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.
We all have doubts and we all have faith - faith that God exists or faith that God does not exist.
No faith required to NOT believe in fairy tales.
Quote:
Atheists are not immune to dogmatism. Those who choose not to be persuaded will never be persuaded.
I guess you do not read the A&A forum? Most of us are EX-THEISTS
Now explain to us why or how we chose NOT to be persuaded? Most of us are deconverts and have drunk your whine and sung from your songsheet, hell some of us know your buybull better than most theists.
It is the nature of man to turn priviledge into license.
Clever religious people who want to do this will find any number of scriptures to back them up. That is the real meaning of taking the Lords name in vain not swearing, like we were alll told as children.
I think anyone who is an adult has seen or experienced this in their lifetime.
In your own life, you have to decide what is right and wrong, regardless of your religious beliefs or lack of beliefs and you should not change that for your own convenience or personal enjoyment. You should possess enough honor to be dedicated to your convictions that you are willing to die for them if you are ever called to do so.
One person's opinion.
You mix freedom to act with freedom from consequence. Gravity exists . . . nothing we can do about it here on earth. It is one of God's "laws" . . . there are many. You are free to violate the law of gravity and walk off the roof of a thirty story building . . . but not free to escape the consequences. There are myriad views about the "laws" that have not been scientifically established and there are similar views about the consequences associated with violations of them. NONE of that removes your free will . . . only what you are willing to risk in violating them (since there is no scientific proof of their existence.)
Before I get too involved, my post was in reply to another conversation I was having with alanMolstad which started with this
Quote:
Originally Posted by alanMolstad
it's not love if you are forced...
the problem was that I neglected to tie this in and make it clear. So it's my bad on that one anyhow...
What I'm saying is that there really isn't a choice. If someone offers you the choice between giving them all your money or having your head kicked in it isn't really a choice it's a threat. It essentially forces you to conform to what they want.
I guess you do not read the A&A forum? Most of us are EX-THEISTS
Now explain to us why or how we chose NOT to be persuaded? Most of us are deconverts and have drunk your whine and sung from your songsheet, hell some of us know your buybull better than most theists.
The tone of your post speaks for itself and illustrates that "EX-THEISTS" are obviously not immune to dogmatism either.
There is no great mystery to choosing not to be persuaded. One either chooses to believe God exists or chooses to believe God does not exist.
I'm open to persuasion - if you can point out the "logic" of atheism I stand ready to honestly consider your case for God's nonexistence.
Theists. plural of theist \-ist\ noun or adjective
Websters
Main Entry: the·ism Pronunciation: \ˈthē-ˌi-zəm\ Function: noun Date: 1678 : belief in the existence of a god or gods ; specifically: belief in the existence of one God viewed as the creative source of the human race and the world who transcends yet is immanent in the world
— the·ist \-ist\ noun or adjective
— the·is·tic \thē-ˈis-tik\ also the·is·ti·cal \-ti-kəl\ adjective
— the·is·ti·cal·ly \-ti-k(ə-)lē\ adverb
The tone of your post speaks for itself and illustrates that "EX-THEISTS" are obviously not immune to dogmatism either.
There is no great mystery to choosing not to be persuaded. One either chooses to believe God exists or chooses to believe God does not exist.
Wrong. Youare so wrong. Unforgivably wrong, because i can't remember how many times this has been said.
One does not choose to believe or not to believe. One looks at the reasons, considers the counter - reasons and decides whether to believe or not. That's to over simplify. There's a lot of emotional baggage too. Your fallacy is to pretend that there is no data on which to base a decision and one makes a 'faith' choice one way or the other. Atheists who have deconverted make the choice to deconvert because they see that the reasons for which they first came to believe do not come anywhere near being good enough.
[quoteI'm open to persuasion - if you can point out the "logic" of atheism I stand ready to honestly consider your case for God's nonexistence.[/quote]
I do hope you mean that and are not just saying it to look reasonable. Let's start with the above. Do you accept that some atheists at least (unthinking ones maybe not) and ex-theists (generally) have looked at the arguments for belief in one or other of the gods and have decided that they cannot believe any more on the basis of that evidence?
I do hope you mean that and are not just saying it to look reasonable.
Interesting that you would question my sincerity. Over and over I have attempted to engage atheists/agnostics in this forum in reasonable and rational debate - they all begin with bluster but soon fizzle out when they are convinced no one is paying attention to the thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AREQUIPA
Let's start with the above. Do you accept that some atheists at least (unthinking ones maybe not) and ex-theists (generally) have looked at the arguments for belief in one or other of the gods and have decided that they cannot believe any more on the basis of that evidence?
Yes. However, true thinkers (both theists and atheists) are in short supply. I'm irritated by dogma - it may surprise to know that I am particularly irritated by Christian dogma. My view is that faith must be well grounded in logic, reason and rationality.
The tone of your post speaks for itself and illustrates that "EX-THEISTS" are obviously not immune to dogmatism either.
Is this the tenth gift of the holy spirit, to discern tone in a forum post?
Quote:
There is no great mystery to choosing not to be persuaded. One either chooses to believe God exists or chooses to believe God does not exist.
This has been addressed but in a way you are right apart from the fact that we have looked at the evidence offered and decided that the likelihood of god existing is remote to null.
Quote:
I'm open to persuasion - if you can point out the "logic" of atheism I stand ready to honestly consider your case for God's nonexistence.
How can I prove the non existence of something you claim exists? I would not know if you suffer from illusions of grandeur or not or whatever else persuades you to "believe" as you do. Thus the burden of proof is with you the claimant.
See atheists do not have a "holy" book that says "god does not exist" we can defer to. It is amazing however that an omni (everything) god knows all yet cannot do a simple show and tell and say "here I am" - that goes for all gods BTW.
Relationships with invisible friends is something most children outgrow. In my 30 years as a theist, I never met an angel, never met the devil, never met a demon and most of all, never saw god or Jesus once.
There used to be 2 videos up on Youtube showing how an atheist convinced non believers in god using the same tactics that the evangelicals use, he managed to convert 50% of them and after the sessions deconverted them again and showed them they had been duped by the power of suggestion. There was falling over, crying the whole shedangle and he did not once use scriptures, just mass hypnotism/power of suggestion.
In that regard, you are correct. You do choose to believe in god. Non belief is the default setting.
No, there isn't because I explained after that just where and why you were wrong, and of course, you didn't post that.
Quote:
Interesting that you would question my sincerity. Over and over I have attempted to engage atheists/agnostics in this forum in reasonable and rational debate - they all begin with bluster but soon fizzle out when they are convinced no one is paying attention to the thread.
And over and over I have egaged with theists who talked blithely of being open - minded but turned out not to be, in the end.
Quote:
Yes. However, true thinkers (both theists and atheists) are in short supply. I'm irritated by dogma - it may surprise to know that I am particularly irritated by Christian dogma. My view is that faith must be well grounded in logic, reason and rationality.
I fully agree. And it's a start that you agree my point above.:
"Let's start with the above. Do you accept that some atheists at least (unthinking ones maybe not) and ex-theists (generally) have looked at the arguments for belief in one or other of the gods and have decided that they cannot believe any more on the basis of that evidence?"
If so, you have agreed that Ex - theism is not dogmatic as opposed to what you said here:
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigetmax24
The tone of your post speaks for itself and illustrates that "EX-THEISTS" are obviously not immune to dogmatism either.
There is no great mystery to choosing not to be persuaded. One either chooses to believe God exists or chooses to believe God does not exist.
and, since I have made my point about you being wrongsowrong, I think you should withdraw your sneer about me displaying dogmatism. I justify my points.
let's move on..
Now I agree that people being people and because logic classes are not in the curriculum, atheists as well as theists can be illogical and dogmatic. Believe me, I know how dogmatic and illogical atheists can be. But atheism, itself, is a logical, evidence - based stance and (where they have thought about it) atheists have a rational basis and ex - theists are most likely to have thought about it.
Can we agree, then, that atheism and ex - theists and thinking atheists at least are likely to be that way because of logic, reason and rationality rather than dogma? Or do you want to discuss it?
You said
Quote:
My view is that faith must be well grounded in logic, reason and rationality
I agree and I would suggest a parallel talk about whether theism is baed on reason, logic and evidence and whether atheism/ex-theism is based on reason logic and evidence?
I've posted on the subject elsewhere so some posters at least know that I have made the case already, but I'm willing to do it here, again. The whole point of posting on threads like this is to show that theism isn't reasonable and atheism is.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 07-05-2009 at 08:08 AM..
Reason: to paste in earlier posts
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.
anyhow...
