Who's the most prominent Christian on this forum?

[greneknight]

What would you disagree with an atheist about?
It seems like you're needing reassurance from another Christian not debate! You've said they 'hate' you on the Christian forum ... Jeez how bad is that!?!? Mind you, they could forgive you!!

No, I don't need reassurance from another Christian. I probably won't see eye to eye with him.

The only thing I might disagree with an atheist about is there is some good in a belief even if it isn't true. Some churches can be a force for good.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

Should Bob believe in the existence of black holes, which actually do exist? Or should he refuse to believe in their existence?

Nice strawman.

---

Some churches can be a force for good.

Tangentially,most do SOME good.

Overall, organised religion,with its dogma,parasitic clergy, obscene wealth and abuse of power is arguably the greatest confidence trick ever perpetrated on the human race, a carbuncle on the arse of human kind.

[greneknight]

Should Bob believe in the existence of black holes, which actually do exist? Or should he refuse to believe in their existence?

Nice strawman.

---

Some churches can be a force for good.

Tangentially,most do SOME good.

Overall, organised religion,with its dogma,parasitic clergy, obscene wealth and abuse of power is arguably the greatest confidence trick ever perpetrated on the human race, a carbuncle on the arse of human kind.

It must be a very pretty carbuncle then. I think my cathedral and most cathedrals and churches in Britain very pretty. My cathedral has a 900 year history. I take pride in our human culture. I admire music and its beauty and a lot of it is Christian. I love art and paintings and most of them are Christian. I love sculpture and most of it (except for the Roman and Greek ones which predate Christ) are Christian. I agree we should divorce the supernatural (ie superstitious) from fact in religion but there is such a huge wealth of art and culture that to cut it off completely is to cut off our human achievements and history.

[The Grand Nudger]

(lets ignore for a moment that anything "non-christian" was periodically destroyed by those art loving christians who so graciously delivered us our culture...... )

[greneknight]

(lets ignore for a moment that anything "non-christian" was periodically destroyed by those art loving christians who so graciously delivered us our culture...... )

Did they do that? Stonehenge remains to this day as do many other pagan structures. It so happens that artistry wasn't that advanced in pre-Christian times and many things were destroyed by time and the weather.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

It must be a very pretty carbuncle then. I think my cathedral and most cathedrals and churches in Britain very pretty

Yes religious building can be exquisite ;I've seen many in the UK, in Europe,and have been inside St Peter's in Rome .Some religious music is also sublime.So what? I did not criticise those things.

Your argument is called 'a strawman fallacy' If you want to have a rational discussion stick to the issues.IE in this case address the specific claims; dogma,parasitic clergy, obscene wealth and abuse of power.

00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

A straw man, known in the UK as an Aunt Sally, is a type of argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[1] To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.[1][2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strawman

[The Grand Nudger]

Artistry wasn't that advanced in pre-christian times......your own ancestors are rolling in their graves. It's a good thing that Stonehenge was a collection of monoliths, because if it wan't so god-damned difficult to get rid of the place they probably would have.

Yes, Gren, "they did that"...frequently. I wouldn't expect you to do that, or honestly, many of the christians alive and kicking today....but I've been wrong before. You and your brethren in christ are off the hook, christianity itself is not.

[CliveStaples]

He would not have any justification to believe in their existence.

What if Bob's religion also believed that there were giant invisible penguins that crapped stars?

How is he any more justified in believing in black holes than giant star crapping penguins?

I don't think it makes much sense to tell someone they should reject a true belief because the belief is unjustified.

Sure, he shouldn't believe that there are giant invisible penguins that crap stars--but that's because such a belief would be false.


Suppose that the overwhelming majority of evidence available to X indicates that some claim C is true--but that, in fact, C is false. Doesn't it seem contrary to reason to urge X to believe C?

[The Grand Nudger]

I don't think it makes much sense to tell someone they should reject a true belief because the belief is unjustified.

Sure, he shouldn't believe that there are giant invisible penguins that crap stars--but that's because such a belief would be false.


Suppose that the overwhelming majority of evidence available to X indicates that some claim C is true--but that, in fact, C is false. Doesn't it seem contrary to reason to urge X to believe C?

Without justification what can be said about it's measure of truth Clive? Right....nada.

BTW, demonstrate that this penguin belief is false without reference to any justification, if you please.

[greneknight]

It must be a very pretty carbuncle then. I think my cathedral and most cathedrals and churches in Britain very pretty

Yes religious building can be exquisite ;I've seen many in the UK, in Europe,and have been inside St Peter's in Rome .Some religious music is also sublime.So what? I did not criticise those things.

Your argument is called 'a strawman fallacy' If you want to have a rational discussion stick to the issues.IE in this case address the specific claims; dogma,parasitic clergy, obscene wealth and abuse of power.

00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

A straw man, known in the UK as an Aunt Sally, is a type of argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[1] To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.[1][2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strawman

OK. This is what you said: "address the specific claims; dogma,parasitic clergy, obscene wealth and abuse of power."

Dogma - what's so bad about it? Let's name one. Virgin birth. That's in the Creed. But we all know it's a mistranslation of almah in Isaiah. St Matthew's writer didn't even read the Hebrew version because he was a Hellenistic Christian probably. He copied from the flawed Septuagint which translated almah as parthenos which is virgin. Everyone knows that but it's religious tradition to talk of the virgin birth. The Archbishop of Canterbury has declared that we should not compel new believers to accept the virgin birth. But we don't erase it from the Creed because that's the nature of religion/culture.

parasitic clergy - you mean RC paedophile priests? Don't know much about them. Jail them I say.

obscene wealth - RC only. The Church of England is quite poor.

abuse of power - that's ancient history. By tradition, our bishops sit in the House of Lords. But there's no abuse of power. If you object to that, you probably object to the monarchy too but that's nothing to do with religion.

All points answered.