wrong 100% of the time on every subject.
Well of course you will tend to agree with the liberal Christians since their arguments are almost identical to atheists when it comes to things like attacking the Bible. Like I said, I'll believe it when I see it. I have not ever once seen an atheist yield or give an ounce of credit to the Christian opposition. And here is one clear telling point that you can't deny. You go look at every single one of these type of threads and almost 100% time, the atheist must always have to get the last word or post. I am the one who finally yields and walks away. That speaks of a desire to always try to look like you won the argument.
An extremely open mind would also keep open the possibility that their new position of atheism could be wrong too. It's one thing to have doubts about a faith that you were raised in. It's another thing to proclaim as fact that God is a fairy tale or the Bible is just a book of myths. A person with an open mind would be out there seeking the truth, not spending their time in fruitless fighting with Christians. But the door is shut so tightly that anything a Christian brings to the table is immediately dismissed. A person with an open mind would be able to have a discussion without it turning into ugly personal attacks.
Here's an interesting study that examines different classes of atheists. I'm pretty sure that the vast majority I encounter here fall into the anti-theist group.
When you come into the discussion with this kind of attitude then the only reason is your side gets even more angry and defensive when the theist refuses to back down and accept your "education".
Well you are essentially asking me to be open minded to the equivalent of accepting the possibility that my parents might murder me in my sleep. It's possible in the realm of possibilities but highly unlikely. Likewise, it's highly unlikely that everything I've experienced in spiritually is just a figment of my imagination. How could my imagination tell other believers my exact problems and to pray for me? That's just one example of my experiences. Are we going to try to scientifically prove that mental thoughts can be transferred between people now?
I'll believe it when I see it. I haven't. Not once.
I just find it a little too convenient that every atheist online has a PHD level education in science, but that's the air that is given off here.
If you can't admit to being wrong then why should a Christian bother responding in defense? Your side can not even admit that mockery and being rude is wrong or that they have done it even when I clearly point out specific examples like last week when I was called a hypocritical fool.
Well of course you will tend to agree with the liberal Christians since their arguments are almost identical to atheists when it comes to things like attacking the Bible. Like I said, I'll believe it when I see it. I have not ever once seen an atheist yield or give an ounce of credit to the Christian opposition. And here is one clear telling point that you can't deny. You go look at every single one of these type of threads and almost 100% time, the atheist must always have to get the last word or post. I am the one who finally yields and walks away. That speaks of a desire to always try to look like you won the argument.
I will address the bolded.
Do you not see the hypocrisy in everything you said in the bolded above? You keep saying that atheists are closed minded because they don't buy into YOUR religion, yet in the very same post you admit that you are closed minded to anything NOT your religion. The hypocrisy is mind boggling.
I mean, seriously Jeff, how can you not see it? Are you that blinded?
An atheist (according to you) is closed minded if they simply don't buy into your religion. Christians however, are not closed minded when they ignore all things that don't confirm their beliefs. I mean, wow, Jeff, even my 3 year old could see the hypocrisy dripping from this post.
Yes and No. I spent the first 30+ years of my life as an atheist, first covert then overt. It was impossible for me to be left alone, especially during that time, so my only real concern was with not having to conform to religious proscriptions. During my rebel teenage years, I took up martial arts and meditation essentially trying to find Nirvana where all this crap would not bother me. I was serially disappointed in every single one of the various meditation practices and their religious-like mumbo jumbo which struck me as patently false. I discovered biofeedback and improved my practice until that fateful day when I encountered another consciousness in deep meditation.
I can assure you that this consciousness was NOT remotely like my own (conscious or unconscious) and the experience was transforming. Within this state, I achieved a "knowing" that cannot verbally be described and is unlike any other form of "knowing" because it was just an inner certainty without preamble, subject or predicate. I "knew" I had encountered God, but God wasn't separate from me and I wasn't absorbed into God as much of my Buddhist meditation nonsense led me to expect. God was a Oneness, but a multitude. I was at once at sea and yet completely at home. All my moorings to reality were removed.
I left atheism instantly but had ZERO preconceptions to anchor to. I began my odyssey with the single fact of the reality of God as the only certain thing to work with. The next 40+ years I approached what we know about reality as the only firm knowledge about God. I also investigated as much of the "spiritual fossil record" of speculations about God as I could trying to confirm ANY of it with what science could explain. So in that respect, my critics here are accurate. It was a confirmation bias that led me to find a plausible explanation. But since I "knew" that God IS, I was left with no other choice.
I point this out here because what I see as the primary obstacle to open-mindedness is the failure to start from a blank slate God and work from that perspective. Even I failed this because I "Knew" God exists and I "knew" God's characteristics are unconditional love and acceptance evoking joy. Given this confirmation bias, I did have an otherwise open-minded view devoid of religious conditioning. I was led to Christ only by the descriptions of Him that matched the consciousness that I encountered. Once armed with the characteristics, It was easy to filter out the dross from the "spiritual fossil record," something fundies like jeff seem unable to do. They are mired in the absurd premise of a 100% inerrant and infallible word of God vested into the Bible, a purely human creation.
Be honest atheists, have you ever abandoned all the BS attributes attributed to God and simply looked at reality without any preconceptions of what God is or should or must do or be??? If not, you are NOT remotely open-minded.
It's hard to even think of responding to the accusation that the "New" kinds of atheism is,...whatever jeff said, when it is nonsense to talk of some "New" kind of atheism other than it not being afraid to come out and talk and argue our case and look to a future where humanism and not Theism is the worldview.
To talk about some new position that is less open -minded that the old one is just wrong. If anything it more open to accommodation than the old kind, becasue debate has made us learn things: that religion may have value, that people who believe are not less intelligent. They simply prefer to place Faith ahead of evidence. And especially the accommodation over agnostics, deists and irreligious theists all being on the same side. Not to mention that even some Liberal christians are beginning to realize whose side they should really be on.
And atheists have come to realize that there is room for god belief of the unprovable kind, and there is a case for first cause, though Kalam doesn't in fact prove a thing. No, jeff. your view that the New atheists have a less open -minded position than the old is utterly wrong and reflects your own prejudices, based on a dislike of a group who are vocal, confident, well based in apologetics (which is why you think we think we know everything - nope, we have just seen all the arguments a dozen times before - and their refutation) and doing rather well in progressing our Agenda - to stop people like you governing people like us.
I feel so silly now, firstly finding out my Masters degree is worthless as most of what I learnt must be false as it disagrees with Jeff's view. Secondly atheists are indeed anti America and quilty of treason because they do not agree with Jeff and finally there must be a god because Jeff says so and he also claims he cannot possibly be wrong g about that. On the bright side the billions of people who have differing religious views (the majority of humans on this planet) must also be wrong.
In this thread I have stated that I do not believe there is a God, as have others on this or other threads on this forum. This is being closed minded, even if you accept that God is possible but bot probable is being closed minded. In order to be open minded one must accept that there is a God with NO possibility of there not being one. I needed to learn to speak orwellian.
Jeff, you are wrong about both evolution and the offensiveness of all those billboards. About your God, I do not agree with you about it existing. I am allowed to have that opinion without it being an attack on either you or your religion. Your are not open ,index when it comes to what we think or post so perhaps you should not lecture on open minded thinking when you clearly state that you cannot be open minded about your belief.
Be honest atheists, have you ever abandoned all the BS attributes attributed to God and simply looked at reality without any preconceptions of what God is or should or must do or be??? If not, you are NOT remotely open-minded.
(Cut purely to save space - an interesting read old pal) and because this is the Nub.
From what I can tell - yes. Many can. And those who can will pass on the idea to those who don't. And those who are not atheists can point out the idea and view to the atheists of both kinds. Open -minded is not limited to what we can think of and look at for ourselves, but is the capacity to give a fair and rational assessment of the claims made for various god concepts.
I needn't go into it further but to say that possible gods and those percivied by faith are irrelevant.
Those based on feelings, dreams and emotions are possible but not believably so,.
The hands on, personal and historically -attested gods are evaluated on the evidence. It fails to convince.
So here we are being told after all this that we are closed minded. All the closed minds we see are the ones convinced on Faith that they cannot possibly be wrong or there cannot possibly be any other explanation. Becasue without that closed mind, Faith cannot survive.
It is no coincidence that Certain Apologists accuse evolution of being a Faith, because they are giving away what a bad reason to believe that is.
Be honest atheists, have you ever abandoned all the BS attributes attributed to God and simply looked at reality without any preconceptions of what God is or should or must do or be??? If not, you are NOT remotely open-minded.
(Cut purely to save space - an interesting read old pa) and because this is the Nub.
from what i can tell - yes. Many can. And those who can will pass on the idea to those who don't. And those who are not atheists can point out the idea and view to the atheists of both kinds. Open -minded is not limited to what we can think of and look at for ourselves, but is the capacity to give a fair and rational assessment of the claims made for various god concepts.
I needn't go into it further but to say that possible gods and those percieved by faith are irrelevant.
Those based on feelings, dreams and emotions are possible but not believably so,.
The hands on, personal and historically -attested gods are evaluated on the evidence. It fails to convince.
so here we are being told after all this that we are closed minded. All the closed minds we see are the ones convinced on Faith that they cannot possibly be wrong or there cannot possibly be any other explanation. Because without that closed mind, Faith cannot survive.
It is no coincidence that Certain Apologists accuse evolution of being a Faith, because they are giving away what a bad reason to believe that is.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Do Atheists Really Just Want to Be Left Alone?
It's hard to even think of responding to the accusation that the "New" kinds of atheism is,...whatever jeff said, when it is nonsense to talk of some "New" kind of atheism other than it not being afraid to come out and talk and argue our case and look to a future where humanism and not Theism is the worldview. 
