10 Types of Internet Trolls You'll Meet Online https://www.lifewire.com/types-of-internet-trolls-3485894 @stu @SunTrader "... 02 of 10 The Persistent Debate Troll This type of troll loves a good argument. They can take a great, thoroughly researched and fact-based piece of content, and come at it from all opposing discussion angles to challenge its message. They believe they're right, and everyone else is wrong. You'll often also find them leaving long threads or arguments with other commenters in community comment sections, and they're always determined to have the last word – continuing to comment until that other user gives up. ..." Read this drama from the beginning: https://www.elitetrader.com/et/threads/six-biblical-truths-about-money.331077/page-5#post-4836162
Did I claim he referenced God in his "last paper"? He referenced the possibility of the existence of God many times throughout his career. His entire theory on black holes relied on the fact that there is matter to begin with. I find Stephen Hawking's research and discoveries quite overrated. He is a brilliant mind and made some noteworthy contributions on his earlier years. The latter years he was stuck with a theory that he never was able to conclusively prove. Again, one can beg to differ and disagree. I am out of here, I made my point perfectly clear that the big bang theory is exactly that, an unproven theory with minimal if any scientific foundations at all. There are hundreds of scientists, Christians and agnostics who all account for the possibility of a creator rather than sign up to the big bang theory. Quintessentially they all cite the very same reason that was given in this thread many times. I can live with the fact that anyone who chooses smirks at Christian and biblical beliefs but so am I smirking at anyone who pretends that the big bang theory is anything more than just a theory based on wild speculation and unrealistic assumptions.
It's a good point and another simple fact that the scientific practices of observation and experiment and development of falsifiable hypotheses along with a relentless questioning of established views has shown to be uniquely powerful in revealing the way in which the universe actually works. Religion has no equivalent record of discovering hidden truths.
Exactly. You're getting it, the big bang theory is just a theory. Like the bible is just a book. Both conceived by men. Yet we (some of us) continue to search for answers to how it all began while others (believers) already "know". I have faith the search will someday find out the beginning of existence - which my guess is circular - creator or not. The other part of Ecclesiastes 1:9 "What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again."
And why for @()%#$&='s sake can you not let anyone believe and have faith in what they choose to believe in? And if a majority believes in something then, yes, it does impact life in general and may even tangent your life who may disagree with the majority opinion. In that case those who disagree with the majority opinion have to decide whether they somewhat re-arrange their lives around or just pack up and leave and find the place where they feel comfortable. Life really essentially boils down to that. You can of course try hard to tip the scales and either turn Christians into atheists or immigrate more and more people of similar conviction as yourself. But right now there are more Christians than atheists in America, more Christians than agnostics, more Christians than Hindus, more Christians than Jews, more Christians than Buddhists. Expect life to be somewhat shaped and influenced by the majority faith. You can't change my mind and my faith and equally I should not try to change your faith unless you yourself choose to do so. So in the end the only practical way of life is to either live peacefully next to each other, or one has to leave, and generally that is the person of the minority representation. That is how it has worked for thousands of years.
This isn't about not letting anyone believe and have faith in what they choose to. It's about questioning it. That's all. The important thing is to never stop questioning. Any religion that teaches not to question has something to hide. There is no way of knowing if something might be right or wrong, true or false from an unwillingness to question it, and there's nothing at all unreasonable either about pushing back against majority beliefs and opinions. God fearing majorities have notoriously taken their turn in also causing a fair share of miscarriages of justice throughout history, even putting legislation itself into serious disrepute. Challenge and question is what rights religious wrongs as much as any other kind. Not about changing minds either or turning people. Religious tolerance has to work all ways, freedom of and freedom from religion. Pushing back against the majority view is how a healthy free society functions. Majorities ebb and flow so the standards society sets for everyone irrespective of that is what matters, for those with and without religious beliefs. It's perfectly possible to live peacefully next to each other while questioning everything. Including religious faith. Might be well to remember how Christians were the minority once, questioning and challenging the majority. Weren't they though, determined to change minds!?
Exactly. Old bumper sticker - question authority. I'd add always to that and from whatever source because eventually all authority gets corrupted in some way, shape or form (religious or yes atheist). Always.
No man can say with absolute certainty that there is no God and claim to have any respect at all for science. Conversely, no man can say with absolute certainty that there is a God and not expect the astounding lack of evidence and inconsistency for such to not be questioned. I always enjoyed listening to Hitchens as his arguments for his position were well researched and thought out. He absolutely destroyed organized religion in every debate on the subject. Personally I think his biggest beef was with organized religion and their interpretation of a God rather than with the idea of a God itself. He could be arrogant and unapologetic, but he was one of the great thinkers and orators on the subject.
I never much appreciated his speeches much because he often says one thing and then dances around the same statement for the subsequent two hours. He takes the "superior view" of being atheist but belittles others who choose a different god/God as being superior over all other gods as idiots. I could never quite reconcile this other than resorting it to hipocrisy. Agree that he mostly aims at organized religion because he does not have a single argument that supports the non existence of God. Hence I always felt he somewhat confused his purpose in life, he wanted to critique organized religion, yet most of the time ended up debating religious believers without ever being able to win the debate and he knew he cannot win nor the other side. And yet he never zeroed in on organized religion in particular. That I always felt strange about Hitchens.