Question(s) for the Religious

[fr0d0]

Yes Chas. You have no fucking idea what you're talking about yet you feel justified in shooting your mouth off anyway. FFS.

---

with the caveat that respect oughtn't be something accorded automatically merely because they are beliefs.

Absolutely. That /should be how it is. Some take their beliefs very personally and you might be a fool to upset them, that it's if you're particularly attached to your body parts.

---

Frodo, answer the two questions above so that we may have an accurate idea of how to proceed.

I already answered question 2, and now I have less reason to answer question 1. Do you see how I worked that out?

[The Reality Salesman01]

I already answered question 2, and now I have less reason to answer question 1. Do you see how I worked that out?

I don't see that you did answer 2, really. Perhaps a direct response would be more helpful.

These are the questions:

1) Can you give a specific example of the nformation you found to be persuasive?

2) What process did you use to evaluate this persuasive information, and determine that it was more likely true than false?

I don't know how you can get to 2 without first explaining what 1 is. In the interest of not putting words in your mouth, couldin't you just answer the questions as I have presented them to you? Am I being unreasonable?

[Chas]

Yes Chas. You have no fucking idea what you're talking about yet you feel justified in shooting your mouth off anyway. FFS.

I know about critical thinking. You don't.

As I said, I don't claim to know why you believe, but please don't insult us by calling it the result of critical thinking.

[Cyberman]

Absolutely. That /should be how it is. Some take their beliefs very personally and you might be a fool to upset them, that it's if you're particularly attached to your body parts.

Some people take their pet sports team, or political affiliation, equally seriously; often even more so than personal religious beliefs, to the extent it can become hard to tell the difference.

However, whereas I could have a discussion about politics with one or more politicesed individuals, or a more limited discussion about football or tennis (or golf if I can keep awake long enough) without necessitating the risk of losing my limbs, religious belief is perhaps the sole area in which a violent response is practically inevitable to any perceived lack of automatic respect (whether actual or not; in fact, the less actual the better, it seems). Besides which, religiously-minded people don't have the monopoly on being offended, nor the automatic right to be such.

So I reiterate: personal beliefs of any flavour ought not expect automatic respect accorded merely for being personal beliefs, however deeply held.

[Bad Writer]

1. If What criteria would you use to distinguish its falsehoods from claims of true divinity?

The only criteria available to me. What they tell me/show me. ...
I test, research, study, compare, criticise etc until I can be satisfied something is true.

The intent is there, the steps are named, but the process is not specified.

So far I haven't found a challenger to my current belief, not for the want of trying. Before, for more than 45 years, I was an atheist with the same goal. My enquiry led me here.

How exactly do atheism and other religions/claims of god not meet the challenge posed by your religion? What is your challenge? More importantly, what is your demonstrable, testable, reproducible proof of God? Please take note that any proof that is your own, that can't be experienced or observed by others, is no proof at all.

My sources wouldn't be your sources.

Of course they wouldn't. I await your response to my above questions.

[fr0d0]

I know about critical thinking. You don't.

As I said, I don't claim to know why you believe, but please don't insult us by calling it the result of critical thinking.

Apparently, to you, critical thinking comprises: "oh no it isn't". That's it.

Like you say, you don't understand, but by way of critical thinking, you feel that you can dismiss it anyway.

You are a joke.

[Bad Writer]

Chas has repeatedly demonstrated an aptitude for critical thinking here. He's very justified in doubting claims about beliefs in deities.

[Cyberman]

Apparently, to you, critical thinking comprises: "oh no it isn't". That's it.

Oh no it isn't.

[fr0d0]

So I reiterate: personal beliefs of any flavour ought not expect automatic respect accorded merely for being personal beliefs, however deeply held.

So let me make this personal then stimbo. What if I were to say something depraved and reprobate about your precious loved one. Taking her memory in vein in a deliberate ruse to rile you. Now how do you feel about my freedom to say what I want?

I saw Jabba the Hut's wife on uk tv explaining to an atheist comedian how her personal relationship with Jesus was an emotional connection to her (I have to concur that it is to me too. I've shed a tear or two for the bloke I have to admit). The atheist got it, and understood his actions to be hurtful and wrong.

There would be no fun in you guys taking the piss as you do if it wasn't hurtful to someone. That's why you do it right? If it had no effect/ if no one could take offense, you'd have to find something else.

Maybe it shouldn't be that way, but you and I aren't that naive.

---

Chas has repeatedly demonstrated an aptitude for critical thinking here. He's very justified in doubting claims about beliefs in deities.

The bloke is a twat. I haven't seen one example of any ability. In every encounter with me he has simply made bare assertions. If you call that critical thinking, then I'll have to write to the OED to get them to re write the definition.

[Chas]

So I reiterate: personal beliefs of any flavour ought not expect automatic respect accorded merely for being personal beliefs, however deeply held.

So let me make this personal then stimbo. What if I were to say something depraved and reprobate about your precious loved one. Taking her memory in vein in a deliberate ruse to rile you. Now how do you feel about my freedom to say what I want?

I saw Jabba the Hut's wife on uk tv explaining to an atheist comedian how her personal relationship with Jesus was an emotional connection to her (I have to concur that it is to me too. I've shed a tear or two for the bloke I have to admit). The atheist got it, and understood his actions to be hurtful and wrong.

There would be no fun in you guys taking the piss as you do if it wasn't hurtful to someone. That's why you do it right? If it had no effect/ if no one could take offense, you'd have to find something else.

Maybe it shouldn't be that way, but you and I aren't that naive.

---

Chas has repeatedly demonstrated an aptitude for critical thinking here. He's very justified in doubting claims about beliefs in deities.

The bloke is a twat. I haven't seen one example of any ability. In every encounter with me he has simply made bare assertions. If you call that critical thinking, then I'll have to write to the OED to get them to re write the definition.

Faith is the holding of unsupported belief.
You have faith.
You have unsupported beliefs.

Your internal feelings are not evidence to anyone but you.

I'm not surprised you think me a twat. You don't take criticism at all well, as you don't understand the nature of critical thinking.