For my Christians Friends

Dr. Zhivodka · Apr 16, 2008

Jesus uses the word "angle?"

Quote from I am...:

Why, what is his angle?
More...

I am... · Apr 16, 2008

Quote from Dr. Zhivodka:

Jesus uses the word "angle?"
More...

No worries. One thing we can all agree on, despite all the rhetoric, is: We all just want to be happy right now. We disagree temporarily how that is achieved.

Jesus

smilingsynic · Apr 16, 2008

Quote from DerekD:

Yes, you did. And you know you did. This thread has made it known to you the atheist position. Then you go on ahead and misstate it anyway because it supports your argument. And you make no strides towards correcting it in spite of what atheists routinely have said to you in this thread as well as others.

That's true arrogance, friend-o.

You'll get no apology from me whatsoever considering the preposterous nature of your claims and statements concerning atheism. I'mcalling it as I see it and as it actually is.

In fact, in the part of your post that I sniped out, you state that some ardent atheists switched sides and became ardent theist. Citing C.W. Lewis as an example. You debunked your own preposterous argument that atheists are not open-minded.

What's more, you fail to answer poignant questions put to you concerning agnosticism and where to draw the line. That's one of the things that makes agnosticism intellectually dishonest and not in the least a logical position to take. It's merely hedging one's bet due to timidity, insecurity, and a false sense of enlightenment. It's not a logical position, it's an emotional one.

Atheism, which is based upon reason and logic, is the only logical position to take. It doesn't mean it's the right position. It just means that it stands up to logical and critical reasoning. Theism and agnosticism do not. That's why I rebuff your claims that agnosticism is the most logical position to take.

And so there's no misunderstanding, I'll reiterate: the atheist only asks the theist to prove their assertion. You have competing assertions among theists. Considering the diverse and incongruent nature of many of the assertions, most probably they all can't be right. But the one thing they have in common is a belief in the supernatural. Atheists only ask that they prove that. Outside of that proof, outside of a testable manifestation of their claims, the only logical conclusion is that their claims are without merit. And what they assert exists, doesn't until such time as they can furnish proof or an atheist stumble upon it.

That, is true openmindedness. Not running around saying, "maybe" to every vain imagination of men.
More...

Oh, there is only "the atheistic position"? One, solitary position.

Really? Seems rather simplistic, doesn't it?

If there is only one atheistic position, then where can this creed be found?

For the record, you have NOT refuted agnosticism. Frankly, I have never seen it happen yet. Please, give it a try. Go use Dawkins, if you want (though he failed in his efforts, I am afraid). You may need some help with this one.

And you have yet failed to answer my questions, choosing instead to offer ad hom instead (typical for the evangelical theist AND atheist, btw) and argue, without evidence that my agnosticism is "preposterous".

Btw, one more immature outburst from you, and you'll be sent to the trolls, along with rcanfiel and the rest of the lot.

volente_00 · Apr 16, 2008

Quote from Thunderdog:

Atheists will change their minds when evidence presents them with the opportunity to do so.
More...

LOL, this is not about proof, this is about your ego and thinking you are right. Even if proof was shown, atheist would not admit it due to the fact you have spent too many years with a close mind to admit self defeat.

Turok · Apr 16, 2008

All this discussion of agnostic vs atheism got me thinking:

Many of my friends are atheist. I am the only agnostic (that I know of) in the immediate group. I'm trying to find any substantive differences.

We live our lives exactly the same -- that is, I (and every other agnostic that I know of) live without a single active thought about whether a god *does* exist. We've all been there, done that and are through with it until *new* evidence surfaces. I would no sooner make a life decision based on that existence than would my atheist friends.

Both my atheist friends (yes all of them) and I would immediately become theists if anything remotely convincing came about, but common sense tells both catagories not to hold their breath. This takes away the "agnostics could eventually believe, but atheists will never" argument.

The only real difference would come if someone ask us "does god exist" They would say "no" and I would say "I don't know" (with a real 'and I don't give a sh**' shrug).

All this conversation makes me wonder about my personal answer. If someone asked me this question "When I pick up a rock and let it go, will it fall back to earth *every time*. I of course would say "Yes" (as would any reasonable person on this list).

According to the arguments some have presented here, to be logical I must answer "I don't know". According to them *I can't know* since, well, I haven't dropped every possible rock every possible time from the begining to eternity.

I'm calling BS on that one and am concluding that there isn't a whit of difference between the atheist and agnostic that *I* know.

JB

Turok · Apr 17, 2008

Quote from volente_00:

LOL, this is not about proof, this is about your ego and thinking you are right. Even if proof was shown, atheist would not admit it due to the fact you have spent too many years with a close mind to admit self defeat.
More...

Projection.

The atheists I've know have shown to a person far more willingness to bend to new evidence that *any* theist I've met.

Remember, the atheists are not carrying a conclusion in search of facts.

(of course with your twisted mind you'll still ask someone to prove a negative ... so never mind).

JB

volente_00 · Apr 17, 2008

Quote from Thunderdog:

And, by extension, should we also be agnostic about Bertrand's celestial teapot and the Flying Spaghetti Monster because their existence has neither been proven nor disproven? Being automatically "agnostic" gives a credibility to flights of fancy that do not deserve such consideration.

I was not setting up a straw man account. I was merely pointing out that if we go by probabilities as we presently understand them, the ideas are laughable. If you want to hang your agnostic hat on something so outlandishly remote, then you are free to do so.
More...

The sun rose today. I say it will rise tomorrow. It is possible that it will not ? Yes, but I have a high degree of faith that it will. The same faith that you place in science and the same faith that you place in your atheist religion. What a mans sees often depends on what he is looking for. Seems to me if there is no God, and no heaven then why are you wasting your precious time trying to convince others? It should not matter what others think as long as you are happy. The simple fact remains that you can not prove that God does not exist, so your basic premise is groundless.

Turok · Apr 17, 2008

V00:
>Even if proof was shown, atheist would not admit it ...

The conundrum:

How does the above square with "there are no atheists in foxholes" routine that you theists throw around?

JB

Turok · Apr 17, 2008

V00:
>Seems to me if there is no God, and no heaven
>then why are you wasting your precious time
>trying to convince others? It should not matter
>what others think as long as you are happy.

On ET ... pure entertainment.

With friends ... I hate to see them waste their time and would like to see them live fuller lives.

JB

volente_00 · Apr 17, 2008

Quote from vhehn:

thanks. keep up the good work. its a tough battle for those of us fighting superstitious beliefs with logic and evidence against those who dont use logic or evidence in their belief in the first place.
More...

logic ?

LOL

So tell us how you prove your unrestricted negative of God does not exist using logic ?

Either your logic is flawed or your position is.

Either way you are wrong.