new here, And I believe in God

kokokolo
Theist
Posts: 2
Joined: 2007-07-22
User is offlineOffline
new here, And I believe in God

yes indeed I am a Christian, And I would like to take part in some discussions on this site. I was once an Agnostic/Atheist so I know where most of you guys are coming from, And I don't think trusting the bible makes me a moron by default. ( though I am sure some of you disagree )

My question is: Should I even bother by trying to have intelligent conversation, or am I just going to get flamed and cussed at and called names and mocked ... Before I even lay out any arguments ? I ask this because of the way I have seen so many online forum debates turn out on many other sites.


djneibarger
Superfan
djneibarger's picture
Posts: 564
Joined: 2007-04-13
User is offlineOffline
welcome! if you follow the

welcome! if you follow the posted rules (and maybe try not to assume that we're all assholes in your very first post) you should be fine.

www.derekneibarger.com http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=djneibarger "all postures of submission and surrender should be part of our prehistory." -christopher hitchens


BGH
BGH's picture
Posts: 2772
Joined: 2006-09-28
User is offlineOffline
kokokolo wrote: My

kokokolo wrote:

My question is: Should I even bother by trying to have intelligent conversation, or am I just going to get flamed and cussed at and called names and mocked ... Before I even lay out any arguments ? I ask this because of the way I have seen so many online forum debates turn out on many other sites.

Welcome!

The answer to your questions lie in how you approach the atheists here. If you insinuate that we have no morals, that we haven't looked hard enough or if you try to quote the bible to us in an attempt to convert you will certainly be flamed. Make sure you can defend your arguments without asinine assertations and you will be just fine. 


mindspread
mindspread's picture
Posts: 360
Joined: 2007-02-18
User is offlineOffline
Here's a good list of what

Here's a good list of what NOT to do:

http://www.rationalresponders.com/how_to_irritate_an_atheist

 

Eye-wink


kokokolo
Theist
Posts: 2
Joined: 2007-07-22
User is offlineOffline
cool bro's

hehe cool. I know you are not all assholes, but I have seen so much flaming on other places so I just had to ask. I have seen some debates go straight to name calling really fast. ( on other sites )

 

anyhow thanks for the welcome Bro's


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
Welcome to the hizzle!

Welcome to the hizzle!


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 16424
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
kokokolo wrote: yes indeed

kokokolo wrote:

yes indeed I am a Christian, And I would like to take part in some discussions on this site. I was once an Agnostic/Atheist so I know where most of you guys are coming from, And I don't think trusting the bible makes me a moron by default. ( though I am sure some of you disagree )

My question is: Should I even bother by trying to have intelligent conversation, or am I just going to get flamed and cussed at and called names and mocked ... Before I even lay out any arguments ? I ask this because of the way I have seen so many online forum debates turn out on many other sites.

Athiests have no choice but to have a thick skin, we are outnumbered.

So why should you bother to ingauge us? It depends what you want out of us? If you are here to preach or save us, we have "been there done that".

My advice to you is that you control how long you stay here. Dont treat us like we are all the same. Dont presume that we had "bad" experiances. Dont presume that you know what every atheist thinks. We are all different and come from all perspectives from the "no holds barred" variety to the "cant we all just get along"

You are welcome here but make no mistake the bottem line is to back up what you claim. "I feel sorry for you" or "I was once like you" or "I only want to help" doesnt wash here.

The best thing you can do is back up the claims you make. If you dont, we wont tourture you or have you tarred an feathered We simply will not adapt the position you are selling.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog


Talk25
Theist
Posts: 53
Joined: 2007-07-10
User is offlineOffline
kokokolo wrote: yes indeed

kokokolo wrote:

yes indeed I am a Christian, And I would like to take part in some discussions on this site. I was once an Agnostic/Atheist so I know where most of you guys are coming from, And I don't think trusting the bible makes me a moron by default. ( though I am sure some of you disagree )

My question is: Should I even bother by trying to have intelligent conversation, or am I just going to get flamed and cussed at and called names and mocked ... Before I even lay out any arguments ? I ask this because of the way I have seen so many online forum debates turn out on many other sites.

I'm not a Christian, but I do consider myself to be theist; of the Falun Dafa type.

My experience is that you can have some really good and meaningful conversations here.

Here's one of my contentions: Both theism and atheism are extra-scientific belief systems (BS) because neither can be proven or disproven by modern science.

The world needs Truthfulness, Compassion, Tolerance.
Falun Dafa is good.


shikko
Posts: 448
Joined: 2007-05-23
User is offlineOffline
Talk25 wrote: I'm not a

Talk25 wrote:

I'm not a Christian, but I do consider myself to be theist; of the Falun Dafa type.

My experience is that you can have some really good and meaningful conversations here.

Here's one of my contentions: Both theism and atheism are extra-scientific belief systems (BS) because neither can be proven or disproven by modern science.

Nice acronym; very concise. Eye-wink

--
maybe if this sig is witty, someone will love me.


AbandonMyPeace
Posts: 324
Joined: 2007-03-15
User is offlineOffline
Talk25 wrote:   Here's

Talk25 wrote:

 

Here's one of my contentions: Both theism and atheism are extra-scientific belief systems (BS) because neither can be proven or disproven by modern science.

I dont really need science to prove that I dont believe in a god. Surprised


stillmatic
stillmatic's picture
Posts: 288
Joined: 2007-03-29
User is offlineOffline
Talk25 wrote: kokokolo

Talk25 wrote:
kokokolo wrote:

yes indeed I am a Christian, And I would like to take part in some discussions on this site. I was once an Agnostic/Atheist so I know where most of you guys are coming from, And I don't think trusting the bible makes me a moron by default. ( though I am sure some of you disagree )

My question is: Should I even bother by trying to have intelligent conversation, or am I just going to get flamed and cussed at and called names and mocked ... Before I even lay out any arguments ? I ask this because of the way I have seen so many online forum debates turn out on many other sites.

I'm not a Christian, but I do consider myself to be theist; of the Falun Dafa type.

My experience is that you can have some really good and meaningful conversations here.

Here's one of my contentions: Both theism and atheism are extra-scientific belief systems (BS) because neither can be proven or disproven by modern science.

Since science is a study of the physical world and theists claim that their belief systems have influence over the physical world, this isn't true.

"A proof is a proof. What kind of a proof? It's a proof. A proof is a proof. And when you have a good proof, it's because it's proven." -- former Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien


Susan
Susan's picture
Posts: 3561
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
Welcome, kokokolo. 

Welcome, kokokolo.  (That's hard to type!)

As some of your previous answers have indicated, sometimes we all have to have a bit of a thick skin - especially in the Atheist vs Theist forum.

Quoting scripture won't win you any friends since most of the members think the bible is just a compilation of writings from a bunch of folks a long time ago.  That doesn't make it true.

At the first hint you are trying to convert anyone, I would suggest you duck and cover because the atomic explosion can't be far behind.

However, if you're here to discuss and debate and are willing back up your claims - especially if you have a sense of humor! - we're ready and willing to discuss and debate!

If you've perused the forums, you'll see that we have some theists that post regularly and we don't pick on them (too much Smiling ). 

We're glad you're here and look forward to hearing what you have to contribute. 

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


Talk25
Theist
Posts: 53
Joined: 2007-07-10
User is offlineOffline
Stillmatic,  I'm looking

Stillmatic,

 I'm looking forward to the invention of the "god indicator" or perhaps the "absence of god indicator". Maybe I'll even invest. Smiling 

The world needs Truthfulness, Compassion, Tolerance.
Falun Dafa is good.


JCE
Bronze Member
JCE's picture
Posts: 1219
Joined: 2007-03-20
User is offlineOffline
kokokolo wrote: yes indeed

kokokolo wrote:

yes indeed I am a Christian, And I would like to take part in some discussions on this site. I was once an Agnostic/Atheist so I know where most of you guys are coming from, And I don't think trusting the bible makes me a moron by default. ( though I am sure some of you disagree )

My question is: Should I even bother by trying to have intelligent conversation, or am I just going to get flamed and cussed at and called names and mocked ... Before I even lay out any arguments ? I ask this because of the way I have seen so many online forum debates turn out on many other sites.

Welcome!  Glad you are here and I am looking forward to reading your input on some of the topics.  

You mentioned that you used to be agnostic/atheist (which is what I am) and now you are a christian...could you explain what caused you to make that change?  Had you been atheist up to that point? 


stillmatic
stillmatic's picture
Posts: 288
Joined: 2007-03-29
User is offlineOffline
Talk25

Talk25 wrote:

Stillmatic,

 I'm looking forward to the invention of the "god indicator" or perhaps the "absence of god indicator". Maybe I'll even invest. Smiling 

Maybe you don't understand what I'm saying. For example the Bible makes claims about historical events, such as earthquakes, eclipses and a world wide flood. These would leave geological and historical evidence, thus they fall within the scientific realm.

That is unless your God lies entirely outside the scope of the physical universe, and/or doesn't interfere with our physical universe in any way.

"A proof is a proof. What kind of a proof? It's a proof. A proof is a proof. And when you have a good proof, it's because it's proven." -- former Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien


illeatyourdog
illeatyourdog's picture
Posts: 580
Joined: 2007-07-20
User is offlineOffline
Talk25

Talk25 wrote:

Stillmatic,

 I'm looking forward to the invention of the "god indicator" or perhaps the "absence of god indicator". Maybe I'll even invest. Smiling 

Wouldn't that be the one and the same indicator? Sticking out tongue

" Why does God always got such wacky shit to say? . . . When was the last time you heard somebody say 'look God told me to get a muffin and a cup tea and cool out man'?" - Dov Davidoff


BGH
BGH's picture
Posts: 2772
Joined: 2006-09-28
User is offlineOffline
Talk25 wrote: Stillmatic,

Talk25 wrote:

Stillmatic,

I'm looking forward to the invention of the "god indicator" or perhaps the "absence of god indicator". Maybe I'll even invest. Smiling

Too late, already being made.

Look here:

http://www.yo-god.com/

I will gladly accept a finders fee. Smiling 


illeatyourdog
illeatyourdog's picture
Posts: 580
Joined: 2007-07-20
User is offlineOffline
Maybe you don't understand

Maybe you don't understand what I'm saying. For example the Bible makes claims about historical events, such as earthquakes, eclipses and a world wide flood. These would leave geological and historical evidence, thus they fall within the scientific realm.

 

So does the Iliad.  The fact there was place called Troy (well the Greeks called it Troy) that was taken over by Greece does not mean that Cebren (a river god) exists.

" Why does God always got such wacky shit to say? . . . When was the last time you heard somebody say 'look God told me to get a muffin and a cup tea and cool out man'?" - Dov Davidoff


stillmatic
stillmatic's picture
Posts: 288
Joined: 2007-03-29
User is offlineOffline
illeatyourdog wrote: Maybe

illeatyourdog wrote:

Maybe you don't understand what I'm saying. For example the Bible makes claims about historical events, such as earthquakes, eclipses and a world wide flood. These would leave geological and historical evidence, thus they fall within the scientific realm.

So does the Iliad.  The fact there was place called Troy (well the Greeks called it Troy) that was taken over by Greece does not mean that Cebren (a river god) exists.

Maybe if we found some centaur skeletons or we find the river Styxx which Achilles was dipped in to make him invulnerable.

"A proof is a proof. What kind of a proof? It's a proof. A proof is a proof. And when you have a good proof, it's because it's proven." -- former Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 16424
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Talk25 wrote: kokokolo

Talk25 wrote:
kokokolo wrote:

yes indeed I am a Christian, And I would like to take part in some discussions on this site. I was once an Agnostic/Atheist so I know where most of you guys are coming from, And I don't think trusting the bible makes me a moron by default. ( though I am sure some of you disagree )

My question is: Should I even bother by trying to have intelligent conversation, or am I just going to get flamed and cussed at and called names and mocked ... Before I even lay out any arguments ? I ask this because of the way I have seen so many online forum debates turn out on many other sites.

I'm not a Christian, but I do consider myself to be theist; of the Falun Dafa type.

My experience is that you can have some really good and meaningful conversations here.

Here's one of my contentions: Both theism and atheism are extra-scientific belief systems (BS) because neither can be proven or disproven by modern science.

I do get down on people who say there is no file 13(trash can) when it comes to bad claims.

Certainly there is no proof for or against my "purple snarfwidget". But how valid is that claim merely because I uttered it?

It is NOT bull to say, "ghosts dont get girls pregnant". It is not bull to say, "human flesh does not survive rigor mortis".

You are trying to argue law of probibility but falsely making all claims equal wich they are not.

Gravity has more weight to it  (No punn intended) than a claim that human flesh magically POOF caim from dirt, merely because someone claimed it did.

There has never been a deity claim proven to exist in human history. They all morph into some new absurd claim, or they die and get religated to "myth" which is what they are.

Does a "god" exist? Even if we cant approach absolute zero either way, there are still absurities that if thrown away would not be a loss whatso ever for intelectual honesty.

Just like it is a 99.999999999999999999999% probibility that I cannot fart a lamborginni out of my butt, merely because you cant prove I cant because we cant reach absolute zero does that make my claim a reality? 

Uttering something doesnt make it a 50/50 proposition. Otherwise Scientology would be taught in biology class right next to claims of Allah picking the sex of the baby and claims of Nerivana. All claims are NOT EQUAL!

It is intelectually dishonest to treat all claims as such. This has nothing to do with anyone's human rights. This has to do with preventing science from becoming  comic book propaganda used by any religion or cult and turning into junk. 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog


illeatyourdog
illeatyourdog's picture
Posts: 580
Joined: 2007-07-20
User is offlineOffline
Maybe if we found some

Maybe if we found some centaur skeletons

 If we did we could finally win Ray Comfort's $10,000 dollar prize :p 

or we find the river Styxx which Achilles was dipped in to make him invulnerable.

We better hurry up, Global Warming might dry it up soon Sticking out tongue

" Why does God always got such wacky shit to say? . . . When was the last time you heard somebody say 'look God told me to get a muffin and a cup tea and cool out man'?" - Dov Davidoff


Talk25
Theist
Posts: 53
Joined: 2007-07-10
User is offlineOffline
Brian37, A little hard for

Brian37, A little hard for me to follow all that (maybe it's not that important to me). But... are you claiming that either theism or atheism is within the realm of science? Personally, I'd find it hard to believe anyone who made a claim that he has proof that gods exist or don't exist. Note the distinction between theism, belief in gods, and religion, ritualized worship of gods.

The world needs Truthfulness, Compassion, Tolerance.
Falun Dafa is good.


Talk25
Theist
Posts: 53
Joined: 2007-07-10
User is offlineOffline
Stillmatic, I've never read

Stillmatic, I've never read the bible. Couldn't even finish the first book, but I've heard about those stories 'cause I grew up in a Christian family.

Hope you can understand that I'm making a distinction between "religion" which can be thought of as ritualized worship of gods and "theism" which can be thought of as merely a beilef that gods exist. 

The world needs Truthfulness, Compassion, Tolerance.
Falun Dafa is good.


CrimsonEdge
CrimsonEdge's picture
Posts: 499
Joined: 2007-01-02
User is offlineOffline
Talk25 wrote: Brian37, A

Talk25 wrote:
Brian37, A little hard for me to follow all that (maybe it's not that important to me). But... are you claiming that either theism or atheism is within the realm of science? Personally, I'd find it hard to believe anyone who made a claim that he has proof that gods exist or don't exist. Note the distinction between theism, belief in gods, and religion, ritualized worship of gods.

To sum it up simply, not all claims are equal. For example, I claim that I can sneeze sunflower seeds, but only when I'm alone and there is no recording equipment around. This claim would not be equal to someone elses claim that I can not. It's a probability thing.

In other words, the existance of a God (specifically the ones religions claim to 'know' of) is not a 50/50 thing.


Talk25
Theist
Posts: 53
Joined: 2007-07-10
User is offlineOffline
illeatyourdog

illeatyourdog wrote:
Talk25 wrote:

Stillmatic,

I'm looking forward to the invention of the "god indicator" or perhaps the "absence of god indicator". Maybe I'll even invest. Smiling

Wouldn't that be the one and the same indicator? Sticking out tongue

Hmm. Could be. Maybe it depends on your point of view what you'ld call it though.

By the way, please put my name on your list. (Joke)

The world needs Truthfulness, Compassion, Tolerance.
Falun Dafa is good.


illeatyourdog
illeatyourdog's picture
Posts: 580
Joined: 2007-07-20
User is offlineOffline
Hmm. Could be. Maybe it

Hmm. Could be. Maybe it depends on your point of view what you'ld call it though.

I would call it the sodomizer Sticking out tongue

 

By the way, please put my name on your list. (Joke)

 

So far, there is only one person on that list . . .

" Why does God always got such wacky shit to say? . . . When was the last time you heard somebody say 'look God told me to get a muffin and a cup tea and cool out man'?" - Dov Davidoff


stillmatic
stillmatic's picture
Posts: 288
Joined: 2007-03-29
User is offlineOffline
Talk25 wrote: Stillmatic,

Talk25 wrote:

Stillmatic, I've never read the bible. Couldn't even finish the first book, but I've heard about those stories 'cause I grew up in a Christian family.

Hope you can understand that I'm making a distinction between "religion" which can be thought of as ritualized worship of gods and "theism" which can be thought of as merely a beilef that gods exist. 

Theistic Gods usually perform some kind of action here on Earth, otherwise they are Deistic in nature (for the most part).

"A proof is a proof. What kind of a proof? It's a proof. A proof is a proof. And when you have a good proof, it's because it's proven." -- former Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 16424
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Talk25 wrote: Brian37, A

Talk25 wrote:
Brian37, A little hard for me to follow all that (maybe it's not that important to me). But... are you claiming that either theism or atheism is within the realm of science? Personally, I'd find it hard to believe anyone who made a claim that he has proof that gods exist or don't exist. Note the distinction between theism, belief in gods, and religion, ritualized worship of gods.

It's not hard to follow at all, you have never been aproached with that before. New things are harder to understand than things you've dealt with before.

I'll try to put it into laymen's terms for you.

I see an add on TV for "Buy one get one free" I go to the store and that product is not there. I ask them when it will be in. They tell me it already is but I just cant see it. Do I keep shoping at a store that cant prove to me that the item exists? Wouldnt it be safe for me to throw their claim in the trash? 

Again, not all claims are equal just because someone utters them. Something has to back it up. Religious claims of dietes are not universal and are self centered cheerleading and circular in reasoning, not to mention they started in an age of ignorance.

For the same reason you'd rightfully reject a Muslim's claim that Allah is real because the Quran talks about "mountains moiving" I reject Thor and Apollo and Jesus. Just because someone claims they are real deities means nothing to  me.

"You cant prove they dont exist" is a fallacious tactic.

"I am a billionair, now prove that I am not".

" I am dating Cyndi Crawford. Now prove that I am not"

But since you claim we dont know either way, then according to that logic I could be the one true god since you cant prove that I am not. By default I am god because you cant prove I am not.

Uttering something doesnt make it true othwise I really could fart a Lamborginni out of my butt. 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog


pariahjane
pariahjane's picture
Posts: 1595
Joined: 2006-05-06
User is offlineOffline
Welcome!  I suggest you

Welcome!  I suggest you follow the advice that has already been given to you.  Definitely don't presume what we atheists think.  We are all very different. 

I believe Susan said it best about trying to convert someone.  Proseltyzing will make your visits here very ugly very fast!

Be open minded  and honest I'm sure you'll do fine.

If god takes life he's an indian giver


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 16424
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Talk25 wrote: Stillmatic,

Talk25 wrote:

Stillmatic, I've never read the bible. Couldn't even finish the first book, but I've heard about those stories 'cause I grew up in a Christian family.

Hope you can understand that I'm making a distinction between "religion" which can be thought of as ritualized worship of gods and "theism" which can be thought of as merely a beilef that gods exist.

"I am not like them" is not the point here.

You are in the same boat as a pantheist, deist, Christian or someone who claims that ouiji boards work. Claim whatever you like but dont expect us to buy it unless you can back it up.

"Theism" as you seem to discribe as a generic lower case "god" doesnt give you any more of a pass excaping questions than any other claim.

"A god exists"

"Allah exists"

Doesnt matter to us what you claim, generic or specific, it matters what you can prove. 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog


Talk25
Theist
Posts: 53
Joined: 2007-07-10
User is offlineOffline
stillmatic wrote: Theistic

stillmatic wrote:

Theistic Gods usually perform some kind of action here on Earth, otherwise they are Deistic in nature (for the most part).

"Deistic" is a new word for me and I can't find my dictionary right now, 'cause I'm moving.

The world needs Truthfulness, Compassion, Tolerance.
Falun Dafa is good.


Talk25
Theist
Posts: 53
Joined: 2007-07-10
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote: It's not

Brian37 wrote:

It's not hard to follow at all, you have never been aproached with that before. New things are harder to understand than things you've dealt with before.

I'll try to put it into laymen's terms for you.

I see an add on TV for "Buy one get one free" I go to the store and that product is not there. I ask them when it will be in. They tell me it already is but I just cant see it. Do I keep shoping at a store that cant prove to me that the item exists? Wouldnt it be safe for me to throw their claim in the trash?

But since you claim we dont know either way, then according to that logic I could be the one true god since you cant prove that I am not. By default I am god because you cant prove I am not.

Uttering something doesnt make it true othwise I really could fart a Lamborginni out of my butt.

It's ok with me if you're God or GOD or a god. Why should I care? I don't worship you anyway. I don't worship any god. To me, being theistic just means that I believe in gods.
Of course I can't prove that they exist neither can anyone prove that they do not exist. Which comes back to my point: Both Atheism and Theism are extra-scientific belief systems.

Perhaps you are correct to say;"'You cant prove they dont exist' is a fallacious tactic." Then it would also be correct to say; "'You cant prove they do exist' is a fallacious tactic."

BTW, when you've got a spare moment or two, I wouldn't mind picking up one of those farts of yours. Smiling

The world needs Truthfulness, Compassion, Tolerance.
Falun Dafa is good.


Talk25
Theist
Posts: 53
Joined: 2007-07-10
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote: "I am not

Brian37 wrote:

"I am not like them" is not the point here.

You are in the same boat as a pantheist, deist, Christian or someone who claims that ouiji boards work. Claim whatever you like but dont expect us to buy it unless you can back it up.

"Theism" as you seem to discribe as a generic lower case "god" doesnt give you any more of a pass excaping questions than any other claim.

"A god exists"

"Allah exists"

Doesnt matter to us what you claim, generic or specific, it matters what you can prove.

I agree with you. That's not my point at all. The only claim I made in this thread is that both atheism and theism are extra-scientific belief systems. If you want me to back it up, well I can't. It's just my opinion. What's your opinion about that specifically?

I don't care if you agree with me, and I didn't say anything about ouiji boards. I just want your opinion about the topic I brought up.

Honestly, I find most atheists to be really intelligent, but when I'm talking to them on this website, too often they answer what they thought I said instead of what I actually said. What's up with that?

The world needs Truthfulness, Compassion, Tolerance.
Falun Dafa is good.


Susan
Susan's picture
Posts: 3561
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
We have some new members so

We have some new members so I thought it might be helpful to let everyone know there is a tutorial on how to use the quote function here.

Eveyone is encouraged to use the quoting feature instead of other methods.

Thanks! 

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


Teresa Nichols
Superfan
Posts: 97
Joined: 2007-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Welcome here. Regarding,

Welcome here.

Regarding, this statement:

"new here, And I believe in God,"

you have my sympathy. Cry

Enjoy the forum. 


Fish
Posts: 315
Joined: 2007-05-31
User is offlineOffline
Talk25 wrote: The only

Talk25 wrote:
The only claim I made in this thread is that both atheism and theism are extra-scientific belief systems. If you want me to back it up, well I can't. It's just my opinion. What's your opinion about that specifically?

I don't care if you agree with me, and I didn't say anything about ouiji boards. I just want your opinion about the topic I brought up.

I'm sorry, I don't have an opinion on this topic. However, I can supply you with two facts.

1. Theism requires "extra-scientific" forces/entities.

2. Atheism does not.

Therefore, it is safe to say that atheism is not "extra-scientific"

(there is a possibility that you have a different definition of "extra-scientific" if that is the case, please provide your definition. thanks).


stillmatic
stillmatic's picture
Posts: 288
Joined: 2007-03-29
User is offlineOffline
Talk25 wrote: stillmatic

Talk25 wrote:
stillmatic wrote:

Theistic Gods usually perform some kind of action here on Earth, otherwise they are Deistic in nature (for the most part).

"Deistic" is a new word for me and I can't find my dictionary right now, 'cause I'm moving.

Deism is the belief that God created the natural laws of the universe, but doesn't interfere in any way.

"A proof is a proof. What kind of a proof? It's a proof. A proof is a proof. And when you have a good proof, it's because it's proven." -- former Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien


Talk25
Theist
Posts: 53
Joined: 2007-07-10
User is offlineOffline
Fish wrote: I'm sorry, I

Fish wrote:

I'm sorry, I don't have an opinion on this topic. However, I can supply you with two facts.

1. Theism requires "extra-scientific" forces/entities.

2. Atheism does not.

Therefore, it is safe to say that atheism is not "extra-scientific"

(there is a possibility that you have a different definition of "extra-scientific" if that is the case, please provide your definition. thanks).

What I mean by "extra-scientific" is that it is not within the realm of science. It is something that cannot be either proven or disproven using scientific methods. Clearly this fits theism (the belief that gods exist). I also think it fits atheism (the belief that gods do not exist).

The world needs Truthfulness, Compassion, Tolerance.
Falun Dafa is good.


Voided
Posts: 1195
Joined: 2006-02-20
User is offlineOffline
God is more of a

God is more of a philosophic matter and not so much of a scientific one. However philosophy can look to science for facts. Also I would argue anyone making a claim about the nature of existence or reality is subject to scientific inquire. If someone claims FSM is the cause of gravity then they are setting foot on scientific soil.


mrjonno
Posts: 726
Joined: 2007-02-26
User is offlineOffline
Treat people as you would

Treat people as you would like them to treat you

 

(That sensible moral attitude predates any 'holy' book, and is present in other animals apart from humans)

 

 


stillmatic
stillmatic's picture
Posts: 288
Joined: 2007-03-29
User is offlineOffline
Talk25 wrote: Fish

Talk25 wrote:
Fish wrote:

I'm sorry, I don't have an opinion on this topic. However, I can supply you with two facts.

1. Theism requires "extra-scientific" forces/entities.

2. Atheism does not.

Therefore, it is safe to say that atheism is not "extra-scientific"

(there is a possibility that you have a different definition of "extra-scientific" if that is the case, please provide your definition. thanks).

What I mean by "extra-scientific" is that it is not within the realm of science. It is something that cannot be either proven or disproven using scientific methods. Clearly this fits theism (the belief that gods exist). I also think it fits atheism (the belief that gods do not exist).

Would you also say that the denial of the existance of unicorns is also an extra-scientific belief?

 This is why it is up the person making the positive claim (you) to provide evidence for the existance of something. Non-existance is the default belief.

"A proof is a proof. What kind of a proof? It's a proof. A proof is a proof. And when you have a good proof, it's because it's proven." -- former Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien


Talk25
Theist
Posts: 53
Joined: 2007-07-10
User is offlineOffline
stillmatic wrote: Talk25

stillmatic wrote:
Talk25 wrote:

What I mean by "extra-scientific" is that it is not within the realm of science. It is something that cannot be either proven or disproven using scientific methods. Clearly this fits theism (the belief that gods exist). I also think it fits atheism (the belief that gods do not exist).

Stillmatic wrote:
Would you also say that the denial of the existance of unicorns is also an extra-scientific belief?

This is why it is up the person making the positive claim (you) to provide evidence for the existance of something. Non-existance is the default belief.

The only positive claim I have made on this thread is that both theism and atheism are extra-scientific belief systems. And yes, the denial of the existance of unicorns is extra-scientific, IMO. I've yet to hear of a peer reviewed study that is broadly accepted by the scientific community that supernatural beings either exist or do not exist.

I'm not making a claim whether unicorns exist or not. I'm just saying that such a belief is not within the realm of modern science.

A default belief is still just a belief, not a proven fact.

The world needs Truthfulness, Compassion, Tolerance.
Falun Dafa is good.


Fish
Posts: 315
Joined: 2007-05-31
User is offlineOffline
To believe in something in

To believe in something in a "scientific" sense requires evidence.

There is scientific evidence of muons. Therefore a belief in muons is scientific.

There is no scientific evidence of god. Therefore, not believing in god is scientific.

Making the positivie statement "There is no god" may be outside the realm of science. However, not believing that god exists is certanly not extra-scientific, since there is no evidence to support its existence. There will be no peer-reviewed articles about the non-existance of god because it is not a question that science asks. From it's very premise, science assumes natural causes.


Talk25
Theist
Posts: 53
Joined: 2007-07-10
User is offlineOffline
Fish wrote:

Fish wrote:

To believe in something in a "scientific" sense requires evidence.

There is no scientific evidence of god. Therefore, not believing in god is scientific.

Atheistic dogma.

Fish wrote:
Making the positivie statement "There is no god" may be outside the realm of science. However, not believing that god exists is certanly not extra-scientific, since there is no evidence to support its existence.

So you're saying that saying "There is no god" may be outside the realm of science, but believing that god does not exist is not extra-scientific. Huh? Have you been playing with toys made in China lately?

Fish wrote:
There will be no peer-reviewed articles about the non-existance of god because it is not a question that science asks. From it's very premise, science assumes natural causes.

Uh... if science will not ask that question... doesn't that make it outside the realm of science?

If you can come up with a good example of how any belief that is not supported by scientific research is within the realm of science, ... rediculous.

Oh. I get it now. Duh! This is the Introductions, general conversations and HUMOR section of RR. Very funny.

The world needs Truthfulness, Compassion, Tolerance.
Falun Dafa is good.


Fish
Posts: 315
Joined: 2007-05-31
User is offlineOffline
Talk25 wrote: Atheistic

Talk25 wrote:
Atheistic dogma

I notice that you provide no evidence to support the existence of god. I suspect it is because you cannot.

Talk25 wrote:
So you're saying that saying "There is no god" may be outside the realm of science, but believing that god does not exist is not extra-scientific. Huh? Have you been playing with toys made in China lately?

You seem to have trouble understanding the difference between saying "there is no god" and saying "i do not believe in god." They are not equivalent.

To make a positive claim against god is something that science will not do. To not believe in god does not conflict with science in any way.

Talk25 wrote:
If you can come up with a good example of how any belief that is not supported by scientific research is within the realm of science, ... rediculous.

Having no belief in god conforms entirely with every scientific discovery every made. How many claims about god do the same?


Talk25
Theist
Posts: 53
Joined: 2007-07-10
User is offlineOffline
Fish wrote: Talk25

Fish wrote:

Talk25 wrote:
Atheistic dogma

Fish wrote:
I notice that you provide no evidence to support the existence of god. I suspect it is because you cannot.

You are correct! I cannot provide evidence to conclusively support the existence of gods. Nor can anyone provide evidence to conclusively support the non-existence of such. We seem to be getting somewhere.

Fish wrote:
Talk25 wrote:
So you're saying that saying "There is no god" may be outside the realm of science, but believing that god does not exist is not extra-scientific. Huh? ...?

You seem to have trouble understanding the difference between saying "there is no god" and saying "i do not believe in god." They are not equivalent.

To make a positive claim against god is something that science will not do. To not believe in god does not conflict with science in any way.

Correct again. I missed your point the first time. I agree, not believing in god does not conflict with science, nor does belief in gods. However, it is clear that some religious fanatics speak irresponsibly. (note the difference between belief in gods and religion)

Fish wrote:
Talk25 wrote:
If you can come up with a good example of how any belief that is not supported by scientific research is within the realm of science, ... rediculous.

Having no belief in god conforms entirely with every scientific discovery every made. How many claims about god do the same?

If it is correct to say that having no belief in god conforms entirely with every scientific discovery ever made, it is also correct to say that believing in gods (as differentiated from belief in religion) also conforms entirely with every scientific discovery ever made. Nature (including the so-called supernatural) does not contradict itself. Only people's thinking does that. After all, as you pointed out, we are talking about people's beliefs, not science itself.

Thus, I still conclude that both theism and atheism are extra-scientific belief systems.

The world needs Truthfulness, Compassion, Tolerance.
Falun Dafa is good.


illeatyourdog
illeatyourdog's picture
Posts: 580
Joined: 2007-07-20
User is offlineOffline
Quote: Thus, I still

Quote:
Thus, I still conclude that both theism and atheism are extra-scientific belief systems.

 

Would you say the the claim "I do not beleive Ra controls the sun" is an extra-scientific beleif or a beleif that is based on scientific evidence? 

" Why does God always got such wacky shit to say? . . . When was the last time you heard somebody say 'look God told me to get a muffin and a cup tea and cool out man'?" - Dov Davidoff


Fish
Posts: 315
Joined: 2007-05-31
User is offlineOffline
Talk25 wrote: You are

Talk25 wrote:
You are correct! I cannot provide evidence to conclusively support the existence of gods. Nor can anyone provide evidence to conclusively support the non-existence of such. We seem to be getting somewhere.

So, please explain how my statement is "Atheistic Dogma"

here it is again for reference:

Fish wrote:

To believe in something in a "scientific" sense requires evidence.

There is no scientific evidence of god. Therefore, not believing in god is scientific

Talk25 wrote:

If it is correct to say that having no belief in god conforms entirely with every scientific discovery ever made, it is also correct to say that believing in gods (as differentiated from belief in religion) also conforms entirely with every scientific discovery ever made.

So then what exactly do you mean by gods? In every case presented for the existence of any god so far, none of them have conformed with naturalistic science.

Talk25 wrote:
Nature (including the so-called supernatural) does not contradict itself.

Nature, by its very defintion, does NOT include the supernatural, so I don't know what you mean by that statement.

Talk25 wrote:
Only people's thinking does that. After all, as you pointed out, we are talking about people's beliefs, not science itself.

Thus, I still conclude that both theism and atheism are extra-scientific belief systems.

I don't know exactly what you're referring to in the difference between science and people's beliefs. If you could present an argument that supports the claim of the existence of god that isn't conflicting with scientific observations, then you could say that such a belief conforms with science.

Not believing in something for which there is no evidence is not extra-scientific.

Thus atheism is not extra-scientific.

Belief in god requires beliving in something with no evidence.

Thus theism is extra-scientific


Talk25
Theist
Posts: 53
Joined: 2007-07-10
User is offlineOffline
Sorry I got off track.

Sorry I got off track. Let's stay focused.

Fish wrote:
Not believing in something for which there is no evidence is not extra-scientific.

Thus atheism is not extra-scientific.

Belief in god requires beliving in something with no evidence.

Thus theism is extra-scientific

I have already stated that theism (a positive belief that gods exist) is extra-scientific. Having a belief for or against something for which there is no known evidence is commonly referred to as faith. This definition of faith also qualifies for the positive belief that gods do not exist, atheism.

It seems we disagree on the definition of atheism. I think it's the positive belief that gods do not exist. Aparently, you think its simply a lack of belief in gods. That's something different. It's what I call agnosticism, not atheism (the "a" making atheism the opposite of theism.)

Do you believe that gods do not exist (a positive belief, the opposite of theism)? or would you say that you do not believe in gods (simple non-belief, not quite the opposite of theism)? or do you have a different definition of the words atheism and agnosticism?

I do agree that agnosticism is not extra-scientific, neither is it science. It's simply non-belief in the existence of gods. It does not require any positive beliefs, nor any faith.

However, a positive belief that gods do not exist clearly is extra-scientific because there is no scientific evidence either way, therefore, it does require faith.

I'm particularly interested in understanding your definitions of atheism and agnosticism, and the differences you see between them, if any. Clearly they are different words and should have different definitions.

Certainly, non-belief in gods is not the same as belief that gods do not exits, and there should be different words to express them. I use the words agnosticism and atheism.

The world needs Truthfulness, Compassion, Tolerance.
Falun Dafa is good.


Talk25
Theist
Posts: 53
Joined: 2007-07-10
User is offlineOffline
illeatyourdog wrote: Would

illeatyourdog wrote:

Would you say the the claim "I do not beleive Ra controls the sun" is an extra-scientific beleif or a beleif that is based on scientific evidence?

Probably my answer to Fish will also answer your question.

The world needs Truthfulness, Compassion, Tolerance.
Falun Dafa is good.


Cory T
Theist
Cory T's picture
Posts: 130
Joined: 2007-03-16
User is offlineOffline
kokokolo wrote: yes indeed

kokokolo wrote:

yes indeed I am a Christian, And I would like to take part in some discussions on this site. I was once an Agnostic/Atheist so I know where most of you guys are coming from, And I don't think trusting the bible makes me a moron by default. ( though I am sure some of you disagree )

My question is: Should I even bother by trying to have intelligent conversation, or am I just going to get flamed and cussed at and called names and mocked ... Before I even lay out any arguments ? I ask this because of the way I have seen so many online forum debates turn out on many other sites.

I can back up what everyone here has said, having broken the "Do Not Proseltyze" rule once.  That got extremely ugly.  But I won't go there.  My therapist warned me not to talk about it.  Eye-wink

That said, I have generally found my experience here has been a much more positive one, overall, than my experience with Christian message boards (regular readers of my blog know about my experience with that horrid "Christian Forums" message board, where I got a moderator warning on my introductary post!).  The people here are very nice, and they aren't afraid to have their beliefs (or lack of) challenged.  And, they usually have very good answers to all of it.

Like everyone else said, if you can't back yourself up with some sort of documentation, they WILL rip you up one side and down the other.  It won't be pretty.  But it will be fun to watch! 

I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use. --Galileo Galilei