Isn't it funny...

[Fr33Th1nker]

He could be a deist. That's not so much of a contradiction. As long as he doesn't think scriptures are authoritative, it's an unusual position but not outside the bounds. Freethinkers aren't required to be atheists, though most of them are.

It's not just about scriptures. Anything or anyone who claims to be an authority of something or anything should be questioned. It just so happened that I am on a personal mission to truly find out if my Faith in God is really justifiable or not. Why do you think that in spite of decades of debates and presentation of facts there are still atheist and theist? People will believe what they want to believe and stick with it no matter what because of pride, ego, ignorance, arrogance or self righteousness. I am aware of these things and am hoping not to succumbed to these things.

I thought I could find the answers here. Unfortunately, the Atheists I have encountered are similar to the bible thumpers and self righteous believers I have met. I don't want to generalize all Atheists but I feel it might take me a while to find the right people. Unless you can recommend someone who is really open minded and a free thinker and is willing to share their knowledge or insight, it would be my great pleasure and I will be grateful.

---

I appreciate you adding more information on some of the statements that were made. There is always room for acceptance and learning.

However, as for your comment, "that believing in god is not really a statement compatible with being a 'freethinker'" you might want to consider this reply:

A standard dictionary defines a freethinker as “one that forms opinions on the basis of reason independently of authority; especially one who doubts or denies religious dogma.” What this means is that to be a freethinker, a person has to be willing to consider any idea and any possibility. The standard for deciding the truth-value of claims is not tradition, dogma, or authorities — instead, it must be reason and logic.


The term was originally popularized by Anthony Collins (1676-1729), a confidant of John Locke who wrote many pamphlets and books attacking traditional religion. He even belonged to a group called “The Freethinkers” which published a journal entitled “The Free-Thinker.”

Collins used the term as essentially a synonym for anyone who opposes organized religion and wrote his most famous book, The Discourse of Free Thinking (1713) to explain why he felt that way. He went beyond describing freethinking as desirable and declared it to be a moral obligation:

Because he who thinks freely does his best toward being right, and consequently does all that God, who can require nothing more of any Man than that he should do his best, can require of him.
As should be obvious, Collins did not equate freethinking with atheism — he retained his membership in the Anglican church. It wasn’t belief in a god which attracted his ire, but instead, people who simply “take the Opinions they have imbibed from their Grandmothers, Mothers or Priests.”

WHY ATHEISM AND FREETHOUGHT ARE DIFFERENT
At the time, freethinking and the freethought movement was usually characteristic of those who were deists just as today freethinking is more often characteristic of atheists — but in both cases, this relationship is not exclusive. It is not the conclusion which differentiates freethought from other philosophies, but the process.


A person can be a theist because they are a freethinker and a person can be an atheist despite not being a freethinker.

For freethinkers and those who associate themselves with freethought, claims are judged based on how closely they are found to correlate with reality. Claims have to be capable of being tested and it has to be possible to falsify it — to have a situation which, if discovered, would demonstrate that the claim is false. As the Freedom From Religion Foundation explains it:

For a statement to be considered true it must be testable (what evidence or repeatable experiments confirm it?), falsifiable (what, in theory, would disconfirm it, and have all attempts to disprove it failed?), parsimonious (is it the simplest explanation, requiring the fewest assumptions?), and logical (is it free of contradictions, non sequiturs, or irrelevant ad hominem character attacks?).
FALSE EQUIVALENCY
Although many atheists may be surprised or even annoyed by this, the obvious conclusion is that freethought and theism are compatible while freethought and atheism are not the same and one does not automatically necessitate the other. An atheist might legitimately raise the objection that a theist cannot also be a freethinker because theism — the belief in a god — cannot be rationally grounded and cannot be based upon reason.

The problem here, however, is the fact that this objection is confusing the conclusion with the process. As long as a person accepts the principle that beliefs regarding religion and politics should be based on reason and makes a genuine, sincere, and consistent attempt to evaluate claims and ideas with reason, refusing to accept those which are unreasonable, then that person should be regarded as a freethinker.

Once again, the point about freethought is the process rather than the conclusion — which means that a person who fails to be perfect does not also fail to be a freethinker. An atheist might regard the theist’s position as erroneous and a failure to apply reason and logic perfectly — but what atheist achieves such perfection? Freethought is not based on perfection.

Can't disagree with any of this.  Well said.

A word of advice though, don't argue for your bonafides.  Let them come indirectly and over time as people see how you express yourself on various points.

I personally don't have any doubt that a person can't be both a free thinker, rational and a believer.  Though, if their belief is anything off the shelf where they wind up accepting the dogma of any organized religion whole cloth .. I will be very skeptical.

Thank you Whateverist and thank you for the warm welcome on the other post. It's not just about scriptures or dogma. I am the type of person who will question anyone or anything who claims to be an authority of something that must be followed. Also, to be honest, I should have mentioned in my post that I just researched the reply that you have commended from the internet because I want to come up with an appropriate response. I apologize if I mislead you or the persons I sent that message to. I don't mean any disrespect to anyone here. I am really here to learn not to educate or debate. At the same time, If I think that a statement is false, I will courteously point it out and work it out with that person unless his mind is closed.

Your advice is sound and I really appreciate it. Although it is understandable that people will have an initial animosity towards me because of my beliefs I hope that they would cut me some slack. After all, this is your abode and I am just a visitor here.

[Whateverist]

He could be a deist. That's not so much of a contradiction. As long as he doesn't think scriptures are authoritative, it's an unusual position but not outside the bounds. Freethinkers aren't required to be atheists, though most of them are.

It's not just about scriptures. Anything or anyone who claims to be an authority of something or anything should be questioned. It just so happened that I am on a personal mission to truly find out if my Faith in God is really justifiable or not. Why do you think that in spite of decades of debates and presentation of facts there are still atheist and theist? People will believe what they want to believe and stick with it no matter what because of pride, ego, ignorance, arrogance or self righteousness. I am aware of these things and am hoping not to succumbed to these things.

I thought I could find the answers here. Unfortunately, the Atheists I have encountered are similar to the bible thumpers and self righteous believers I have met. I don't want to generalize all Atheists but I feel it might take me a while to find the right people. Unless you can recommend someone who is really open minded and a free thinker and is willing to share their knowledge or insight, it would be my great pleasure and I will be grateful.

---

Can't disagree with any of this.  Well said.

A word of advice though, don't argue for your bonafides.  Let them come indirectly and over time as people see how you express yourself on various points.

I personally don't have any doubt that a person can't be both a free thinker, rational and a believer.  Though, if their belief is anything off the shelf where they wind up accepting the dogma of any organized religion whole cloth .. I will be very skeptical.

Thank you Whateverist and thank you for the warm welcome on the other post. It's not just about scriptures or dogma. I am the type of person who will question anyone or anything who claims to be an authority of something that must be followed. Also, to be honest, I should have mentioned in my post that I just researched the reply that you have commended from the internet because I want to come up with an appropriate response. I apologize if I mislead you or the persons I sent that message to. I don't mean any disrespect to anyone here. I am really here to learn not to educate or debate. At the same time, If I think that a statement is false, I will courteously point it out and work it out with that person unless his mind is closed.

Your advice is sound and I really appreciate it. Although it is understandable that people will have an initial animosity towards me because of my beliefs I hope that they would cut me some slack. After all, this is your abode and I am just a visitor here.

Some will.  Some won't.  The person who created these forums sincerely desires that this be a place where people of all persuasions can meet and discuss what they will, preferably with respect but also with wide open freedom of speech.  You can see the tension between those two goals.  

It just isn't a comfortable place to be to have to defend yourself or your beliefs.  If it were me I wouldn't let the adequacies of my beliefs be the topic of discussion.  When you do, it can become personal and you end up provoked to respond in ways you obviously aren't otherwise inclined toward.

Anyhow I do look forward to hearing more from you.

[Astonished]

The fact that you don't have the guts to address me directly means you are unsure of your answer. This is an atheist forum. You should feel safe here. You even sought the advice of your compatriot and his answer is sound. In spite of that you prefer to be stubborn in your belief just like an ignorant theist. Assuming that you are a free and critical thinker let me just say that you missed a point. Life is not just about believing or not believing in God. It is just an iota of the intricacy of life and the world we live in. Let's say you are correct that God does not exist, you can not conclude that a person who is wrong in believing this does not know how to think freely in other aspects of life. Do you know what my stand is regarding abortion, the government, pro gun or gun ban, antisemitism or LGBT etc? You know nothing because you never bothered to ask or use critical and free thinking. You already have formed an opinion and assumption about me without further investigating. You my friend are an example of an atheist who do not think for himself. You are not different from the ignorant and self righteous believers who are bible thumpers and only believe that they are right. You make statements without making reference and expect others to take it as truth. 

And knowing your kind, you probably go bonkers the moment you hear someone say he is a believer. Kudos to you for being a free  and critical thinker. Believers use the phrase "God moves in mysterious ways", "God has a plan". "In his time" when they do not know the answer or are unsure. In your case, it's looking for affirmations from others or resorting to derogatory remarks. 

I came here to learn. Unfortunately, I won't learn anything from you. So live your life and I will live mine.

---

Wow, LMMFAO, thank you for proving my point, liar. Excuse the hell out of me, big boy, for not addressing you directly (which I DID, jackass, I just abbreviated your name to FT since it would be like trying to say the pen is red to actually type your name in addressing you, and quoting that mountain of nothing would be pointless; and what the fuck exactly made you think I WASN'T addressing you directly?) Also, when the fuck did I seek the advice of a compatriot in my rebuttal of your lie? Are you the kind of severely delusional theist that most try to pretend they're not? Sure looks that way.

Also, in what way was my statement not logically sound? No critical examination of the evidence or arguments would lead to your conclusion, or we would all believe the same thing you do (unless you're simply ignorant of the lack of evidence or all the refutations, but you would be dishonest not to own up to it up front). You also question why there are still so many theists despite this argument having been around so long, and your own mentality is the 'reason' (pun intended) because you simply don't listen to reason. And neither do the people who indoctrinate their children and force those beliefs and lack of reason on them, and out-breed the rest so they produce more progeny to spread their lack of thought. Pretty simple fucking answer. That you could be ignorant of that is what's surprising, not to mention the amount of projection you're beaming onto me calling ME ignorant. Remember, the null hypothesis is the default position, so for you to be where you're at demonstrates a confirmation bias. You don't start out on the side of theism without the evidence and there is none. What's your excuse, or are you really just a liar?

You wonder why there's animosity towards you, for your perceived 'beliefs'? Here's the short answer: I just don't appreciate being lied to or having my intelligence insulted. You come in here calling yourself a free thinker, and I called you on your bullshit for making a claim that is in direct fundamental conflict with the very idea. Playing around with definitions is par for the course with believers like yourself so obviously that doesn't impress me one bit, and if that's your only defense, well, it's as flimsy as every other apologetic. Sorry if I didn't fall for your song and dance, but I'd actually respect you WAY more if you were just honest about your actual outlook and beliefs. Coming in here wearing someone else's severed face over yours not only doesn't fool anyone but it looks creepy and wrong and makes us wonder what the fuck you're hiding under there; come as you are, admit you either fully believe for whatever reasons you do, or admit you don't have any reasons but still believe anyway, and we've got the measure of you, no harm, no foul. You're really the only one who's a victim of your own dishonesty because you seem to have completely pulled the wool over your own eyes.

[Fr33Th1nker]

It's not just about scriptures. Anything or anyone who claims to be an authority of something or anything should be questioned. It just so happened that I am on a personal mission to truly find out if my Faith in God is really justifiable or not. Why do you think that in spite of decades of debates and presentation of facts there are still atheist and theist? People will believe what they want to believe and stick with it no matter what because of pride, ego, ignorance, arrogance or self righteousness. I am aware of these things and am hoping not to succumbed to these things.

I thought I could find the answers here. Unfortunately, the Atheists I have encountered are similar to the bible thumpers and self righteous believers I have met. I don't want to generalize all Atheists but I feel it might take me a while to find the right people. Unless you can recommend someone who is really open minded and a free thinker and is willing to share their knowledge or insight, it would be my great pleasure and I will be grateful.

---

Thank you Whateverist and thank you for the warm welcome on the other post. It's not just about scriptures or dogma. I am the type of person who will question anyone or anything who claims to be an authority of something that must be followed. Also, to be honest, I should have mentioned in my post that I just researched the reply that you have commended from the internet because I want to come up with an appropriate response. I apologize if I mislead you or the persons I sent that message to. I don't mean any disrespect to anyone here. I am really here to learn not to educate or debate. At the same time, If I think that a statement is false, I will courteously point it out and work it out with that person unless his mind is closed.

Your advice is sound and I really appreciate it. Although it is understandable that people will have an initial animosity towards me because of my beliefs I hope that they would cut me some slack. After all, this is your abode and I am just a visitor here.

Some will.  Some won't.  The person who created these forums sincerely desires that this be a place where people of all persuasions can meet and discuss what they will, preferably with respect but also with wide open freedom of speech.  You can see the tension between those two goals.  

It just isn't a comfortable place to be to have to defend yourself or your beliefs.  If it were me I wouldn't let the adequacies of my beliefs be the topic of discussion.  When you do, it can become personal and you end up provoked to respond in ways you obviously aren't otherwise inclined toward.

Anyhow I do look forward to hearing more from you.

Wisely said. You must be a master. =) Thank you for the words of wisdom. I will try not to be baited in such situations.

---

The fact that you don't have the guts to address me directly means you are unsure of your answer. This is an atheist forum. You should feel safe here. You even sought the advice of your compatriot and his answer is sound. In spite of that you prefer to be stubborn in your belief just like an ignorant theist. Assuming that you are a free and critical thinker let me just say that you missed a point. Life is not just about believing or not believing in God. It is just an iota of the intricacy of life and the world we live in. Let's say you are correct that God does not exist, you can not conclude that a person who is wrong in believing this does not know how to think freely in other aspects of life. Do you know what my stand is regarding abortion, the government, pro gun or gun ban, antisemitism or LGBT etc? You know nothing because you never bothered to ask or use critical and free thinking. You already have formed an opinion and assumption about me without further investigating. You my friend are an example of an atheist who do not think for himself. You are not different from the ignorant and self righteous believers who are bible thumpers and only believe that they are right. You make statements without making reference and expect others to take it as truth. 

And knowing your kind, you probably go bonkers the moment you hear someone say he is a believer. Kudos to you for being a free  and critical thinker. Believers use the phrase "God moves in mysterious ways", "God has a plan". "In his time" when they do not know the answer or are unsure. In your case, it's looking for affirmations from others or resorting to derogatory remarks. 

I came here to learn. Unfortunately, I won't learn anything from you. So live your life and I will live mine.

---

Wow, LMMFAO, thank you for proving my point, liar. Excuse the hell out of me, big boy, for not addressing you directly (which I DID, jackass, I just abbreviated your name to FT since it would be like trying to say the pen is red to actually type your name in addressing you, and quoting that mountain of nothing would be pointless; and what the fuck exactly made you think I WASN'T addressing you directly?) Also, when the fuck did I seek the advice of a compatriot in my rebuttal of your lie? Are you the kind of severely delusional theist that most try to pretend they're not? Sure looks that way.

Also, in what way was my statement not logically sound? No critical examination of the evidence or arguments would lead to your conclusion, or we would all believe the same thing you do (unless you're simply ignorant of the lack of evidence or all the refutations, but you would be dishonest not to own up to it up front). You also question why there are still so many theists despite this argument having been around so long, and your own mentality is the 'reason' (pun intended) because you simply don't listen to reason. And neither do the people who indoctrinate their children and force those beliefs and lack of reason on them, and out-breed the rest so they produce more progeny to spread their lack of thought. Pretty simple fucking answer. That you could be ignorant of that is what's surprising, not to mention the amount of projection you're beaming onto me calling ME ignorant. Remember, the null hypothesis is the default position, so for you to be where you're at demonstrates a confirmation bias. You don't start out on the side of theism without the evidence and there is none. What's your excuse, or are you really just a liar?

I just don't appreciate being lied to or having my intelligence insulted. You come in here calling yourself a free thinker, and I called you on your bullshit for making a claim that is in direct fundamental conflict with the very idea. Playing around with definitions is par for the course with believers like yourself so obviously that doesn't impress me one bit, and if that's your only defense, well, it's as flimsy as every other apologetic. Sorry if I didn't fall for your song and dance, but I'd actually respect you WAY more if you were just honest about your actual outlook and beliefs. You're really the only one who's a victim of your own dishonesty because you seem to have completely pulled the wool over your own eyes.

Ok, If you say so. Have a nice day.

[Astonished]

Cowardly, too. Makes me sad. I thought people were supposed to defend their beliefs. Innit funny how that so often seems to escape the notice of those who believe?

[Fr33Th1nker]

Cowardly, too. Makes me sad. I thought people were supposed to defend their beliefs. Innit funny how that so often seems to escape the notice of those who believe?

Awww, don't be sad. As a free thinker you should accept the fact that there are cowardly people and that should not affect you. =) Will I be banned if I communicate with you this way? Believe it or not but you are my first friend here.

[Catholic_Lady]

Ignore Astonished. He's got some deep seeded issues to work out.

[FatAndFaithless]

Nah, as long as you aren't spamming/making threats/revealing any personal info, you can say what you want and won't get banned. Whateverist was right when he said the staff try to let this place be as open as possible.

[Cyberman]

And until it is, the beatings will continue.

[Astonished]

Ignore Astonished. He's got some deep seeded issues to work out.

Says the pot to the silverware. And the phrase is 'deep-seated'.

Cowardly, too. Makes me sad. I thought people were supposed to defend their beliefs. Innit funny how that so often seems to escape the notice of those who believe?

Awww, don't be sad. As a free thinker you should accept the fact that there are cowardly people and that should not affect you. =) Will I be banned if I communicate with you this way? Believe it or not but you are my first friend here.

Meh, more disappointed. You claim you don't want to fall into that gullible cycle like the rest of your fellow followers but I can't distinguish your beliefs from others', so all indications are that you've already fallen for it, hook, line and sinker. That's why I can't take you seriously. Your inner conflict doesn't seem...conflicted enough? And it comes across as disingenuous. If you want advice on how to be more open and honest in how you communicate this in a way that won't generate mistrust and contempt, I'm sure there's some out there. Not worth my time.