Do you doubt that your God exists?
This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="Sam_Lowery"]Well it's a magical man who is invisible and lives in the sky, I guess it's just semantics as far as what you call someone like that.
But let me ask you why this, there are thousands of gods you could believe in, but I assume you are an atheist in regards to Ra and Thor, so why do you worship this particular god? Is it just because you were raised to believe in him, or was there some kind of logical process that brought you to the conclusion that this was the true god while the others were not?
Dracargen
Option two. I didn't even come to that conclusion until fairly recently.
What was the situation that lead you that decision, and which god do you worship if you don't mind me asking?
My god is my girl, my goddess.
I certainly don't doubt her existence, as I 'had fun' with her last night.
To be absolutely certain of one's belief....one has to have entertained the opposite.[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="sonicare"]But likewise, shouldn't atheists wonder if a god does exist?sonicare
I'm just saying, that if atheists are true intellectuals, than they must always harbor that possibility. Just as many sane minded religous people can entertain strong doubts.
It's hard to harbor god's existence because there's no evidence or signs to lead us to believe that there's the possibility.[QUOTE="Rocky32189"]If anyone religious DOESN'T doubt that god exists, they are not a rational thinking individual because there is no proof that their god exist.LJS9502_basicDepends on what you consider proof......and as I stated...one does need to come to terms with faith....and question it. But that doesn't mean one can't believe.If you had your own proof, you wouldn't need to believe.
[QUOTE="soren008"]Well to be honest....I don't think all atheists question much. They take what science says and only attribute reality to that. Science requires questions...yet if you have read any posts in OT regarding science you see stagnant minds that don't wish to question science.Actually Atheism is built on the foundations to "question everything"
Atheists ask "Why?"......... how very narrowminded that is ....:P
LJS9502_basic
Well science is an evolving process ... they will always question science ??
and there is always a possiblilty that they are wrong ... which they will accept & take on board?
You know there are people that DON'T question what science tells them right? Which would, of course, stagnant the field.Well science is an evolving process ... they will always question science ??
and there is always a possiblilty that they are wrong ... which they will accept & take on board?
soren008
[QUOTE="soren008"]You know there are people that DON'T question what science tells them right? Which would, of course, stagnant the field.Well science is an evolving process ... they will always question science ??
and there is always a possiblilty that they are wrong ... which they will accept & take on board?
LJS9502_basic
Yeah, you keep repeating that but the same can be said about religious people, so it doesn't mean anything. There will always be blind believers on all sides. Personally, I have yet to come across an atheist or generally a non religious person who doesn't question evolution or think it's a complete load of bull.
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="soren008"]You know there are people that DON'T question what science tells them right? Which would, of course, stagnant the field.Well science is an evolving process ... they will always question science ??
and there is always a possiblilty that they are wrong ... which they will accept & take on board?
BlackAlpha666
Yeah, you keep repeating that but the same can be said about religious people, so it doesn't mean anything. There will always be blind believers on all sides. Personally, I have yet to come across an atheist or generally a non religious person who doesn't question evolution or think it's a complete load of bull.
Context is everything....more selective reading.:lol:You did notice I was responding to a point made by another person? And I limited my answer to the subject of said post. Try that sometime....
[QUOTE="soren008"]You know there are people that DON'T question what science tells them right? Which would, of course, stagnant the field.Well science is an evolving process ... they will always question science ??
and there is always a possiblilty that they are wrong ... which they will accept & take on board?
LJS9502_basic
I was referring to the actual Scientists ..
I understand your point ... There are people who follow Science blindly as well as religion
Without ever learning about either.
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="soren008"]Well to be honest....I don't think all atheists question much. They take what science says and only attribute reality to that. Science requires questions...yet if you have read any posts in OT regarding science you see stagnant minds that don't wish to question science.Actually Atheism is built on the foundations to "question everything"
Atheists ask "Why?"......... how very narrowminded that is ....:P
soren008
Well science is an evolving process ... they will always question science ??
and there is always a possiblilty that they are wrong ... which they will accept & take on board?
That's right. Science promotes questioning, creation of new ideas and the basic motto is that we don't know everything. It's a completely different kind of mindset. That's why I support science a lot more then religion. Right now science doesn't hold the answer to everything, it's arrogant and close minded to think that you do, but that mindset will allow people to get to the truth of how the universe really works.
Context is everything....more selective reading.:lol:
You did notice I was responding to a point made by another person? And I limited my answer to the subject of said post. Try that sometime....
LJS9502_basic
Selective reading my arse.
Science doesn't promote questioning....that is up to the individual. Some question....some do not. Sometimes when people think the answer has been found they stop looking. It can take years or decades before another person takes another look at a scientific finding.That's right. Science promotes questioning, creation of new ideas and the basic motto is that we don't know everything. It's a completely different kind of mindset. That's why I support science a lot more then religion. Right now science doesn't hold the answer to everything, it's arrogant and close minded to think that you do, but that mindset will allow people to get to the truth of how the universe really works.
BlackAlpha666
You seem to be confusing religion with science. Religion is not intended to be scientific in nature. It doesn't involve the physical properties of life. It's completely false to think it's an either/or thing.
Then show me in that exchange where religion was mentioned? Wait...it wasn't until you misinterpreted again.:lol:Selective reading my arse.
BlackAlpha666
[QUOTE="BlackAlpha666"]Science doesn't promote questioning....that is up to the individual. Some question....some do not. Sometimes when people think the answer has been found they stop looking. It can take years or decades before another person takes another look at a scientific finding.That's right. Science promotes questioning, creation of new ideas and the basic motto is that we don't know everything. It's a completely different kind of mindset. That's why I support science a lot more then religion. Right now science doesn't hold the answer to everything, it's arrogant and close minded to think that you do, but that mindset will allow people to get to the truth of how the universe really works.
LJS9502_basic
You seem to be confusing religion with science. Religion is not intended to be scientific in nature. It doesn't involve the physical properties of life. It's completely false to think it's an either/or thing.
Yes but that's irrelevant. The way science works is that you must question and create new ideas or you won't be able to prove the scientific theories. Then those theories will never turn into facts, thus you won't get anywhere and there won't be any progress.
Science is partly a belief like religion. Non religious people just choose not to believe in the spiritual world, which might only exist in our head as an idea. Of course like with everything else in religion, we can't prove who's right an who's wrong, therefore you shouldn't say what's right and what's wrong like it's a fact because you just don't know for sure.
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="BlackAlpha666"]Science doesn't promote questioning....that is up to the individual. Some question....some do not. Sometimes when people think the answer has been found they stop looking. It can take years or decades before another person takes another look at a scientific finding.That's right. Science promotes questioning, creation of new ideas and the basic motto is that we don't know everything. It's a completely different kind of mindset. That's why I support science a lot more then religion. Right now science doesn't hold the answer to everything, it's arrogant and close minded to think that you do, but that mindset will allow people to get to the truth of how the universe really works.
BlackAlpha666
You seem to be confusing religion with science. Religion is not intended to be scientific in nature. It doesn't involve the physical properties of life. It's completely false to think it's an either/or thing.
Yes but that's irrelevant. The way science works is that you must question and create new ideas or you won't be able to prove the scientific theories. Then those theories will never turn into facts, thus you won't get anywhere and there won't be any progress.
Science is partly a belief like religion. Non religious people just choose not to believe in the spiritual world, which might only exist in our head as an idea. Of course like with everything else in religion, we can't prove who's right an who's wrong, therefore you shouldn't say what's right and what's wrong like it's a fact because you just don't know for sure.
One....that doesn't negate what I said.
Two...theories aren't always provable.
Three....I never said that so stop with the "you" comments. More editting.:roll:
[QUOTE="BlackAlpha666"]Then show me in that exchange where religion was mentioned? Wait...it wasn't until you misinterpreted again.:lol:Selective reading my arse.
LJS9502_basic
I simply said that it's not worth ridiculing religion or science over it because there are blind believers on both sides.
[QUOTE="BlackAlpha666"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="BlackAlpha666"]Science doesn't promote questioning....that is up to the individual. Some question....some do not. Sometimes when people think the answer has been found they stop looking. It can take years or decades before another person takes another look at a scientific finding.That's right. Science promotes questioning, creation of new ideas and the basic motto is that we don't know everything. It's a completely different kind of mindset. That's why I support science a lot more then religion. Right now science doesn't hold the answer to everything, it's arrogant and close minded to think that you do, but that mindset will allow people to get to the truth of how the universe really works.
LJS9502_basic
You seem to be confusing religion with science. Religion is not intended to be scientific in nature. It doesn't involve the physical properties of life. It's completely false to think it's an either/or thing.
Yes but that's irrelevant. The way science works is that you must question and create new ideas or you won't be able to prove the scientific theories. Then those theories will never turn into facts, thus you won't get anywhere and there won't be any progress.
Science is partly a belief like religion. Non religious people just choose not to believe in the spiritual world, which might only exist in our head as an idea. Of course like with everything else in religion, we can't prove who's right an who's wrong, therefore you shouldn't say what's right and what's wrong like it's a fact because you just don't know for sure.
One....that doesn't negate what I said.
Two...theories aren't always provable.
Three....I never said that so stop with the "you" comments. More editting.:roll:
1. So there are blind believers in science too, yes. What is your point?
2. What is your point exactly? One sentence replies are really worthless.
3. Your quote: "It's completely false to think it's an either/or thing." Sounds like you are claiming that the spiritual world is a fact.
, you keep repeating that but the same can be said about religious people, so it doesn't mean anything.I simply said that it's not worth ridiculing religion or science over it because there are blind believers on both sides.
BlackAlpha666
Nothing simple about your comment. It was intended to say I had something in my last post I hadn't to further your agenda.;)
[QUOTE="BlackAlpha666"], you keep repeating that but the same can be said about religious people, so it doesn't mean anything.I simply said that it's not worth ridiculing religion or science over it because there are blind believers on both sides.
LJS9502_basic
Nothing simple about your comment. It was intended to say I had something in my last post I hadn't to further your agenda.;)
You always fail to specify what's on your agenda which makes us only speculate on what your points are. Instead of simply denying something, you should explain why you deny it. Why were my post wrong? And don't say "selective reading" again because that doesn't mean crap without you explaining why.
You had to guess that a post about science was about science?:lol:You always fail to specify what's on your agenda which makes us only speculate on what your points are. Instead of simply denying something, you should explain why you deny it. Why were my post wrong? And don't say "selective reading" again because that doesn't mean crap without you explaining why.
BlackAlpha666
I don't have the agenda...I said you twisted the post to suit your agenda.
[QUOTE="BlackAlpha666"]You had to guess that a post about science was about science?:lol:You always fail to specify what's on your agenda which makes us only speculate on what your points are. Instead of simply denying something, you should explain why you deny it. Why were my post wrong? And don't say "selective reading" again because that doesn't mean crap without you explaining why.
LJS9502_basic
I don't have the agenda...I said you twisted the post to suit your agenda.
Do I always have to spell things out for you? Agenda is a metaphor. Re-read the last post and replace the first part of the first sentence by: "You always fail to specify what you mean."
You always dodge the questions, which makes me believe that you don't know the answers.
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="BlackAlpha666"]You had to guess that a post about science was about science?:lol:You always fail to specify what's on your agenda which makes us only speculate on what your points are. Instead of simply denying something, you should explain why you deny it. Why were my post wrong? And don't say "selective reading" again because that doesn't mean crap without you explaining why.
BlackAlpha666
I don't have the agenda...I said you twisted the post to suit your agenda.
Do I always have to spell things out for you? Agenda is a metaphor. Re-read the last post and replace the first part of the first sentence by: "You always fail to specify what you mean."
You always dodge the questions, which makes me believe that you don't know the answers.
*sigh* Having meaning to one's statement DOESN'T mean one has an agenda. Flawed analogy.Second....since the post was dealing ONLY IN SCIENCE....I fail to see why you thought we were talking about anything BUT SCIENCE. That would be an error on your part....as the post CLEARLY mentioned science. Now you want to spin it that it was not your fault. Sorry dude...but the post was clear as to subject matter.
Answer to what question? You haven't asked any questions. Can't dodge what isn't there. You're merely ranting about agenda's now. :lol:
[QUOTE="soren008"]You know there are people that DON'T question what science tells them right? Which would, of course, stagnant the field.Well science is an evolving process ... they will always question science ??
and there is always a possiblilty that they are wrong ... which they will accept & take on board?
LJS9502_basic
Could you please explain why you said that? What was your point?
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="soren008"]You know there are people that DON'T question what science tells them right? Which would, of course, stagnant the field.Well science is an evolving process ... they will always question science ??
and there is always a possiblilty that they are wrong ... which they will accept & take on board?
BlackAlpha666
Could you please explain why you said that? What was your point?
Self obvious....some people don't question science....not questioning can lead to stagnation with no new advances. That was my point. Spelled out exactly as I said the first time.If you are not understanding that.... then I don't think a debate will be very fruitful dude.
[QUOTE="BlackAlpha666"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="soren008"]You know there are people that DON'T question what science tells them right? Which would, of course, stagnant the field.Well science is an evolving process ... they will always question science ??
and there is always a possiblilty that they are wrong ... which they will accept & take on board?
LJS9502_basic
Could you please explain why you said that? What was your point?
Self obvious....some people don't question science....not questioning can lead to stagnation with no new advances. That was my point. Spelled out exactly as I said the first time.If you are not understanding something so simple than I don't think a debate will be very fruitful dude.
Isn't that a bit obvious? Do you think this is a big problem for science or something? To me it just seems like saying something obvious like: "The sky is blue during day." Clearly you must have said that for another reason. Or was it just a random remark without any point?
This is where we come back to context again. It was a post in a discussion with another user. And if it was so obvious why did you have to ask what it meant? Why did you respond to my post incorrectly? In fact, why respond at all since you weren't involved in the discussion and didn't further the discussion?Isn't that a bit obvious? Do you think this is a big problem for science or something? To me it just seems like saying something obvious like: "The sky is blue during day." Clearly you must have said that for another reason. Or was it just a random remark without any point?
BlackAlpha666
I don't think it was obvious to some.;)
[QUOTE="BlackAlpha666"]This is where we come back to context again. It was a post in a discussion with another user. And if it was so obvious why did you have to ask what it meant? Why did you respond to my post incorrectly? In fact, why respond at all since you weren't involved in the discussion and didn't further the discussion?Isn't that a bit obvious? Do you think this is a big problem for science or something? To me it just seems like saying something obvious like: "The sky is blue during day." Clearly you must have said that for another reason. Or was it just a random remark without any point?
LJS9502_basic
I don't think it was obvious to some.;)
Because it looks like you are trying to ridicule science, seeing as how the point of your post has almost no meaning. That's like me replying to one of your religious posts with: "But you know that there are priests who are pedophiles?"
And his childish name-calling, and his fourth grade knowledge of Christianity, and his silly debating, and his ridiculous generalisations. . . . .Dracargen
Where's the name calling? How did you come up with 4th grade? And why would you say I make ridiculous generalizations, right after you just did in the same post? Again, think before you speak so you don't look like a hypocrite, unless that's what you want to be for some odd reason.
Yeah....took me all day but I think I finally got through. I don't enjoy posting with him. I do enjoy an exchange of ideas which necessitates differing viewpoints.....but in a mature non insulting way. I think I got him angry with some of my posts....ah well. As long as it worked.LJS9502_basic
The only thing you got through to me is that you would rather die before you put your ego on the shelf. I don't know why you can never admit to being a flawed being. Jeez, nobody here even really knows you, so why would it be embarrassing?
You didn't get me angry. I just got tired and went to eat and watch the basketball game. You could never get me angry, cause I don't even get mad anymore. There's a big difference between annoyance and anger. You're annoying like a gnat, but I don't get angry at gnats.
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Have you invited DS along?Dracargen
Actually, I'm trying to set up an appointment between him and one of the smartest Christian users there. But I need the other guy's permission first.
Yeah, it would need to be the "smartest" christian wouldn't it? Thanks for the compliment that you didn't even mean to give me. ;) Cause you know the majority of them couldn't even get past the first five minutes with me, and might even end up losing their faith.
Won't do any good. He's not looking to think about it. He wants to just flame religion and anyone that believes. I've tried to have discussions with him and answer questions...but he just insults me back. So I don't think he wants information.LJS9502_basic
LJ, because you're not telling me anything that I didn't hear for the decade and a half that I was a christian. You can't teach me anything new. I've heard all this crap countless times. Same stories over and over that STILL make no logical sense. Why are you trying to tell me something I've already heard? I'm trying to open you to a side that you obviously never explored before, so that would be something new. You, however, are just repeating what you were taught, which is the same thing I was taught too, which I don't need to hear for the 87,345th time. :roll:
And I don't insult you, I don't know why you keep saying that. Maybe you're trying to get people to turn against me, by playing the victim card, but do you really think I would care if that happened? You couldn't break down someone who's already been through hell.
And having faith in yourself, your family, your friends, and the entire human race isn't enough?I guess like Einstein said everything is relative because from my perspective an adult having an imaginary friend isn't healthy.
Sam_Lowery
Bingo.
[QUOTE="Sam_Lowery"]But let me ask you why this, there are thousands of gods you could believe in, but I assume you are an atheist in regards to Ra and Thor, so why do you worship this particular god? Is it just because you were raised to believe in him, or was there some kind of logical process that brought you to the conclusion that this was the true god while the others were not?
BlackAlpha666
Usually it comes down to ignorance towards the other gods. Ignorance in the sense that people don't know a thing about them and don't care enough to find out about them.
Bingo, again. Man, I'm glad I'm not the only logical person around here. You guys make me feel good.
Arguing with nonbelievers is useless because they can never understand the relationship that some believers have with God. abdelmessih101
I used to think I had a relationship with "god". Why does this keep coming up? Appraently, it's the current believers who can't understand that many current atheists used to feel the same way that you do.
God can't be proven to anyone unless they have faith first. abdelmessih101
But god still hasn't been proven at all, not even by people with faith. :roll:
You know there are people that DON'T question what science tells them right? Which would, of course, stagnant the field.LJS9502_basic
I don't know anybody like that personally, although it's apparent that some people like that do exist. They must be small in number though, and everyone would know they are blockheads, so why be concerned with it anyway?
...you shouldn't say what's right and what's wrong like it's a fact because you just don't know for sure. BlackAlpha666
Yes, that is his problem, and I've tried to point it out before, but he doesn't seem to see it. I guess wearing a veil can do that to ones' vision? Perhaps...
You always fail to specify what's on your agenda which makes us only speculate on what your points are. Instead of simply denying something, you should explain why you deny it. Why were my post wrong? And don't say "selective reading" again because that doesn't mean crap without you explaining why.BlackAlpha666
Exactly. He never explains. He just says, "you're wrong, dude", and then leaves. It proves nothing, and means nothing. Exactly.
Do I always have to spell things out for you? BlackAlpha666
I always have to do that too! :shock:
You always dodge the questions, which makes me believe that you don't know the answers.BlackAlpha666
Yup.
Do you think this is a big problem for science or something? To me it just seems like saying something obvious like: "The sky is blue during day." Clearly you must have said that for another reason. Or was it just a random remark without any point?BlackAlpha666
Exactly. :lol: There is never a point. He says elementary level things, and acts like he said something profound, and shows how highly he feels of himself with a little wink. ;)
Because it looks like you are trying to ridicule science, seeing as how the point of your post has almost no meaning. That's like me replying to one of your religious posts with: "But you know that there are priests who are pedophiles?"
BlackAlpha666
Exactly, again. Damn, BlackAlpha, I wish you would have been around earlier. I like your no-nonsense approach and how you don't let people try to weasel their way out of explanations. So, for the record, there is a least one person here (me) who's got your back, and understands you completely. I know you're right. You rule. :)
Nope. I don't beleive in any "God" or "Religion" and have absolutely nothing against any form of it. I beleive greatly in "The Big Bang" theory.
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="BlackAlpha666"]This is where we come back to context again. It was a post in a discussion with another user. And if it was so obvious why did you have to ask what it meant? Why did you respond to my post incorrectly? In fact, why respond at all since you weren't involved in the discussion and didn't further the discussion?Isn't that a bit obvious? Do you think this is a big problem for science or something? To me it just seems like saying something obvious like: "The sky is blue during day." Clearly you must have said that for another reason. Or was it just a random remark without any point?
BlackAlpha666
I don't think it was obvious to some.;)
Because it looks like you are trying to ridicule science, seeing as how the point of your post has almost no meaning. That's like me replying to one of your religious posts with: "But you know that there are priests who are pedophiles?"
We have diversed greatly of the subject. This has no impact on any part of what you may believe, so these messages are completely pointless in answer to 'Do you doubt that your God exists?'
Black Alpha, It may look like that to you but it doesn't look like that to me. He is not trying to ridicule science at all. And your outlandish example does the opposite of what you had hoped for, because all I can see from it is how ridiculous your point of view is compared to his.
Answer me this, if you couldn't see the world around you, would you believe it was there? Most people would agree with me that the answer is no. Because in the world we live in we seem to need physical scientific proof to believe anything.
Now, I can't see God, but from past experiences I know he is there. So don't say, 'if I can't see him then he isn't there' because you can't see everything with your own eyes.
Answer me this, if you couldn't see the world around you, would you believe it was there? Most people would agree with me that the answer is no. Because in the world we live in we seem to need physical scientific proof to believe anything.
Now, I can't see God, but from past experiences I know he is there. So don't say, 'if I can't see him then he isn't there' because you can't see everything with your own eyes.
Lansdowne5
Blind people know the world is there. They have 4 other senses through which they experience the world.
What are your past experiences that make you "know" that god is there?
Answer me this, if you couldn't see the world around you, would you believe it was there? Most people would agree with me that the answer is no. Because in the world we live in we seem to need physical scientific proof to believe anything.
Now, I can't see God, but from past experiences I know he is there. So don't say, 'if I can't see him then he isn't there' because you can't see everything with your own eyes.
Lansdowne5
It's not so much about physical evidence. It's mostly about logical evidence which makes sense. Like I said before, there's no physical proof for one of the most controversial beliefs ever, evolution. But because there is a large amount of indirect evidence, which explains things in a logical way to people, many people believe in it.
EDIT: I'm a big skeptic when it concers the type of faith from your example. I've experienced how easily the brain can be deceived into thinking or seeing things which aren't there. I've experienced how easily you can fake emotions by certain triggers or even at will.
[QUOTE="BlackAlpha666"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="BlackAlpha666"]This is where we come back to context again. It was a post in a discussion with another user. And if it was so obvious why did you have to ask what it meant? Why did you respond to my post incorrectly? In fact, why respond at all since you weren't involved in the discussion and didn't further the discussion?Isn't that a bit obvious? Do you think this is a big problem for science or something? To me it just seems like saying something obvious like: "The sky is blue during day." Clearly you must have said that for another reason. Or was it just a random remark without any point?
Lansdowne5
I don't think it was obvious to some.;)
Because it looks like you are trying to ridicule science, seeing as how the point of your post has almost no meaning. That's like me replying to one of your religious posts with: "But you know that there are priests who are pedophiles?"
We have diversed greatly of the subject. This has no impact on any part of what you may believe, so these messages are completely pointless in answer to 'Do you doubt that your God exists?'
Black Alpha, It may look like that to you but it doesn't look like that to me. He is not trying to ridicule science at all. And your outlandish example does the opposite of what you had hoped for, because all I can see from it is how ridiculous your point of view is compared to his.
Maybe you're right. I was simply trying to figure out how much credibility he got. I've made up my mind, so I won't do it again.
What I would really like to know is why God doesn't simply prove his own existence, like the mythical Greek Gods. If you answer with a "because he's testing our faith", then I'm going to say that by doing it, he/she is playing with us. We are to believe books written couple thousands of years ago, like it was better than any other historical fiction. This "test" is measuring our intelligence.
You people have to remember, all religious beliefs come from books, books written on paper, by human beings, with ink. Nothing more, and nothing less.
Like Scientology...
If your parents never taught you to believe in your God, you just wouldn't. It's all in what you're told. If no one pushed you in the right direction, simply reading a holy book will do nothing, nothing at all. Your logic wouldn't let you believe, not if you've been in high school for an year or two.
One last thing. 2 of my friends and I started highschool with full belief in our respective religions. We've all graduated knowing that blind faith is foolish. Just like terrorists, they believe in what they're told. If you believe what one of the Holy books tells you, you will follow the teachings without ever knowing if it's all for naught.
PS: I am grateful for my parent's forceful teachings where it came to Christianity. I think it made me a better person, but I grew out of it. I don't need some made up rules to guide my way anymore. I have a brain...I can distinguish between fiction and fact.
So, you like arguing about how religion is stupid, hmm? I just got permission from a user on TheologyWeb, and he (and a few other Christians) would like to see just what you have to say.
If you accept, go here and make an account if you don't already have one. Then go to this board. Tell me (on GameSpot) that you accept and I'll tell the other user and he'll make a topic just for you.
So, feeling up to it? Make a believer outta me, DS.;)
Dracargen
Ok, you said to answer you on Gamespot, so here ya go...
Well, I'm honored to receive an invitation to a debate with those whom you would call the "smartest" christians. Obviously, I must be making a dent in someone's faith it you feel so threatened by me. Did you offer this to any of the other atheists on gamespot? If you're only focusing on me, I must be the best at this, otherwise I'd slip under the radar. Actions speak much louder than words, and by taking this action, you're basically giving me credit for being good enough for people to take notice. Thanks. :)
But...
First of all, I'd need to know what we're going to be discussing. I'm not just going to walk into a trap where a bunch of guys whom you've previously conditioned to think of me in a certain way, will just be bashing me for the hell of it. Not that I couldn't handle it, but it would be a waste of time.
Also, why can't this person, or people, just make an account on Gamespot? Why do I have to go through all this trouble? You're the one who's asking for it, not me.
I'd be up for it though, as long as these people are not going to just call me an idiot for being an atheist, or tell me I'm going to hell blah blah blah...or, and most importantly, not just repeat what some of the christians on Gamespot do, which is dodge questions, make excuses, and never admit to an error. I'm not in the mood for another one of those people.
But tell me, what's the motivation behind your idea with this? Are these people going to debate logically, or are they going to try and remind me of biblical jibberish that I've already heard a million times? I hope you're not just going to waste my time with this. We'll see...
[QUOTE="Dracargen"]So, you like arguing about how religion is stupid, hmm? I just got permission from a user on TheologyWeb, and he (and a few other Christians) would like to see just what you have to say.
If you accept, go hereand make an account if you don't already have one. Then go to this board.Tell me (on GameSpot) that you accept and I'll tell the other user and he'll make a topic just for you.
So, feeling up to it? Make a believer outta me, DS.;)
Deity_Slapper
Ok, you said to answer you on Gamespot, so here ya go...
I kinda meant via PM. . . .but whatever.
Well, I'm honored to receive an invitation to a debate with those whom you would call the "smartest" christians. Obviously, I must be making a dent in someone's faith it you feel so threatened by me. Did you offer this to any of the other atheists on gamespot? If you're only focusing on me, I must be the best at this, otherwise I'd slip under the radar. Actions speak much louder than words, and by taking this action, you're basically giving me credit for being good enough for people to take notice. Thanks. :)
I didn't say they were "the smartest." I said they were some of the smartest on that website. And no, I don't feel threatened; I expected some such response. I just think you need to be pushed off your pedestal. . . .and sadly, I'm still just an amateur at this.;)
But...
First of all, I'd need to know what we're going to be discussing. I'm not just going to walk into a trap where a bunch of guys whom you've previously conditioned to think of me in a certain way, will just be bashing me for the hell of it. Not that I couldn't handle it, but it would be a waste of time.
You may discuss whatever topic you want. It can be a general discussion or on a specific area. The only person who knows about you is the one I messaged. Some of these people do not hesitate to insult a stupid person, of any belief, but I'm sure you have nothing to worry about in that regard. . .;) They are very reasonable to someone who is the same way to them. If you admit you're wrong when you are wrong, you should have little problem. As for me conditioning the user I asked, all I did was tell him you are a fairly new user here, and I showed him some of your posts.
Also, why can't this person, or people, just make an account on Gamespot? Why do I have to go through all this trouble? You're the one who's asking for it, not me.
Because GameSpot isn't made for these kinds of discussions, and it would be rude for me to ask a bunch of people to make an account here when I could ask only you to make an account there.
I'd be up for it though, as long as these people are not going to just call me an idiot for being an atheist, or tell me I'm going to hell blah blah blah...or, and most importantly, not just repeat what some of the christians on Gamespot do, which is dodge questions, make excuses, and never admit to an error. I'm not in the mood for another one of those people.
They are not fundamentalists (they criticise them very frequently), and they won't insult you for your atheism, but they will call you an idiot if you act like one.
But tell me, what's the motivation behind your idea with this? Are these people going to debate logically, or are they going to try and remind me of biblical jibberish that I've already heard a million times? I hope you're not just going to waste my time with this. We'll see...
It all depends on what you want to discuss.
So, shall I send a message saying you accept, or what?
Oh, and I will also be watching the debate (should there be one). I may even participate.
If you want, they have an area where you formally debate with one person for a set number of rounds on a specific topic. Just tell me if you'd prefer that.
[QUOTE="Deity_Slapper"]Ok, you said to answer you on Gamespot, so here ya go...
I kinda meant via PM. . . .but whatever.
Oops.
Well, I'm honored to receive an invitation to a debate with those whom you would call the "smartest" christians. Obviously, I must be making a dent in someone's faith it you feel so threatened by me. Did you offer this to any of the other atheists on gamespot? If you're only focusing on me, I must be the best at this, otherwise I'd slip under the radar. Actions speak much louder than words, and by taking this action, you're basically giving me credit for being good enough for people to take notice. Thanks. :)
I didn't say they were "the smartest." I said they were some of the smartest on that website. And no, I don't feel threatened; I expected some such response. I just think you need to be pushed off your pedestal. . . .and sadly, I'm still just an amateur at this.;)
I usually place others on a pedestal. Unless they're jerks, then I give no respect. But why don't you knock some of your christian friends off of theirs? That's not fair.
But...
First of all, I'd need to know what we're going to be discussing. I'm not just going to walk into a trap where a bunch of guys whom you've previously conditioned to think of me in a certain way, will just be bashing me for the hell of it. Not that I couldn't handle it, but it would be a waste of time.
You may discuss whatever topic you want. It can be a general discussion or on a specific area. The only person who knows about you is the one I messaged. Some of these people do not hesitate to insult a stupid person, of any belief, but I'm sure you have nothing to worry about in that regard. . .;) They are very reasonable to someone who is the same way to them. If you admit you're wrong when you are wrong, you should have little problem. As for me conditioning the user I asked, all I did was tell him you are a fairly new user here, and I showed him some of your posts.
I still don't understand why you can't do this yourself. I mean, we're talking right now.
Also, why can't this person, or people, just make an account on Gamespot? Why do I have to go through all this trouble? You're the one who's asking for it, not me.
Because GameSpot isn't made for these kinds of discussions, and it would be rude for me to ask a bunch of people to make an account here when I could ask only you to make an account there.
So it's a bunch of people, or just one?
I'd be up for it though, as long as these people are not going to just call me an idiot for being an atheist, or tell me I'm going to hell blah blah blah...or, and most importantly, not just repeat what some of the christians on Gamespot do, which is dodge questions, make excuses, and never admit to an error. I'm not in the mood for another one of those people.
They are not fundamentalists (they criticise them very frequently), and they won't insult you for your atheism, but they will call you an idiot if you act like one.
The problem with that, is that they'll call me an idiot for not acting like one...it will be just because I disagree. That's what happens here. People just like to bash because I don't agree. Then they'll make an excuse why I'm really an idiot, convince themselves that it's true, and then go back to their circle of friends and act like I was the one who wasted their time, as they all talk crap about me from that point on. That's what always happens. They never admit when they are wrong, they just point fingers and dodge.
But tell me, what's the motivation behind your idea with this? Are these people going to debate logically, or are they going to try and remind me of biblical jibberish that I've already heard a million times? I hope you're not just going to waste my time with this. We'll see...
It all depends on what you want to discuss.
So, shall I send a message saying you accept, or what?
I guess, but an even better way to do this would be to open up a conference within Yahoo messenger or something. More than 2 people can participate without anyone else interjecting. I don't know if I want to sign up for a website for one debate, and probably never go back to it even again.
Dracargen
PM me any posts by DS or Swizz that you think I should reply to on TheologyWeb.Oh, and I will also be watching the debate (should there be one). I may even participate.
If you want, they have an area where you formally debate with one person for a set number of rounds on a specific topic. Just tell me if you'd prefer that.
Dracargen
I usually place others on a pedestal. Unless they're jerks, then I give no respect. But why don't you knock some of your christian friends off of theirs? That's not fair.
If you'd kindly show me where they did something. . . .
I still don't understand why you can't do this yourself. I mean, we're talking right now.
I already told you: I'm still an amateur. We could talk, but then, there are people who make me look like I have the knowledge equivalent to a sea cucumber.
So it's a bunch of people, or just one?
For what I have in mind, there will be several people. But as I proposed in my other message, it can be arranged (with his permission) for there to be a one-on-one discussion between you and him.
The problem with that, is that they'll call me an idiot for not acting like one...it will be just because I disagree. That's what happens here. People just like to bash because I don't agree. Then they'll make an excuse why I'm really an idiot, convince themselves that it's true, and then go back to their circle of friends and act like I was the one who wasted their time, as they all talk crap about me from that point on. That's what always happens. They never admit when they are wrong, they just point fingers and dodge.
You do the exact same thing.:| And then you paint yourself as some sort of victim when you have been shown to use the very same tactics that victimise you.:|
I guess, but an even better way to do this would be to open up a conference within Yahoo messenger or something. More than 2 people can participate without anyone else interjecting. I don't know if I want to sign up for a website for one debate, and probably never go back to it even again.
Well, if we set it up with just a one-on-one, you two will be able to talk, and then anyone watching will be able to discuss amongst themselves the topics you are on without being allowed to interfere with your conversation. BUT, your conversation will be very limited. I'll send him a message saying you accept, and I'll get back to you when he replies.
Deity_Slapper
[QUOTE="Dracargen"]PM me any posts by DS or Swizz that you think I should reply to on TheologyWeb.Oh, and I will also be watching the debate (should there be one). I may even participate.
If you want, they have an area where you formally debate with one person for a set number of rounds on a specific topic. Just tell me if you'd prefer that.
Welkabonz
Why?
And why don't you just reply to my posts here? :question:
[QUOTE="Dracargen"]PM me any posts by DS or Swizz that you think I should reply to on TheologyWeb.Oh, and I will also be watching the debate (should there be one). I may even participate.
If you want, they have an area where you formally debate with one person for a set number of rounds on a specific topic. Just tell me if you'd prefer that.
Welkabonz
Sure thing. I can send you the topic as well, if you'd like.
[QUOTE="Deity_Slapper"]If you'd kindly show me where they did something. . . .
Oh, I know you've seen it... :roll: Apparently, you have selective memory. I know, I know, if a christian does it, it slips by you. When an atheist does it, you're all fired up! Raaaah!
You do the exact same thing.:| And then you paint yourself as some sort of victim when you have been shown to use the very same tactics that victimise you.:|
You're thinking of LJ, not me. I always explain why I feel what I feel. I don't just bash and run.
Dracargen
But, I'm actually logging off soon, so this will have to happen tomorrow.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment