RE: Open discussion of the Christian Why We're Here thread
May 7, 2018 at 1:29 pm
(This post was last modified: May 7, 2018 at 1:31 pm by Catholic_Lady.)
(May 7, 2018 at 12:59 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote:(May 6, 2018 at 8:47 am)chimp3 Wrote: If Chad has any personal integrity he would make that his final post and depart AF.
I changed my username because another member was calling on others to physically harm me. Everyone knows this. I guess it is too much to ask that people stop referring to me by name and respect the concerns I have for the safety of me and my family.
Wow, I did not know this. I'm sorry, I'm one of the people who occasionally calls you by your name.
(May 7, 2018 at 1:25 pm)Hammy Wrote:(May 7, 2018 at 1:06 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: To clarify, are you saying that it's ok to insult people and generalize groups in an unflattering way so long as you're on the correct side of the argument? I may have misunderstood.
No I'm saying it's not a generalization if the generalization is correct. Just as it's not a generalization to say that all squares have four sides or generalization to say that all Nazis who followed Hitler all followed Hitler.
Of course, nowhere did I suggest that all theists are anything--besides irrational in their theism--but the point is that what I said wasn't judgmental or patronizing because what he actually quoted I was right about, as Mathilda confirmed (all I was doing is saying what I think Mathilda was trying to say and it turns out it really was what she was trying to say)... but what he said was judgmental and patronizing because he literally spoke of atheists being ignorant of the truth and yet his beliefs about atheism being wrong have no basis. And what's more: he went much further than that... he said that we didn't even want hope, that we weren't even seeking the truth in other words--the truth from his perspective i.e. Christianity--and... ironically he flat out admitted (albeit implicitly but regardless of what he said it was an admission) that he is not interested in furthering knowledge for its own sake... a position which is guaranteed to lead to confirmation bias... so, ironically, is an example of him shutting his own eyes to truth (or at least the possibility of being wrong. If I'm wrong about atheism and God really does exist... at least I seek knowledge for its own sake so I have no reason to shut my eyes to anything that supports theism. Because I don't seek knowledge merely to further atheism... I seek knowledge to seek knowledge).
I don't think many of the generalizations made here about theists is correct.
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
-walsh
-walsh