Question for theists with belief in a personal god.

[monitoradiation]

Sasano, you seem to be under the impression that we're all somehow this sort of "intellectual collective" that must be solemn at all times and cite Nietzche and Hume at every corner. Most of us are not rabidly against religion, though some may be. Some of us would also like to have fun. You also seem to have been calling us hypocritical:

The point is that there's no moving forward if the religious trash and mock atheist in there social circles and if Atheist trash and mock religious in there social circles.Now unlike them we have a lot of weight behind our reasoning and "beliefs" not to mention were a lot more flexible this is however does not excuse for us to stoop to the level of name calling & petty insults and then accuse them of being close-minded,etc.

Don't you find a bit of futility in debating against religion, but doing so in a morally incorrect way?

The fact of the matter is, we have every right to insult what we perceive as unjust, unfair, and absurd, just as you've got every right to tell us that our method of saying such things is inappropriate. If you think that what we're saying is incorrect, let us know. But in an open forum, you'll be getting insults and snarky comments thrown around with points that we make. It's inevitable. I don't see how you can expect otherwise.

I do agree that we shouldn't trash talk simply for the heck of it; but us being open/close minded has more to do with how convincing their arguments are rather than our refutation of their arguments, with some petty namecalling. I don't see how namecalling constitutes "close mindedness" on our part.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

[

The point is that there's no moving forward if the religious trash and mock atheist in there social circles and if Atheist trash and mock religious in there social circles.Now unlike them we have a lot of weight behind our reasoning and "beliefs" not to mention were a lot more flexible this is however does not excuse for us to stoop to the level of name calling & petty insults and then accuse them of being close-minded,etc.

Don't you find a bit of futility in debating against religion, but doing so in a morally incorrect way?

Don't you think that it is a little odd that in your first post you "stooped" to name calling and attacks on the people posting here? The fact that you expected me to defend myself tells me that you know you were attacking, and that it was your sole intent.

It seems deeply hypocritical from where I'm sitting, for you to preach at me for my tone while attacking and insulting me.

 

[Sasano]

Sasano, you seem to be under the impression that we're all somehow this sort of "intellectual collective" that must be solemn at all times and cite Nietzche and Hume at every corner. Most of us are not rabidly against religion, though some may be. Some of us would also like to have fun. You also seem to have been calling us hypocritical:

The fact of the matter is, we have every right to insult what we perceive as unjust, unfair, and absurd, just as you've got every right to tell us that our method of saying such things is inappropriate. If you think that what we're saying is incorrect, let us know. But in an open forum, you'll be getting insults and snarky comments thrown around with points that we make. It's inevitable. I don't see how you can expect otherwise.

Well when you say it like that it does seem a bit silly of me, but that wasn't exactly what I was trying to say.You see I do understand were all of it comes from, I'm not saying that we're not justified in some way, and I'm not saying that religious folk don't come at us with unexplainable fury, neither am I just "offended" by "mean words".I understand why a lot of people are completely comfortable with insulting religion as a whole.But if you will listen to my point.

I do agree that we shouldn't trash talk simply for the heck of it; but us being open/close minded has more to do with how convincing their arguments are rather than our refutation of their arguments, with some petty namecalling. I don't see how namecalling constitutes "close mindedness" on our part.

Admittedly english is not my forte, I think perhaps a few things that I planted got misinterpreted.I will however try again.

By acting the way most of us do when approaching religion adding to our debates: namecalling,degradation,blind disgust,etc.Like I mentioned in my first post what do we become? We are pretty much acting the same way as the religious most notably the Christians do, then we just become an opposition.An opposition to what?whom? To religious folk that are not willing/able to accept the facts that we have to present.My point is that being the Opposite side of the coin won't help anybody, it will only result in useless confrontation.The opponent we're trying to combat is very complex & sensitive, by for example degrading they're God they will automatically group us and our intent as an enemy they MUST defeat not someone trying to pulling them out of ignorance, this just create more people like for example Jay Comfort that seek out to demonize us and our actions.

In summary the best way imo, to make any progress is not to be the opponent but to be the helping hand that gets them out there current mindset.


@Joe: I hope you don't mind I wont make and actual rebuttal to you, it seems like a waste of time.
@Augh3 : I guess its not unreasonable to think that this forums gets a lot of trolls and I posted here without taking into consideration.All though I think my position would make a poor troll, Im pretty sure most people could come up with something more annoying.I do thank you for you're answer its appreciated nonetheless.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

@Joe: I hope you don't mind I wont make and actual rebuttal to you, it seems like a waste of time.

Not at all. I'm sure you wouldn't want to actually deal with the issues I brought up.

 

[Sasano]

Not at all. I'm sure you wouldn't want to actually deal with the issues I brought up.

There is no issue, its just fruitless to try to reason with an e-alpha male persona.

 

[Th1sWasATriumph]

We say religion is part of a barbaric generation that is completely negative yet, we can't help but act as children making fun of each others favorite team.

Here's the deal: people who actually stoop to using nothing but infantile approaches are morons.

Very few people on this site rely solely, or even in part, on this method.

All you're doing is trying to find the meanest sniff of something that could be considered childish in order to dismantle the rest of a well-crafted rebuttal or refutation, and that just doesn't work. If you make an excellent argument and your opponent refuses to respond, or responds badly or lies or misrepresents or connives or prevaricates . . . why be civil? And why should it matter if you stop being civil, if your central points are sound? I like debates that go well, with people who can concede their position being flimsy. But very few of the faithful maintain such a facade for long under the kind of barrage that I habitually offer.

You are confusing childishness with irreverence. I can make a coherent and well-argued case in debate and still be irreverent. If you want to dismiss my points because of such a minor concern, that's your issue. You may as well say that Dawkins would not be as intelligent if he used the phrase "well, fuck me sideways" a lot.

Onus of proof is ALWAYS on them. That's fundamental.

 

[Th1sWasATriumph]

we can never stop ourselves from pulling the quick blows and overall cheap shots

There is no issue, its just fruitless to try to reason with an e-alpha male persona.

Are you even aware of the irony here?

Can you smell it?

It smells like JUSTICE


Also, please tell me what is actually wrong with what I said:

To send me to hell regardless would be the act of a spiteful, malicious and petty God who isn't worth worship in the first place.

Hedge your bets, folks. There's no God. If there is, he can show himself. If not, it's his fault.

I smell a troll.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

I smell a troll.

You too? :lol:

 

[JBeukema]

"Makes no sense" pretty much covers the whole thing. The blind spot religious people have when it comes to the illogic of their beliefs is only surpassed by the mental gymnastics they engage in to defend those beliefs.

It all goes out the window when their baby gets sick. They don't rush to the church, ask their friends to lay hands on the child and say 'god, your will be done'- when they try, the baby dies and they go to prison

they go to the hospital, find a heathen and blasphemous doctor who casts aside the bible and beg science to save their baby

iN their heart of hearts, they know their religion is bullshit and their god does not exist and cannot save their child's life- they come crawling back to heathen science and the progress it hath wrought

 

[ImprobableJoe]

It all goes out the window when their baby gets sick. They don't rush to the church, ask their friends to lay hands on the child and say 'god, your will be done'- when they try, the baby dies and they go to prison

they go to the hospital, find a heathen and blasphemous doctor who casts aside the bible and beg science to save their baby

iN their heart of hearts, they know their religion is bullshit and their god does not exist and cannot save their child's life- they come crawling back to heathen science and the progress it hath wrought

Well... there are two times regular folks turn their backs on reality-based thinking and embrace all manner of woo: when there's nothing wrong, and when there's so much stuff wrong that there's little chance of anything helping.

When a baby has a sniffle or one of a dozen normal ailments that go away on their own, the parents might try prayer or woo. When the kid has an inoperable tumor, the parents might try prayer or woo. When the kid has a fever that doesn't go away or a broken leg, they take her to the doctor. No one ever expects prayer to fix broken bones, or reattach severed fingers, or to help out when Junior decided to toss a lawn dart at passing birds and gets one stuck in his skull.

 

[theatheistguy]

Does omniscient God have the omnipotence to change his mind?

enjoy

 

[Jotto999]

The atmosphere here does not condone, for religious folk to say they're share if anything a beleiver would just end up bullied.Know I was under the assumption that this was the "League of Reason" not an atheist club, I came here with the eagerness to learn from open-minded minds that far exceed the norm that surrounds me, but at this point I see the same actions of "fanatics" with a different color.

I find this a very misleading view of the atmosphere here. When I came here, it was pretty much what I had expected it to be. I was not expecting it to be nothing but a 100% intellectual true debating arena. This site definitely has it's informal, not necessarily always constructive attributes, but I think you're blowing it out of proportion a bit.

This is after all, a public forum on the internet. Bear in mind that not everyone who comes here has a university degree (I don't even have my highschool diploma yet). Not everyone is completely sophisticated and polite, nor would I expect them to be. Of course some insults and jokes will be made, is it really that big a deal?

Besides, there was a thread posted by a Muslim, and it was pretty civil, I didn't see insults start flying around. I really disagree with how you feel about this site's atmosphere.

 

[irmerk]

I think this video has to do with the original post.

 

[Espi]

That's not a very good point, that Jesus doesn't appear when you pray so. A theist will quickly say that Jesus appears spiritually or something, not physically. And of course, you have to open your heart so you can feel the Jebus.

Besides, how arrogant are you to command the almighty to perform to you like a circus animal!

I think the best point is the first point. It was okay for Jesus to prance around showing off his godly superpowers. That is very unfair towards everyone else, who have never witnessed anything like it in their lives, and are supposed to just believe it from hearsay.

 

[Sasano]

Sasano :we can never stop ourselves from pulling the quick blows and overall cheap shots

Sasano: There is no issue, its just fruitless to try to reason with an e-alpha male persona.

Are you even aware of the irony here?

Can you smell it?

It smells like JUSTICE

Theres is no irony.Its a simple fact.Joe on all of his recent(to when this was posted) post likes assort himself as the maximum authority and quickly resorts to bashing as soon as he gets questioned for his rudeness, an example would be a marijuana thread that was active at the time as well.

Furthermore quote mine is a self deplorable act, wouldn't you agree? The quotes have nothing to do with each other even if you consider my statement "e-alpha-male" a blatant lie and just used as an insult my quote above is referring too how WE as atheist can NEVER stop ourselves from bashing believers in a topic with such sensitivity.

You have to understand having a bigger post count doesn't give you the right to assume,friend.

Also, please tell me what is actually wrong with what I said:

To send me to hell regardless would be the act of a spiteful, malicious and petty God who isn't worth worship in the first place.

Hedge your bets, folks. There's no God. If there is, he can show himself. If not, it's his fault.

This quote is a simple example on how we purposely add demeaning adjectives to they're God(as true as it might be) without realizing that this worthless insults that you throw out to seem witty would close off a Christians mind automatically from whatever you say.

I smell a troll.

You know what I smell? That you guys aren't used to criticized on the fact that when you do this thing you make it out to SEEM that you pick on religion not for hopes of a better tomorrow or a sense of moral obligation but simply as an intellectual bully.

I find this a very misleading view of the atmosphere here. When I came here, it was pretty much what I had expected it to be. I was not expecting it to be nothing but a 100% intellectual true debating arena. This site definitely has it's informal, not necessarily always constructive attributes, but I think you're blowing it out of proportion a bit.

This is after all, a public forum on the internet. Bear in mind that not everyone who comes here has a university degree (I don't even have my highschool diploma yet). Not everyone is completely sophisticated and polite, nor would I expect them to be. Of course some insults and jokes will be made, is it really that big a deal?

Besides, there was a thread posted by a Muslim, and it was pretty civil, I didn't see insults start flying around. I really disagree with how you feel about this site's atmosphere.

Yes I know, I already admitted to another user that my expectations were too high for this place and I forgot the fact that is in fact a normal forum on the internet.My point made on weather it was a big deal or not, is that simply we don't have a "divine obligation" to reach out or to argue with this people but a moral one, if you just go out and insult and degrade this people then progress cannot be made.Religion is not like debating what Football team will win the season, theres A LOT of psychological & cultural influences making it something that should not be taking lightly.

 

[Ozymandyus]

If you think we're not used to being criticized, you haven't read very much. There is about 90% less patting on the back here than Any other forum, and we are constantly disagreeing and refining arguments. The fact that you undoubtedly created a sock account (or got a friend to make an account) just to pat yourself on the back is proof that you are completely disingenuous on this point.

And none of us believe for a second that someone who had never posted before decided to make a single post about how deep your completely trite post was.

I pick on religion for one reason and one reason only - it is not based on evidence. I concede that there may be a being out there with power beyond my comprehension - but there is NO DOUBT that such a being does not care about us personally from all the evidence I've seen. If someone presented me with irrefutable evidence, I would know it and listen. But when someone believes such things just because they were raised to believe that I have no reason to respect them for it, and every reason to make fun of them.

 

[Sasano]

If you think we're not used to being criticized, you haven't read very much. There is about 90% less patting on the back here than Any other forum, and we are constantly disagreeing and refining arguments. The fact that you undoubtedly created a sock account (or got a friend to make an account) just to pat yourself on the back is proof that you are completely disingenuous on this point.

And none of us believe for a second that someone who had never posted before decided to make a single post about how deep your completely trite post was.

I pick on religion for one reason and one reason only - it is not based on evidence. I concede that there may be a being out there with power beyond my comprehension - but there is NO DOUBT that such a being does not care about us personally from all the evidence I've seen. If someone presented me with irrefutable evidence, I would know it and listen. But when someone believes such things just because they were raised to believe that I have no reason to respect them for it, and every reason to make fun of them.

First of all, I draw my conclusion that you're not used to criticism solely based on the fact that you keep framing as a "Troll" or someone who needs pats in the back, like I said you're free to check IPs.I really have no idea who that was and for all I know he could just be mocking me or someone who understood what I was saying, it makes no difference to the topic I was presenting.

They only thing I'm doing is calling you out on the hypocrisy of calling yourself morally superior when you're just bullying someone.Thats like a Math teacher ridiculing a retarded student for not being able to understand the basics of adding and subtracting.

All of you constantly underestimate the deep ramifications of religion in the psyche of a human being.The fact you THINK you have a RIGHT to make fun of people in this position is highly barbaric, something that to me seems hypocritical from someone who advocates reason over fantasy.I did nothing but point that out and instead of actually just refuting my claims with reasoning you just go on to attack my persona by calling me a troll.

The reason I tried to withdraw from this discussion was because I saw that my words were going to deaf ears, the fact is that this is just and average forum and I have to accept that theirs people here that take on religion for lulz and not something meaningful.

And I did accept it, You can have you're lulz and I don't have to associate myself to that.

 

[Aught3]

The fact you THINK you have a RIGHT to make fun of people in this position is highly barbaric

I do have the right to make fun of them. If they come posting on the internet with their absurd ideas about religion, 9/11, vaccines, etc. then I don't mind having a joke at their expense, and they deserve it for being so gullible. Ridicule can be an important tools in showing someone where they have gone wrong with their thinking. I'm not going to give it up just because you don't like it.

 

[Ozymandyus]

The difference between me and a math teacher is one gets paid to teach people patiently. I am doing this shit for free. I don't need to have patience - if someone shows they are slow or will never listen to reason, I can make fun of them and forget them. I certainly have no obligation to treat them like wayward children in my charge or handle their fragile egos with kid gloves.

As for whether you are a troll, I certainly never suggested that and I doubt that you are. But it's easy to see why people might think so: anyone that so clearly contradicts his own message has to at least MAYBE be a troll. Especially when he does so and then calls YOU hypocritical.

In any case, to say that none of us know the ramifications of religion on people's psyche is beyond ridiculous. Most of us WERE formerly religious.

 

[xchillx42]

What's that smell? It's flattery.

Mmm, crunchy

Yeah, it was the first formulated atheist argument I came up with, not that it's unique to me of course, and the easiest to express simply. God would have to know that my disbelief is down to a lack of evidence rather than malice, and would have to know that he could remedy the situation instantly and with ease, but will not. To send me to hell regardless would be the act of a spiteful, malicious and petty God who isn't worth worship in the first place.

Hedge your bets, folks. There's no God. If there is, he can show himself. If not, it's his fault.

Its a very good signature, I have to say.