Open discussion of the Christian Why We're Here thread

[Edwardo Piet]

In the specific context of intellectual debate, I do not feel compelled to couch and qualify every generalization to protect people’s feelings. It is not unfair opining that men are taller than women despite the fact that “some” women are taller that “most” men.

I don't feel compelled to protect feelings either. And likewise, it's not judgmental or condescending--despite how you would pretend otherwise as you dodge my actual point in support of Mathilda's point on a philosophical matter--to judge your lowly bigotry to be lowly bigotry. I don't mind being on a high horse when I deserve to be on it, whereas you on your make-belief unicorn did absolutely nothing of value besides providing a reminder of what you are like as a poor example of a human being by spouting asininely cretinous bullshit about your own total misunderstanding of atheism as you simultaneously offer a clear testimony to the fact that you are a classic case of confirmation bias on legs.

[Mystic]

Let's not kid ourselves. Neither Theists or Atheists are sincere to the truth. If we theists were, we would have long abandoned our idols and held on to God's rope and solved our disputes. Neither are Atheists who are trying to escape the conflict of religion and escape the striving necessary to reach the truth.

No one is better off. And as for myself, a person who abandoned reason to the extent of insanity for 14 years, who when God opened a door to ascension to the higher realms ran away to the darkness in fear of the truth, and was playful with irrationality and listening to the darkest whispers and relying on the unclean energy, my stench is a lot worse then everyone here.

And my disbelief in the truth and hidden signs I saw for years is the worse type of disbelief.

May God lead us to his forgiveness and make us strive to enjoin the truth upon one another.

[Neo-Scholastic]

he [Ne] flat out admitted he's only interested in seeking knowledge that reconfirms his own viewpoint.

You are wrong. I said that knowledge is not an end in-and-of itself....at least not with regards to mission work, the topic of that thread. "Man by his nature desires to know" and the pursuit of pure knowledge does have value. In context however, Christian mission work is more like engineering than mathematics. This is just another example of you twisting my words.

[Edwardo Piet]

I do not much care for being called a psychopath[...]

Luckily no one actually called you a psychopath, myself included. Twisting my words?

---

On thinking about it further, it might be inevitable that theists offend others who don't share their dogma. Just one example off the top of my head. If you are indoctrinated into believing that homosexuality is sinful, then you are not going to be receptive to anything that gay people say to you to enlighten you. Same when it comes to dogma about abortion, women's rights, gender dysphoria, non-nuclear families, open relationships etc. It means that all the rational decisions that you had to make when living your life, which may not have been your choice, get brushed aside without consideration merely because it feels wrong to the indoctrinated theist.  It effectively nullifies you as a person and that can be deeply insulting.

You're nullifying theists as people by assuming they were indoctrinated into those positions, rather than reaching them by rational thought.

It's not an assumption... it's an extremely clear reality.

---

But that's the thing though. People here say terribly offensive things and make generalizations and assumptions about theists all the time lol. Just look through the threads and even some of the thread titles alone. The generalizations and offensive things Neo said about atheists on the debate thread don't really compare to the amount aimed at theists throughout the rest of the forums.

And this is why I say the crucial difference is that he's wrong.

---

Let's not kid ourselves. Neither Theists or Atheists are sincere to the truth.

Speak for yourself.

If we theists were, we would have long abandoned our idols and held on to God's rope and solved our disputes. Neither are Atheists who are trying to escape the conflict of religion and escape the striving necessary to reach the truth.

Funny how your example of atheists not being sincere relies entirely on your own presupposition that theism is true, ain't it?

[Neo-Scholastic]

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.

[John V]

No, I didn't know that.

[Joods]

We don't have to be friend to speak to one another. If you can find your way to determine I am sincere and or honest in what I say, then perhaps I can be a rare resource that will tell you like it is rather than give you the lip service western culture demands. In essence once your done with everyone elses bs come to me for the way it is.

Right.   Because you think that calling my kids retards is going to get me to listen to you? 

1 - your people skills need a LOT of work. 
2 - putting my personal opinions about religion aside and looking at you for the human being you are supposed to be, as long as you continue to belittle others and put them down without a second thought, I hope no one will ever see you as the example of what Christ-like is supposed to be. I'm by no means perfect, but I'm also not trying to promote a "religion of peace" so how I come across to others with regard to being an example is a moot point. You however, go out of your way to tell everyone how they should live and behave and why they should follow Christ. Clearly - your shining example of calling my kids retards in another thread - hits a new low. I have no desire to learn from you or ask you for any advice when you have disregarded my children this way. Like I said in the other thread - I'm sure your god must really be proud of you.

[Edwardo Piet]

he [Ne] flat out admitted he's only interested in seeking knowledge that reconfirms his own viewpoint.

You are wrong. I said that knowledge is not an end in-and-of itself....at least not with regards to mission work, the topic of that thread. "Man by his nature desires to know" and the pursuit of pure knowledge does have value. In context however, Christian mission work is more like engineering than mathematics. This is just another example of you twisting my words.

No, I'm not twisting your words... you're just completely blind to the very clear conclusion that your words entail. And, as you're still clearly logically blind to it: If knowledge is not an end in itself but is merely an end to further Christianity then you have no reason to seek knowledge to refute Christianity which is precisely what confirmation bias is all about: being unwilling to seek knowledge that goes against what you already believe

I don't have to say that you said what you said word for word to point out what you say actually says--as in entails--something else that you have clearly missed. If you say that all X is ultimately Y but you fail to notice that what you say also entails that all X is ultimately Z and I say that you're therefore also saying that all X is also Z you can't say I am twisting your words just because you didn't explicitly mention Z. What one's intended meaning is and what one's semantic meaning is, can be completely separate. Regardless of what you intend to say, what you actually said entailed a very clear position of confirmation bias on your part.

[brewer]

Had no clue Neo. Apparently not everyone.

[Angrboda]

But that's the thing though. People here say terribly offensive things and make generalizations and assumptions about theists all the time lol. Just look through the threads and even some of the thread titles alone. The generalizations and offensive things Neo said about atheists on the debate thread don't really compare to the amount aimed at theists throughout the rest of the forums.

And this is why I say the crucial difference is that he's wrong.

It's natural to always feel that we are right, and the other wrong, but those feelings are not always reliable. I think it is a bit naive to build one's incensed feeling that the other is wrong into some greater conclusion. If your only reason for your animosity toward Neo is because you feel he is wrong in his generalizations, then I suspect you are not on particularly solid ground.