• Amused
  • Angry
  • Annoyed
  • Awesome
  • Bemused
  • Cool
  • Crazy
  • Crying
  • Depressed
  • Down
  • Embarrassed
  • Enraged
  • Friendly
  • Geeky
  • Grumpy
  • Happy
  • Hungry
  • Innocent
  • Meh
  • Piratey
  • Poorly
  • Sad
  • Secret
  • Shy
  • Sneaky
  • Tired
  • Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
    Results 11 to 20 of 23

    Ethics & Debate Center - Thread: Atheism ...

    1. #11
      MarkFL's Avatar
      MarkFL is offline La Villa Strangiato
      Valued Contributor
      55
      In Relationship
      Swamped.
       
      Mood:
      Geeky
       
      Join Date
      May 2015
      Location
      St. Augustine, FL.
      Posts
      3,056
      Country
      United States
      CH Cash
      2,328
      CH Challenge
      0
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (0 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      11,973
      Level
      32
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      17.83%
      Rep Power
      192
      Quote Originally Posted by MoreCoffee View Post
      Yes, I see what you mean. Keep up the fight to inform. Information ought to help rather damage faith (I reckon).
      Yes, my goal has never been to undermine anyone's faith. I just want any would-be "atheist-slayers" to understand the potential position(s) of their adversaries, and why those who make a positive claim carry a burden of proof. Many fail to see this, and are incorrectly under the impression that the playing field isn't level when a person who simply rejects a claim (made with no compelling evidence behind it) isn't burdened to justify this rejection, as it's the default position. If everyone correctly understands the basic rules of debate, a lot of frustration can be avoided...on both sides.
      Living in the pools, They soon forget about the sea...— Rush, "Natural Science" (1980)

      “There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” — Søren Kierkegaard

    2. Likes Rens liked this post
    3. #12
      MoreCoffee's Avatar
      MoreCoffee is offline Gold Member
      Girding loins for the battle.
       
      Mood:
      Awesome
       
      Join Date
      Jul 2015
      Posts
      16,033
      CH Cash
      19,866
      CH Challenge
      695
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (0 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      43,319
      Level
      54
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      10.84%
      Rep Power
      674
      Quote Originally Posted by MarkFL View Post
      Yes, my goal has never been to undermine anyone's faith. I just want any would-be "atheist-slayers" to understand the potential position(s) of their adversaries, and why those who make a positive claim carry a burden of proof. Many fail to see this, and are incorrectly under the impression that the playing field isn't level when a person who simply rejects a claim (made with no compelling evidence behind it) isn't burdened to justify this rejection, as it's the default position. If everyone correctly understands the basic rules of debate, a lot of frustration can be avoided...on both sides.
      Giving reasons for why one is not convinced is good. I reckon many atheists can give a credible account of reasons for their position. Yet I agree, there is no burden of proof on an atheist who says "I do not believe in gods because I've seen no convincing evidence for belief in God".

    4. Likes MarkFL liked this post
    5. #13
      MarkFL's Avatar
      MarkFL is offline La Villa Strangiato
      Valued Contributor
      55
      In Relationship
      Swamped.
       
      Mood:
      Geeky
       
      Join Date
      May 2015
      Location
      St. Augustine, FL.
      Posts
      3,056
      Country
      United States
      CH Cash
      2,328
      CH Challenge
      0
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (0 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      11,973
      Level
      32
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      17.83%
      Rep Power
      192
      Quote Originally Posted by MoreCoffee View Post
      Giving reasons for why one is not convinced is good. I reckon many atheists can give a credible account of reasons for their position. Yet I agree, there is no burden of proof on an atheist who says "I do not believe in gods because I've seen no convincing evidence for belief in God".
      Yes, and being familiar with the fallacies and empty arguments used by misguided debaters is good too. But, I would only actually debate if someone is actively trying to convince me that their position is one I should adopt. I would only ask for evidence when someone claims to me personally that they know something that concerns me when I suspect they simply believe it instead.

      If someone tells me they know God exists, I have no issue with that because I assume their knowledge comes by faith. Nothing wrong with that, in and of itself. I don't agree with the "New Atheists" who call us to treat such a claim like we would if someone says they know the Easter Bunny is real. But if they tell me I better change my ways because judgement days is coming, and I will feel the wrath of God, etc., then I'm going to ask them for evidence for this because "changing my ways" is a tedious chore, and needn't be done unless I have some compelling reason to do so.
      Living in the pools, They soon forget about the sea...— Rush, "Natural Science" (1980)

      “There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” — Søren Kierkegaard

    6. Likes Rens liked this post
    7. #14
      Rens's Avatar
      Rens is offline Expert Member
      48
      In Relationship
      Mood:
      Happy
       
      Join Date
      Sep 2015
      Posts
      4,754
      Country
      Netherlands
      CH Cash
      20,366
      CH Challenge
      0
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (0 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      18,086
      Level
      38
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      19.6%
      Rep Power
      374
      I don't think it's very smart to warn an atheist that doomsday is coming. It'll have the opposite effect.
      But if someone is about to die I don't care. You have to warn if you're sure something is the truth. Not aggressive or annoying. One guy who used to be a believer, he was dying, I just sent him a card: hey don't forget to arrange your ticket to heaven. Here's how you do it. My sister said he listened. She doesn't believe, but she said to him when he asked her about it just before he died: yes better do that.

    8. #15
      popsthebuilder's Avatar
      popsthebuilder is offline Veteran Member
      Single
      Mood:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Jun 2015
      Posts
      1,712
      CH Cash
      34,080
      CH Challenge
      3
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (0 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      6,254
      Level
      24
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      40.31%
      Rep Power
      141
      MarkFL,

      You would know better that I would, and I'm not trying to offend or debate.

      It seems that there are different levels of disbelief in GOD. I find that the majority of atheists are actually what seems to be referred to as soft atheism. It seems, from my interactions with atheists that many are actually deists to some extent. Not denying a higher power or intelligent design per say, but denying it's care for, and, or, interaction with It's creation.

      Is this accurate to you?

      I'm not claiming that you are or are not a deist.

      Thank you in advance.

      Peace

      Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk
      Faith in selfless Unity for Good.

    9. #16
      Josiah's Avatar
      Josiah is offline Bronze Member
      Supporting Member
      Married
      Mood:
      Happy
       
      Join Date
      Jun 2015
      Posts
      6,593
      Country
      United States
      CH Cash
      116,239
      CH Challenge
      270
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (0 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      67,726
      Level
      64
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      2.61%
      Rep Power
      894
      Quote Originally Posted by MarkFL View Post
      Yes, and being familiar with the fallacies and empty arguments used by misguided debaters is good too. But, I would only actually debate if someone is actively trying to convince me that their position is one I should adopt.

      True. I suppose one could proclaim a position (such as GOD IS - "Theism" or the antitheis of GOD IS NOT - "Atheism") and not care to defend it as true. I'm okay with that. What I have no respect for is the one who attacks, ridicules, mocks a postion demanding objective, absolute PROOF for that he will accept..... but then runs for his own position on the same thing. For example, one holds that there is life on Mars. Someone mocks that, ridicules it, demands PROOF of such..... but then runs away of his own position that there is no life on Mars, insisting his own position is exempt from any need for proof, accountability, responsiblity. That double standard, the hypocrisy, the GAME is - sadly - not uncommon.




      If someone tells me they know God exists, I have no issue with that because I assume their knowledge comes by faith. Nothing wrong with that, in and of itself. I don't agree with the "New Atheists" who call us to treat such a claim like we would if someone says they know the Easter Bunny is real. But if they tell me I better change my ways because judgement days is coming, and I will feel the wrath of God, etc., then I'm going to ask them for evidence for this because "changing my ways" is a tedious chore, and needn't be done unless I have some compelling reason to do so.

      I largely agree. REGARDLESS of ones position, there needs to be respect (as well as a "level playing field" void of epistemological games, tricks, gymnastics). The Christian Bible tells us to "speak the truth in love." Some forget that last part.....


      I know such Theists exist (I find them quite offensive). I have an admittedly limited experience of Atheists (and all but a couple "met" only online) - they seem very rare. But my experience is that they tend to be a very angry, bitter, hateful people - an anger that is very puzzling (do people get SO gluded, so angry if one holds that UFO's are real?). They seem obsessed with mocking, ridiculing, condemning Theists..... I've been told in big, embolden words that I'm stupid, ignorant, uneducated, unthinking - without them knowing a thing about me except that I accept that God is. And they DEMAND - over and over and over and over - PROOF for this position, object and absolute PROOF of a purely scientific, physical nature that they'd accept in full knowledge that obviously the supernatural cannot be defended by a denial of the supernatural. The anger, the hate... and yes the disrespect (they often will state they don't respect me - me being so uneducated, so unthinking, of such low IQ).... it's hard to understand. Something for Dr. Phil, I suppose LOL.

      My experience with Agnostics is very different. I know lots of Agnostics. They tend to be honest, thoughtful people - respectful as a whole. Void of the intense anger that characterizes Atheists in my experience. And since they by no means reject the concept of God, they have no felt need to mock such. Indeed, I have had Agnostics (well, two anyway) who expressed a certain envy of my faith - and the comfort, hope, strength and inspiration it gives to me. I understand their position and respect it, and that tends to be mutual.



      - Josiah




      .
      Last edited by Josiah; 10-25-2016 at 09:31 AM.

    10. #17
      DHoffmann's Avatar
      DHoffmann is offline Veteran Member
      34
      Mood:
      Amused
       
      Join Date
      Aug 2017
      Posts
      2,027
      Country
      United States
      CH Cash
      10,124
      CH Challenge
      159
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (0 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      9,868
      Level
      29
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      65.45%
      Rep Power
      294
      I heard of an atheist that said something like "if you believe in a god, I dont... and if you dont believe in god, I do" I never understood this, I think he must be implying that if no one believed in God then it would in theory answer his prayers that his type of god (atheist world) exist... go figure

      Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk
      Last edited by DHoffmann; 11-26-2017 at 02:23 PM.

    11. #18
      Pedrito's Avatar
      Pedrito is offline Clarifier
      Married
      Hyding from Jekyll
       
      Mood:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Aug 2015
      Posts
      767
      Country
      Australia
      CH Cash
      4,639
      CH Challenge
      54
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (0 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      4,023
      Level
      20
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      16.28%
      Rep Power
      110
      These thoughts are primarily for MarkFL’s consideration.

      Others in the CH community may find them discomforting.

      (The Post is long, but the thoughts are better posted as a unit, as opposed to being split.)

      ================================================== ============================================

      First of all, let Pedrito state that he finds Atheism (as he understands the concept) to be totally logical when one considers the world around one. How can a Superior Being, one who supposedly created this Earth on which we live, as well as Mankind itself – a Being of whom it is said has the welfare of Mankind at heart – permit the evil and sadness and trauma that pervades the world in which we are forced to live?

      And what about the multiplicity of those Beings that exist in the various religions around the Globe (whether considered to be the First Cause or not)? Each of them has characteristics that differ from the others.

      And even just considering in isolation the religion called Christian, the situation is not much better, if better at all. Multiplicity reigns there as well – a multiplicity of religious organisations and religious groups holding conflicting beliefs and practices, all claiming to be either representing God or being close to what He wants us to be doing and believing. It is a total mess.

      ================================================== ============================================

      Secondly, Pedrito would like to share snippets of his background. The sum total of Pedrito’s religious education in the family, was the bedtime prayer: “God bless: Mummy, Daddy, (my name), Grandma, Amen”, from which the Grandma (who resided in a far country) was omitted suddenly and without explanation.

      When Pedrito was around 8 years of age, his father decided it was time for Pedrito to attend Sunday School. He was taken to the church associated with the country from which his father had come. He attended the first week, won a prize the second week, and was thunderstruck on the third. That was the week when the Sunday School attended the normal church service. It was a ceremonial church. There was this book of prayers that everybody but Pedrito seemed adept at flipping backwards and forwards within at the right times. Including all the other kids. There were also several references to “collects”. Pedrito was traumatised. He refused to go back.

      ================================================== ============================================

      Years later, Pedrito was invited to a Christian fellowship by a someone he was working and studying with. He went along and was exposed to a ritualistic-with-evangelical-leanings message. It offered explanation for the observable state of the world, and presented a plausible proposition about how God was doing something about it in the lives of individuals. Pedrito responded. There developed a thankfulness in his heart towards the God being presented, and he accepted what he understood to be a personal offer from God to him.

      Naturally, a strong loyalty towards the organisation that had effected the introduction developed. Just like the loyalties that are very apparent among CH posters to their religious backgrounds.

      ================================================== ============================================

      Equally naturally, Pedrito began reading the Bible, the supposed basis for what he had been taught. What a surprise he got. What he was reading was noticeably different from what he had been taught. He asked for explanations. He got into trouble for asking. He looked to other organisations for explanations. He got into trouble there, too. He adopted an interdenominational outlook, and was considered an enemy by all. (Even by “interdenominational” organisations if (when) he asked the questions “everybody knew” should not be asked.)

      So Pedrito laid aside what he had been taught, and collated the teachings of Jesus and the apostles, while gaining an appreciation of the how and why of the formation of Israel, Israel’s purpose, and the amazing models and prophecies contained in the Hebrew writings (Old Testament).

      In summary, the integrated nature of the 66 books of the (Protestant) Bible and its message, convinced Pedrito that there had to have been an overall guiding hand influencing the around 40 component authors as they wrote.

      ================================================== ============================================

      In more detail, Pedrito investigated and found that largely (it seemed at that time) there was a highly integrated message that pointed to an overall single source of authorship. However, a few questions still remained – remained until he stumbled across a group of people who chose to study the Bible in an unfettered manner – no holds barred, no question avoided. The answers to his remaining queries became obvious, and he became convinced that the existence of the being we label God was indeed unquestionably real, and that that Being did have a strong interest in the intelligent beings inhabiting the third planet of a particular star in a galaxy of billions – that galaxy itself being one among billions – and that there was a distinct purpose to it all that the “normal” churches don’t know about, and wouldn’t want to know about.

      Pedrito concluded all that (as have others), based on the improbability that a collection of writings from so many authors over such a period of time, could have such a cohesion when looked at as a whole – a mind-blowing cohesion in fact, if the plethora of incompatible doctrine-practice mixes observable within established Christendom, are ignored.

      ================================================== ============================================

      Based on his personal experience, Pedrito sincerely suggests that MarkFL consider following in Pedrito’s footsteps (as it were) and possibly discover something amazing – something personally worthwhile and maybe even personally rewarding in a wonderful way.

      Pedrito is open to considering any questions that may arise if MarkFL (or anyone else) seriously embarks on this path, and to discussing those questions in a non-combative manner.
      Seeking to understand with precision, God's holy and coherent revelation to us.

    12. Likes Snerfle liked this post
    13. #19
      Snerfle is offline Veteran Member
      Supporting Member
      Mood:
      Geeky
       
      Join Date
      Feb 2017
      Location
      In a house
      Posts
      1,646
      Country
      United States
      CH Cash
      123,904
      CH Challenge
      0
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (0 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      10,017
      Level
      29
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      84.53%
      Rep Power
      204
      Quote Originally Posted by Pedrito View Post
      These thoughts are primarily for MarkFL’s consideration.

      Others in the CH community may find them discomforting.

      (The Post is long, but the thoughts are better posted as a unit, as opposed to being split.)

      ================================================== ============================================

      First of all, let Pedrito state that he finds Atheism (as he understands the concept) to be totally logical when one considers the world around one. How can a Superior Being, one who supposedly created this Earth on which we live, as well as Mankind itself – a Being of whom it is said has the welfare of Mankind at heart – permit the evil and sadness and trauma that pervades the world in which we are forced to live?

      And what about the multiplicity of those Beings that exist in the various religions around the Globe (whether considered to be the First Cause or not)? Each of them has characteristics that differ from the others.

      And even just considering in isolation the religion called Christian, the situation is not much better, if better at all. Multiplicity reigns there as well – a multiplicity of religious organisations and religious groups holding conflicting beliefs and practices, all claiming to be either representing God or being close to what He wants us to be doing and believing. It is a total mess.

      ================================================== ============================================

      Secondly, Pedrito would like to share snippets of his background. The sum total of Pedrito’s religious education in the family, was the bedtime prayer: “God bless: Mummy, Daddy, (my name), Grandma, Amen”, from which the Grandma (who resided in a far country) was omitted suddenly and without explanation.

      When Pedrito was around 8 years of age, his father decided it was time for Pedrito to attend Sunday School. He was taken to the church associated with the country from which his father had come. He attended the first week, won a prize the second week, and was thunderstruck on the third. That was the week when the Sunday School attended the normal church service. It was a ceremonial church. There was this book of prayers that everybody but Pedrito seemed adept at flipping backwards and forwards within at the right times. Including all the other kids. There were also several references to “collects”. Pedrito was traumatised. He refused to go back.

      ================================================== ============================================

      Years later, Pedrito was invited to a Christian fellowship by a someone he was working and studying with. He went along and was exposed to a ritualistic-with-evangelical-leanings message. It offered explanation for the observable state of the world, and presented a plausible proposition about how God was doing something about it in the lives of individuals. Pedrito responded. There developed a thankfulness in his heart towards the God being presented, and he accepted what he understood to be a personal offer from God to him.

      Naturally, a strong loyalty towards the organisation that had effected the introduction developed. Just like the loyalties that are very apparent among CH posters to their religious backgrounds.

      ================================================== ============================================

      Equally naturally, Pedrito began reading the Bible, the supposed basis for what he had been taught. What a surprise he got. What he was reading was noticeably different from what he had been taught. He asked for explanations. He got into trouble for asking. He looked to other organisations for explanations. He got into trouble there, too. He adopted an interdenominational outlook, and was considered an enemy by all. (Even by “interdenominational” organisations if (when) he asked the questions “everybody knew” should not be asked.)

      So Pedrito laid aside what he had been taught, and collated the teachings of Jesus and the apostles, while gaining an appreciation of the how and why of the formation of Israel, Israel’s purpose, and the amazing models and prophecies contained in the Hebrew writings (Old Testament).

      In summary, the integrated nature of the 66 books of the (Protestant) Bible and its message, convinced Pedrito that there had to have been an overall guiding hand influencing the around 40 component authors as they wrote.

      ================================================== ============================================

      In more detail, Pedrito investigated and found that largely (it seemed at that time) there was a highly integrated message that pointed to an overall single source of authorship. However, a few questions still remained – remained until he stumbled across a group of people who chose to study the Bible in an unfettered manner – no holds barred, no question avoided. The answers to his remaining queries became obvious, and he became convinced that the existence of the being we label God was indeed unquestionably real, and that that Being did have a strong interest in the intelligent beings inhabiting the third planet of a particular star in a galaxy of billions – that galaxy itself being one among billions – and that there was a distinct purpose to it all that the “normal” churches don’t know about, and wouldn’t want to know about.

      Pedrito concluded all that (as have others), based on the improbability that a collection of writings from so many authors over such a period of time, could have such a cohesion when looked at as a whole – a mind-blowing cohesion in fact, if the plethora of incompatible doctrine-practice mixes observable within established Christendom, are ignored.

      ================================================== ============================================

      Based on his personal experience, Pedrito sincerely suggests that MarkFL consider following in Pedrito’s footsteps (as it were) and possibly discover something amazing – something personally worthwhile and maybe even personally rewarding in a wonderful way.

      Pedrito is open to considering any questions that may arise if MarkFL (or anyone else) seriously embarks on this path, and to discussing those questions in a non-combative manner.
      Nicely done. I pray that Mark fellow, along with the Roman Catholics and any other religiously confused, doubters, and unbelievers here would consider it carefully ... And mainly, to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and be saved. GBU.
      ~Deliberate ignorance
      is anti-christian~

    14. #20
      DHoffmann's Avatar
      DHoffmann is offline Veteran Member
      34
      Mood:
      Amused
       
      Join Date
      Aug 2017
      Posts
      2,027
      Country
      United States
      CH Cash
      10,124
      CH Challenge
      159
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (0 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      9,868
      Level
      29
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      65.45%
      Rep Power
      294
      Socrates was poisoned with hemlock because he was an atheist, Athenian law prescribed it, but think about it, back then being an atheist was the label you got if you didnt surrender to the 'many' gods. This was pre-Christian era and he wasn't Jewish, you couldnt be adopted into Judaism and you didnt have Jesus to convert/adopt gentiles and thus these days we would call him atheist

      Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

    Bookmarks

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •