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.
Thank you. I find it frustrating that some people will never end their false beliefs. Am not talking about religion or the belief in a God. I have zero problems with people believing and have friends and relatives who are very devout. It's those whose either religion or personal angry attacks non Christians, liberal Christians, science, atheism, LBGT, and even fairness and tolerance with very dishonest, distain and outright hatred beyond what I can almost imagine.
To the Jeffs, OzzyRules and others who I refer to above, we are not after your religion so calm down. I would like to see you use your religion as a tool for a better life rather than as a weapon to lessen the quality of life of another. I just don't like being told that because I am not a believer I cannot have the feelings that other humans feel, or morality or a meaning to my life. I realize that you make these claims in order to be able to view me as a lesser person. Dehumanizing worked in the American slave trade, on immigrants, on Jews resulting in the Final solution or what happened in Rwanda. And I don't want your religion ruling my life.
What I most want from this forum is an honest discussion where I can learn from you and you can learn from me. That cannot happen at all with religious people who insist on using false definitions of atheism and setting up strawman to fight instead of answering questions or even asking questions in order to increase understanding between us. There are many religious posters who I have enjoyed discussions with and would be more than willing to sit down for an afternoon over tea or a beer and chat. I think that there are some for which it would be impossible due to what appears to be a mixture of anger, fear and hate.
When I say something that you do not think is true, rather than attacking or insulting please inform me of how you think I am incorrect and back it up. I actually try to do this but either I am not proficient in doing this, the recreceipant are not willing to take it so or a combination of such. I do not hate your God or your religion. I hate the appearance you have is that anyone who does not believe as you do is immoral and unworthy humans who must be attacked at every opportunity.
Fine. But don't expect to get the best from people like Jeff or myself if we are the only remaining Christians posting in this thread anymore, and we are constantly outnumbered and on the defensive.
Because atheism is so un-scientific, the only conclusion that most mature thinking people can make is that an atheist is someone who hates God or the idea of God.
The best comparison would be Icharus who flew too high. Or perhaps the arrogant giraffe who thinks he understands the complexities of the universe.
Still getting it all wrong, not understanding and being illogical.
The illogic is in the analogy. A very, very, common one though presented in many, many different scenarios.
"Atheists only look at the very limited world and ignore what is outside of their comprehension (1)'. This is the informal logical fallacy called 'appeal to unknowns'.
'But what is outside our comprehension is unknown. Therefore the logic says that you do not make claims about what is unknown. God -believers use this 'unknown' to support their god -claims. Atheists say 'Not Known'. Atheism takes the logical position (2) .
This of course is why atheism, though very simple, looks complicated to you because you constantly try on many and various involved arguments intended to invalidate the rationale of atheism. That is why (in refuting them) it looks complicated to you.
(1) scientists/science can be dismissed using the same argument - when their findings do not support a religious claim.
(2) "Science doesn't know everything" (also "Science can't explain X[2]") is an argument that asserts that, because of science's lack of knowledge about something, something else must be true. The implication is that, because science does not have an answer (or a sufficiently good answer) already, any claim can take its place, even though it has no supporting evidence. The argument is closely linked to the Science was wrong before and God of the gaps arguments.
The argument is overused by woomongers and theists alike, and is used to disparage the application of scientific methods to problems under discussion or analysis.
The argument is an informal fallacy and a prime example of an argument from ignorance.(RationalWiki)
P.s Ignorance in this context means 'not knowing', not being stupid.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OzzyRules
Fine. But don't expect to get the best from people like Jeff or myself if we are the only remaining Christians posting in this thread anymore, and we are constantly outnumbered and on the defensive.
I am sorry about that. I do feel sorry for you - and Jeff - because you are trapped. You cannot engage in an honest, rational and open -minded discussion, because that would show so many of your cherished beliefs to be untenable. For you to alter your position on that is unthinkable for you, so you have to argue, using whatever you can, and it so happens that what you have is pretty much wrong in one way or another.
If you followed verified evidence and sound logic along with us, we'd all do fine, but you would have to modify your mindset, and that is near impossible for you. I have said before that I am thankful that I don't have to think like that.
You could of course do what the other believers do, and stick with Faith and decline to debate with us. Which is why we outnumber you two warriors for the Word.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 04-07-2019 at 12:04 PM..
I am sorry about that. I do feel sorry for you -and Jeff, because you are trapped. You cannot engage in an honest, rational and open -minded discussion, because that would show so many of your cherished beliefs to be untenable. For you to alter your position on that is unthinkable for you, so you have to argue, using whatever you can, and it so happens that what you have is pretty much wrong in one way or another.
If you followed verified evidence and sound logic along with us, we'd all do fine, but you would have to modify your mindset, and that is hear impossible for you.
You could of course do what the other believers do, and stick with Faith and decline to debate with us. Which is why we outnumber you two warriors for the Word.
Do mean like when you base every conclusion on how theist will use the information and make atheism harder to sell? you know, all science has to be filtered through your sect's of atheism's dogma, based on how you see the world?
At least they admit to faith statements. You prentend yours is logical and understanding. well, so long as it lines up with you that is.
Fine. But don't expect to get the best from people like Jeff or myself if we are the only remaining Christians posting in this thread anymore, and we are constantly outnumbered and on the defensive.
Ozzy, if you and Jeff didn't misrepresent over and over again of who atheists are and what they do not believe, or misrepresent what science actually is, you would not have to be on the defensive.
Fine. But don't expect to get the best from people like Jeff or myself if we are the only remaining Christians posting in this thread anymore, and we are constantly outnumbered and on the defensive.
I would never post some thing that I would not be willing to defend. There was zero reason for you to defend the physicist statement that included a totally bias and incorrect definition of the meaning of atheism and which certainly does not reflect the atheism of any of us on this forum.
There are comments made by atheists here that I would not try to defend and there are two posters who I think consider themselves as atheists who I have on my ignore list as they are neither nicer informitive. I certainly didn't expect you to defend the post and the link made by Jeff.
One of the reasons that you and Jeff are on the defensive is you keep posting offensive assertiins. Are atheists dimwitted? Do atheists hate God? Making those claims invites rebuttals.
There is no known way to prove or disprove a G9d. For the Templeton Foundation to honour a scientist who claims that atheists believe that the non existence of God has been proven is extremely dishonest and everyone who knows either what atheists believe or don't believe or knows how science operates should find that article both deceptive and dishonest.
This thread is about the decline of religion in the USA. 8t is not about changing the definition of the word atheism in order to mock or attack it. Maybe other relogious people on this forum are not posting because they understand that it is happening and do not wish to argue against statistics. 8f the thread had started off by religious people discussing what they can do to reverse the trend maybe no atheists would post but right away it started as a denial by some and a welcoming by others.
There are certain religious posters who you might think get attacked all the time and others never do. That might be because of the nature of their posts.some posters on either side love heated discissions. Judging from your posting record I think you fall on that side although n9t as much as some others. I think Jeff would prefer to be able to state whatever he wants with no one debating him and that all of his assertions are accepted without challenge.
"I think Jeff would prefer to be able to state whatever he wants with no one debating him and that all of his assertions are accepted without challenge."
Ah The Good Old Days when Religion could say whatever it liked and nobody would dare to challenge it. No wonder their most fervent prayer is 'Father, if it be thy will, let these bloody atheists pass away from me, shut up and go away."
So predictable. When it is explained to you why you and your link are wrong, you misrepresent.
Then it explain it. Enough with the bold talk. You just can't stand that a highly educated man who won an award exposes the illogical nature of atheism. So all you can do is talk trash about the award or say, well he is just one man. Why on earth should I value your opinion over his? Atheists are too swollen with pride to admit they are wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes
There is no "when all else fails". The Templeton Foundation only ever pays money to people who write articles supporting religion. That is bias. We have every reason to point out the source is not credible, especially when the scientist gets atheism wrong. But why bother responding to this criticism when you can just switch on the automatic BS generator.
The Templeton Foundation funds the Pew Research Center and yet your ilk has absolutely NO problem using Pew research studies whenever it is negative towards us. Just shows how atheists are just a bunch of flaming hypocrites. You'll accept ANYTHING without question if it suits an anti-Christian argument. But when it doesn't, oh suddenly the source is not credible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes
Except he was talking about atheism. And he got that wrong. Houses on sand, remember? It IS in your instruction manual.
Yet you don't even bother to explain what he got wrong. Typical hollow bold talk.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes
Science works. Theology does not. We have the winning hand here. You are not even in the card game.
Science can't give people hope and meaning to life. Science did not heal my friend from late stage thyroid cancer. Science can not defeat death. Your scientific fact is only as good as until another new discovery invalidates the old.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes
And no, science is not our god.
Sure it is. You have put all your faith into fallible man.
Thank you. I find it frustrating that some people will never end their false beliefs. Am not talking about religion or the belief in a God. I have zero problems with people believing and have friends and relatives who are very devout. It's those whose either religion or personal angry attacks non Christians, liberal Christians, science, atheism, LBGT, and even fairness and tolerance with very dishonest, distain and outright hatred beyond what I can almost imagine.
The attacks on others are an example of Christian religion sans Jesus.
Quote:
Originally Posted by badlander
To the Jeffs, OzzyRules and others who I refer to above, we are not after your religion so calm down. I would like to see you use your religion as a tool for a better life rather than as a weapon to lessen the quality of life of another. I just don't like being told that because I am not a believer I cannot have the feelings that other humans feel, or morality or a meaning to my life. I realize that you make these claims in order to be able to view me as a lesser person. Dehumanizing worked in the American slave trade, on immigrants, on Jews resulting in the Final solution or what happened in Rwanda. And I don't want your religion ruling my life.
The first bolded is spoken like a Jesus follower!
The second bolded is what happens when someone DOES follow Jesus!
Quote:
Originally Posted by badlander
What I most want from this forum is an honest discussion where I can learn from you and you can learn from me. That cannot happen at all with religious people who insist on using false definitions of atheism and setting up strawman to fight instead of answering questions or even asking questions in order to increase understanding between us. There are many religious posters who I have enjoyed discussions with and would be more than willing to sit down for an afternoon over tea or a beer and chat. I think that there are some for which it would be impossible due to what appears to be a mixture of anger, fear and hate.
Religious fundamentalists are some of the most fearful people on the planet. That's why they constantly see any disagreement as an attack.
Quote:
Several observers have reported anecdotal evidence that members of fundamentalist religions tend to have high levels of religious guilt and fear (e.g., Barr, 1980; Hartz & Everett, 1989; Strozier, 1994). The usual explanation is that guilt and fear of punishment result from an inability to meet the very high, perhaps unrealistically high, standards of conduct and thought set by the religion.
https://jeksite.org/research/bv.htm
Of course, fundamentalists themselves will reject the above as "scientific" not spiritual, and, therefore, subject to immediate dismissal rather than contemplation. Moreover they always thing OTHER people ought to be doing more to follow the rules, while making exceptions for their own inadequacies. There is little, if any, introspection. They are plagued with the thought that they must "work" their way into heaven by sin avoidance.
Me? I'm a sinner and grateful God is as merciful to me as I hope He is for you!
Quote:
Originally Posted by badlander
When I say something that you do not think is true, rather than attacking or insulting please inform me of how you think I am incorrect and back it up. I actually try to do this but either I am not proficient in doing this, the recreceipant are not willing to take it so or a combination of such. I do not hate your God or your religion. I hate the appearance you have is that anyone who does not believe as you do is immoral and unworthy humans who must be attacked at every opportunity.
Judging others about NOT following biblical rules is what the Pharisees were like in Jesus' day. They vexed Him as well---be more like Jesus and they will vex you with increasing intensity.
Not all of us who are believers see other viewpoints than our own as unworthy. We weigh them in light of how well they result in treatment of others. And that's what you and I have in common. You do the same as me from a different perspective. But then Jesus told us a parable by which we are to understand who our neighbor really is---it's not the one who passes the disenfranchised by so they won't get their hands dirty---it's those who CARE about others enough to inconvenience themselves.
All you'll here from jeff is his insistence that his religious "rights" are under attack. I'm not as certain about Ozzy as he appears to have a more thoughtful side, too. At least that's how it appears to me.
actually he breaks it down pretty well. Not perfect, but good.
he makes it clear that there are different types of atheist. He basically talks about the fundy-mental theist type atheist. That being atheist that answer to a statement of belief about god/religion. Like the Fundy theist, these fundamental atheist have to answer to a personal world view instead of a conclusion based on science.
speaking about defensive. The fundy-think type atheist had to change the rules when observations about different statements of belief were beginning to aling with known observations of the universe.
why is that? why wouldn't we align statements of belief to observations/traits about the universe?
Then it explain it. Enough with the bold talk. You just can't stand that a highly educated man who won an award exposes the illogical nature of atheism. So all you can do is talk trash about the award or say, well he is just one man. Why on earth should I value your opinion over his? Atheists are too swollen with pride to admit they are wrong.
The Templeton Foundation funds the Pew Research Center and yet your ilk has absolutely NO problem using Pew research studies whenever it is negative towards us. Just shows how atheists are just a bunch of flaming hypocrites. You'll accept ANYTHING without question if it suits an anti-Christian argument. But when it doesn't, oh suddenly the source is not credible.
Yet you don't even bother to explain what he got wrong. Typical hollow bold talk.
Science can't give people hope and meaning to life. Science did not heal my friend from late stage thyroid cancer. Science can not defeat death. Your scientific fact is only as good as until another new discovery invalidates the old.
Sure it is. You have put all your faith into fallible man.
Spiritual belief doesn't defeat physical death either---so how is that different. Once you start speaking spiritually, science doesn't play a role.
One of your greatest weaknesses, jeff, is to accept science when it appears to support your religious views, but reject it out of hand when it does not. Someone takes a few pictures of some rocks in Turkey and someone else claims its Noah's Ark----eureka!---science is good. Someone else concludes that since in the couple of hundred years archaeologists have been searching the Sinai desert no evidence of a mass exodus has turned up---damnation--that is pure evil.
Work on yourself. Right now you are unfit to step into the intellectual shoes of any atheist on this thread.
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.
The Good Old Days when Religion could say whatever it liked and nobody would dare to challenge it. No wonder their most fervent prayer is 'Father, if it be thy will, let these bloody atheists pass away from me, shut up and go away."
