Hostage to fear

[robvalue]

Indeed! There is a very handy ignore function too for people who you get tired of talking to.

[Spacetime]

Are you open to being convinced? Or do you just want me to throw out some more clay pigeons for you???

How's this then; we'll address one issue at a time, that way our argument can be linear and pertinent to the issues that I can be convinced on. This will work if we both agree not to fork the conversation without granting the other's opinion/proofs the merit it would warrant at least in further discussion, while staying on topic. Not addressing a single issue out of many does not suggest relent on the other person's part. Surely we can both agree to that.

Let me start with how I would talk to someone in my own Church if we were having fellowship over beers following liturgy (as men often do at my Church);

The bible mentions belief as though it were a choice. I've found that my Christian identity is wholly wrapped up in trying (desperately) to believe, when I simply have not been convinced. A positive affirmation of belief "on" Christ Jesus would be a lie in my case... something that very doctrine prohibits. What I do believe is that I've made tremendous effort in trying to believe, by investigating the faith. Without deconstructing this paragraph, please address this over all point; If belief is a choice and there is evidence that this belief is convincing and rational, why hasn't this evidence rationally convinced me to believe? Especially when I'm not ignorant to it... down to its most specific points.

Here... have the "talking stick". lol

---

Spacetime, just in case this is not perfectly clear to you, you are not obligated to respond to every post directed at you.  Of course, you may respond to anything that you wish.  And you are doing a great job.  But you don't have to post in response to everything, if you do not wish to do so.

As you can see, you are presently in a discussion with someone who uses plenty of irrelevant verbiage, which can serve as a distraction from the main topic.  It is an argument style designed to both wear out one's opponent, as it is tedious to read long-winded irrelevant bullshit, and to misdirect someone away from a losing point.

This is a habit of trying to dignify people from my practice of what I believed to be "Christian".  A more mature agnostic/deist(at best) would dignify people's ideas in these types of discussions.

The conversation has been entirely diverted as a result, you're only too right.  But I proposed something to him that should make our discussion less intrusive to the topic.

Thanks for your reply! 

[Minimalist]

Indeed! There is a very handy ignore function too for people who you get tired of talking to.

It is not a good idea to ignore ignorant fuckheads.



They tend to get elected while you aren't watching.

[Spacetime]

That is some awesome stuff there space time!

I thought I knew a fair bit about the problems with Christianity by now, but you're throwing out stuff I never even heard of! As well as pointing the standard problems out that never, ever get honestly addressed. I think I'm going to learn a lot from you

That's cool, because I too have loads to learn from you folks.

Thanks for acknowledging my posts.  I don't know that really anyone around me knows that I am conversant on theology (at least to a degree).  Really the only time it's been treated with respect... is here.  Most Christians I know in person, sort of gawk at it, try to dismiss it.

Thanks, man!

---

Indeed! There is a very handy ignore function too for people who you get tired of talking to.

I try not to ignore anyone, but it would be nice to.  It's sort of "blessed suffering".  lol

---

It is not a good idea to ignore ignorant fuckheads.

They tend to get elected while you aren't watching.

Good point.

[robvalue]

You're welcome

Oh sure, when it comes to important public figures whose words carry influence, ignoring them is not an option. On here, what each particular annoying person says isn't of much consequence so I save my sanity for those worth talking to. If I had the mental energy, I would take on everyone all the time here, but sadly I have to prioritise my resources.

[Randy Carson]

Are you open to being convinced? Or do you just want me to throw out some more clay pigeons for you???

How's this then; we'll address one issue at a time, that way our argument can be linear and pertinent to the issues that I can be convinced on.  This will work if we both agree not to fork the conversation without granting the other's opinion/proofs the merit it would warrant at least in further discussion, while staying on topic.  Not addressing a single issue out of many does not suggest relent on the other person's part.  Surely we can both agree to that.

Let me start with how I would talk to someone in my own Church if we were having fellowship over beers following liturgy (as men often do at my Church);

The bible mentions belief as though it were a choice.  I've found that my Christian identity is wholly wrapped up in trying (desperately) to believe, when I simply have not been convinced.  A positive affirmation of belief "on" Christ Jesus would be a lie in my case... something that very doctrine prohibits.  What I do believe is that I've made tremendous effort in trying to believe, by investigating the faith.  Without deconstructing this paragraph, please address this over all point; If belief is a choice and there is evidence that this belief is convincing and rational, why hasn't this evidence rationally convinced me to believe?  Especially when I'm not ignorant to it... down to its most specific points.

Here... have the "talking stick".

I'm happy to have a civil discussion. Rather than take over your thread however, which is really about your apparent conversion to atheism, post your question in the "Ask a Catholic" (My thread) and everyone who wants to ignore the conversation can do so more easily.

Sound good?

One point, I'm having one of these "quiet conversations" there with Neimenovic, too, but it shouldn't be to difficult to keep the two trains of thought separated.

[Simon Moon]

I'm happy to have a civil discussion. Rather than take over your thread however, which is really about your apparent conversion to atheism, post your question in the "Ask a Catholic" (My thread) and everyone who wants to ignore the conversation can do so more easily.

Sound good?

One point, I'm having one of these "quiet conversations" there with Neimenovic, too, but it shouldn't be to difficult to keep the two trains of thought separated.

Minor correction:

There is no such thing as a 'conversion to atheism'. That is an incoherent statement.

Carry on with the thread...

[Randy Carson]

I'm happy to have a civil discussion. Rather than take over your thread however, which is really about your apparent conversion to atheism, post your question in the "Ask a Catholic" (My thread) and everyone who wants to ignore the conversation can do so more easily.

Sound good?

One point, I'm having one of these "quiet conversations" there with Neimenovic, too, but it shouldn't be to difficult to keep the two trains of thought separated.

Minor correction:

There is no such thing as a 'conversion to atheism'. That is an incoherent statement.

Carry on with the thread...

ˈkänˌvərt/

1. a person who has been persuaded to change their religious faith or other beliefs.

Someone who leaves Christianity for atheism has, by definition, been persuaded one way or another to change their faith or beliefs.

[Spacetime]

I'm happy to have a civil discussion. Rather than take over your thread however, which is really about your apparent conversion to atheism, post your question in the "Ask a Catholic" (My thread) and everyone who wants to ignore the conversation can do so more easily.

Sound good?

One point, I'm having one of these "quiet conversations" there with Neimenovic, too, but it shouldn't be to difficult to keep the two trains of thought separated.

It doesn't sound good. I'm not going to "ask a Catholic", because, as I've said twice previously, it would be doing more of the same. I'd like to ask you as a person, who might be reaching to help me in this rough time I'm having from the personal perspective of a Catholic. However, you've just been copy/pasting catechism. Going on over to "Ask a Catholic" means I need Catholicism to explain to me all that I already know. I've spent years reading Catholic literature and I find Catholicisms answers to be inadequate. If you have a convincing argument (outside of the catechism), then yes... I'm ready to be convinced.

I used to use this conversion / deconversion / reversion argument too. If the truth were really written in our hearts, why is it so hard to find? Given enough education, a person can easily take Christianity off like a t-shirt. Though I recognize each person is different, I know enough about Christianity and just enough about the universe to abandoned the attempt of faith.

If you come to me as a person, I'll gladly be open to convincing. If you just recite catechism, as if I hadn't read it (or papal bulls, or the Early Church Fathers, or respected Bishops of post modern Christianity, or apologists, or anthropologists, or biologists, or physicists, etc)... I'll be offended. I'm sure you can understand that. One of our greatest achievements as a species is empathy (no seriously, it really is), surely you have some of that... enough to see that regurgitating catechism to a catholic with answers that don't exist within it... is offensive because it lacks empathy, the crowning achievement of our species that lead to us becoming so much more than the other animals.

[Minimalist]

Someone who leaves Christianity for atheism has, by definition, been persuaded one way or another to change their faith or beliefs.

Atheism is not a faith or belief, dummy.  In fact, it is the total lack of same.

Why can you not comprehend this simple fact?  I have trouble accepting that you are that stupid.  Therefore it must be intentional.