FreeThinkerNZ Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 I think that a more practical request to make of Christians (or any other group) would be that they not impose their beliefs on others who disagree with them. This is a strawman. Everyone in society attempts to influence the beliefs of others and this translates into the push and pull we see in the political process. Any atheist who is seeking to remove the ten commandments from a courthouse is seeking to impose their will and is displaying intolerance. Really? you just pulled that out? You know good and well that getting the 10 commandments removed from a courthouse has nothing to do with atheists spreading their beliefs. It is them being responsible citizens and calling out the government when it fails to live up to the 1st amendment. Atheists do this because of their beliefs. Very simple. We all act based on our beliefs. It would be irrational not to do so. Atheism is not a belief. It is the non-acceptance of the claim that there are gods. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrdinaryClay Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 I think that a more practical request to make of Christians (or any other group) would be that they not impose their beliefs on others who disagree with them. This is a strawman. Everyone in society attempts to influence the beliefs of others and this translates into the push and pull we see in the political process. Any atheist who is seeking to remove the ten commandments from a courthouse is seeking to impose their will and is displaying intolerance. Really? you just pulled that out? You know good and well that getting the 10 commandments removed from a courthouse has nothing to do with atheists spreading their beliefs. It is them being responsible citizens and calling out the government when it fails to live up to the 1st amendment. Atheists do this because of their beliefs. Very simple. We all act based on our beliefs. It would be irrational not to do so. Atheism is not a belief. It is the non-acceptance of the claim that there are gods. An atheist is someone who is certain that God does not exist, someone who has compelling evidence against the existence of God. I know of no such compelling evidence. Because God can be relegated to remote times and places and to ultimate causes, we would have to know a great deal more about the universe than we do now to be sure that no such God exists. To be certain of the existence of God and to be certain of the nonexistence of God seem to me to be the confident extremes in a subject so riddled with doubt and uncertainty as to inspire very little confidence indeed Carl Sagan - 1981 Cats and dogs lack belief. Atheism is the position where a human mind establishes a belief that there is no God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest afireinside Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 It not a relevant point but birds migrate in belief that they're going in the right direction and salmon believe they are meant to swim upstream to spawn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest afireinside Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 Cats and dogs wait at the door because they believe that they're god(owner) will feed them. They believe hallelujah they believe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeThinkerNZ Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 I think that a more practical request to make of Christians (or any other group) would be that they not impose their beliefs on others who disagree with them. This is a strawman. Everyone in society attempts to influence the beliefs of others and this translates into the push and pull we see in the political process. Any atheist who is seeking to remove the ten commandments from a courthouse is seeking to impose their will and is displaying intolerance. Really? you just pulled that out? You know good and well that getting the 10 commandments removed from a courthouse has nothing to do with atheists spreading their beliefs. It is them being responsible citizens and calling out the government when it fails to live up to the 1st amendment. Atheists do this because of their beliefs. Very simple. We all act based on our beliefs. It would be irrational not to do so. Atheism is not a belief. It is the non-acceptance of the claim that there are gods. An atheist is someone who is certain that God does not exist, someone who has compelling evidence against the existence of God. I know of no such compelling evidence. Because God can be relegated to remote times and places and to ultimate causes, we would have to know a great deal more about the universe than we do now to be sure that no such God exists. To be certain of the existence of God and to be certain of the nonexistence of God seem to me to be the confident extremes in a subject so riddled with doubt and uncertainty as to inspire very little confidence indeed Carl Sagan - 1981 Cats and dogs lack belief. Atheism is the position where a human mind establishes a belief that there is no God. Sagan was an agnostic (by the way, agnostics are welcome here, not everyone is an atheist) so I prefer to get my definition of the label I identify with from people who also identify with that label. Anyway, did you notice in the third sentence of the quote that Sagan utterly dismisses theism? You tend to find that sort of thing if you read things written by agnostics/athiests/skeptics. Although you're lucky, you normally have to read their works and not just rip a quote straight from Wikipedia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
francesco Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 Reading ironhorse posts: Bible idol Bible idol everywhere Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted April 25, 2014 Super Moderator Share Posted April 25, 2014 Any atheist who is seeking to remove the ten commandments from a courthouse is seeking to impose their will and is displaying intolerance. This is a bald-faced lie and you know it perfectly well, OrdinaryClay. The law of our land provides for the separation of church and state. Placing the 10 commandments on a public courthouse defies the law of our land. Atheists are not alone in wishing to rectify this, secular humanists and even satanists join them. Contrariwise, christians attempting to keep gays from being able to marry or making abortion illegal are attempting to impose their will and displaying their intolerance. I've seen some pretty disingenuous arguments from you, Clay; but you really shouldn't stoop to the level of lying. I think one of the very commandments you are attempting to defend here has something to say about that. Clearly it was not a lie as I pointed out here. Any citizen who seeks laws is imposing their will on others. That's what a law is. Every citizen does it. Bullshit. Just because the majority of the people in a society agrees with something and decide to make it a law doesn't mean that a "particular group" is forcing their will upon another "particular group". You are a liar, OrdinaryClay. You need to repent or else god will strike down upon you with great vengeance and furious anger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 Bible quiz for those who understand the Bible. Does anyone know when the last tribal conquest ordered by God occurred in the Bible? When the New Testament rolled around God gave up on mere tribal conquest. Now God wanted to rule the entire world. And so Christians spread around the world bringing plague and the point of a sword everywhere they went. And where ever Christianity took hold the natural culture and society was destroyed in favor of the invading culture. If that's your view, I suggest you read some books on history. I suggest you get busy living up to your word and answering the questions put to you, Ironhorse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 -Because of this, anyone who accepts Jesus and places their faith in Him have eternal life in the Kingdom of God. That is what I believe are the central messages of the Bible. I do not understand everything about God, but I understand this narrative. There are many mysteries about God that I do not comprehend. I believe that even in the Kingdom of God there will be things about God that will remain a mystery. This is from the hippie christie Ironhorse. This can be used by all christians as their get-out-of-trying-to-explain-their-faith-with-reason. There are many many doctrinal differences fundies will have with IH, and even liberal christians will disagree with him on more than a few points (IE: the different interpretations of Rev. 20). Regardless, virtually all christians will use their 100% sure bet on christianity to affect the rest of our lives. Please stop being arrogant and use your 100%-sure-yet-totally-not-sure leaps of blind faith to: exclude 2 consenting adults from the legal privileges of marriage ensure that your particular faith based special creation myth be given government-endorsed status by being taught alongside real science give enormous amounts of aid to Israel and approve of them acting like assholes enshrine your 10 commandments (version 1.0 of course, ver. 2.0 is totally different yet it's the biblically endorsed 10) in courthouses and other public property influence our entire system of government voting for who's the more faithful and not who's got the better ideas for governance (btw, nothing against Republicans, but man that party's locked alongside the fucking immoral majority.) Stop it christians, I for one am sick and tired you using your blind obedience instead of reason. The definition first to remind myself: Arrogant - 1. Having or displaying a sense of overbearing self-worth or self-importance. 2. Marked by or arising from a feeling or assumption of one's superiority toward others OK, can we discuss this statement first? NO! No more questions. Honor your word to me! "give enormous amounts of aid to Israel and approve of them acting like assholes Is this one of the reasons you think Israel acts badly? No! No more questions. Answer the outstanding questions put to you already. "There are 1.4 million Arabs living in Israel with civil rights that are the envy of the Arab world. Israeli Arabs vote in Israel’s elections, have representatives in the Israeli Parliament, sit on Israeli courts and on the Israeli Supreme Court, and serve as tenured professors teaching in Israeli colleges and universities. The Arab citizens of Israel have more rights, and enjoy more freedom, education, and economic opportunity than the inhabitants of any Arab or Muslim state."~Wall of Truth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 Nope, two flavors of arrogant crap? Equally hideous. Crap? What did you find as "hideous" in the Dylan song? You better stop jerking me around, Ironhorse! I'll be lodging a formal complaint against you with the Mods... if you keep this kind of bs going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 Roz "To the christian who has shown that he will dodge questions over and over again in this board" Can we get back to the topic? That's wrong. Can you get back to honoring your word to me, Ironhorse? (That's another rhetorical question, btw.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 If God can make three magically one but still three, a circle square seems obtainable. Define a square circle? No other member of this forum is under any obligation to answer your questions, Clay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 Keep in mind that most of the Ten Commandments predate the Jewish religion, dating back to much earlier civilization. No religion created them. They were formed by societal consensus. Really? Can you educate us all on the details? Nobody here is under any obligation to answer your questions, Clay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 Bible quiz for those who understand the Bible. Does anyone know when the last tribal conquest ordered by God occurred in the Bible? Nobody here is under any obligation to respond to your quiz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted April 25, 2014 Super Moderator Share Posted April 25, 2014 I think that a more practical request to make of Christians (or any other group) would be that they not impose their beliefs on others who disagree with them. This is a strawman. Everyone in society attempts to influence the beliefs of others and this translates into the push and pull we see in the political process. Any atheist who is seeking to remove the ten commandments from a courthouse is seeking to impose their will and is displaying intolerance. Really? you just pulled that out? You know good and well that getting the 10 commandments removed from a courthouse has nothing to do with atheists spreading their beliefs. It is them being responsible citizens and calling out the government when it fails to live up to the 1st amendment. Atheists do this because of their beliefs. Very simple. We all act based on our beliefs. It would be irrational not to do so. Atheism is not a belief. It is the non-acceptance of the claim that there are gods. An atheist is someone who is certain that God does not exist, someone who has compelling evidence against the existence of God. I know of no such compelling evidence. Because God can be relegated to remote times and places and to ultimate causes, we would have to know a great deal more about the universe than we do now to be sure that no such God exists. To be certain of the existence of God and to be certain of the nonexistence of God seem to me to be the confident extremes in a subject so riddled with doubt and uncertainty as to inspire very little confidence indeed Carl Sagan - 1981 Cats and dogs lack belief. Atheism is the position where a human mind establishes a belief that there is no God. Bullshit. Atheism is the default position in response to the lack of evidence to support the claim that god(s) exist. Your appeal to authority here is simply inexcusable, OrdinaryClay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted April 25, 2014 Super Moderator Share Posted April 25, 2014 An atheist is someone who is certain that God does not exist, someone who has compelling evidence against the existence of God. I know of no such compelling evidence. Because God can be relegated to remote times and places and to ultimate causes, we would have to know a great deal more about the universe than we do now to be sure that no such God exists. To be certain of the existence of God and to be certain of the nonexistence of God seem to me to be the confident extremes in a subject so riddled with doubt and uncertainty as to inspire very little confidence indeed Carl Sagan - 1981 Cats and dogs lack belief. Atheism is the position where a human mind establishes a belief that there is no God. Did you even read this quote before you posted it, Clay? According to your own post, your confidence in the existence of god is questionable at best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mymistake Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 I think that a more practical request to make of Christians (or any other group) would be that they not impose their beliefs on others who disagree with them. This is a strawman. Everyone in society attempts to influence the beliefs of others and this translates into the push and pull we see in the political process. Any atheist who is seeking to remove the ten commandments from a courthouse is seeking to impose their will and is displaying intolerance. Really? you just pulled that out? You know good and well that getting the 10 commandments removed from a courthouse has nothing to do with atheists spreading their beliefs. It is them being responsible citizens and calling out the government when it fails to live up to the 1st amendment. Atheists do this because of their beliefs. Very simple. We all act based on our beliefs. It would be irrational not to do so. Atheism is not a belief. It is the non-acceptance of the claim that there are gods. An atheist is someone who is certain that God does not exist, someone who has compelling evidence against the existence of God. I know of no such compelling evidence. Because God can be relegated to remote times and places and to ultimate causes, we would have to know a great deal more about the universe than we do now to be sure that no such God exists. To be certain of the existence of God and to be certain of the nonexistence of God seem to me to be the confident extremes in a subject so riddled with doubt and uncertainty as to inspire very little confidence indeed Carl Sagan - 1981 Cats and dogs lack belief. Atheism is the position where a human mind establishes a belief that there is no God. Regardless of Sagan's statement this is false. Many atheists are soft atheists so that their views are not much different than agnostics. However I am a hard atheist. I would be happy to debate with you regarding the merits of my position that we know beyond a reasonable doubt that all gods are fiction. However you will have to agree to a condition that you must not mischaracterize this as "beyond all doubt". We send convicts to prison with "beyond a reasonable doubt" and this level of evidence can still be wrong. So I will not tolerate being mischaracterized as claiming that I cannot be wrong. If you want to debate with me then you must use objective evidence and logic to demonstrate there is reason to doubt all gods are fiction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 I think that a more practical request to make of Christians (or any other group) would be that they not impose their beliefs on others who disagree with them. This is a strawman. Everyone in society attempts to influence the beliefs of others and this translates into the push and pull we see in the political process. Any atheist who is seeking to remove the ten commandments from a courthouse is seeking to impose their will and is displaying intolerance. Really? you just pulled that out? You know good and well that getting the 10 commandments removed from a courthouse has nothing to do with atheists spreading their beliefs. It is them being responsible citizens and calling out the government when it fails to live up to the 1st amendment. Atheists do this because of their beliefs. Very simple. We all act based on our beliefs. It would be irrational not to do so. Atheism is not a belief. It is the non-acceptance of the claim that there are gods. An atheist is someone who is certain that God does not exist, someone who has compelling evidence against the existence of God. I know of no such compelling evidence. Because God can be relegated to remote times and places and to ultimate causes, we would have to know a great deal more about the universe than we do now to be sure that no such God exists. To be certain of the existence of God and to be certain of the nonexistence of God seem to me to be the confident extremes in a subject so riddled with doubt and uncertainty as to inspire very little confidence indeed Carl Sagan - 1981 Cats and dogs lack belief. Atheism is the position where a human mind establishes a belief that there is no God. I've seen OC use this very argument, word-for-word, in other forums. It's flawed on two counts. First, it's a logical fallacy known as an appeal to or argument from authority. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority Sagan's areas of authority lay in the fields of astrophysics, astronomy and cosmology. Outside of those fields, whatever he said about atheism should not be taken as either authoritative or representative. Clay knows this, but the quote serves his agenda, which is why he continues to use it. Second, Clay's definition of atheism is incorrect. Atheism is not the belief that there is no god. Atheism is the null position. It is the rejection of the claims of Theists that a god exists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrdinaryClay Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 Atheists do this because of their beliefs. Very simple. We all act based on our beliefs. It would be irrational not to do so. Atheism is not a belief. It is the non-acceptance of the claim that there are gods. An atheist is someone who is certain that God does not exist, someone who has compelling evidence against the existence of God. I know of no such compelling evidence. Because God can be relegated to remote times and places and to ultimate causes, we would have to know a great deal more about the universe than we do now to be sure that no such God exists. To be certain of the existence of God and to be certain of the nonexistence of God seem to me to be the confident extremes in a subject so riddled with doubt and uncertainty as to inspire very little confidence indeed Carl Sagan - 1981 Cats and dogs lack belief. Atheism is the position where a human mind establishes a belief that there is no God. Sagan was an agnostic (by the way, agnostics are welcome here, not everyone is an atheist) so I prefer to get my definition of the label I identify with from people who also identify with that label. Anyway, did you notice in the third sentence of the quote that Sagan utterly dismisses theism? You tend to find that sort of thing if you read things written by agnostics/athiests/skeptics. Although you're lucky, you normally have to read their works and not just rip a quote straight from Wikipedia. Sagan most likely was intellectually willing to admit that he did not know if God existed and therefore called himself an agnostic. In other words he lacked belief, but he was willing to admit that simply lacking belief was not adequate to call oneself an atheist. The word atheism means the positive acknowledgement that God does not exist. An Agnostic simply states they do not have enough evidence to make the call. Both don't believe. Anthony Flew also admitted the word has changed meaning recently - he called himself an atheist. Atheists have played word games and tried to convert the meaning into something that babies, dogs and cats hold to. Dogs lack belief. Inanimate objects like chairs lack belief. So in essence saying an atheist simply lacks belief is the same intellectual position as saying atheism is not thinking. It seems to be an attempt to shirk their burden of proof responsibility when saying there is no God. The human mind holds beliefs. If one simply does not believe in God then whether you call yourself an atheist or agnostic depends on the reasoning you used to reach that position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrdinaryClay Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 I think that a more practical request to make of Christians (or any other group) would be that they not impose their beliefs on others who disagree with them. This is a strawman. Everyone in society attempts to influence the beliefs of others and this translates into the push and pull we see in the political process. Any atheist who is seeking to remove the ten commandments from a courthouse is seeking to impose their will and is displaying intolerance. Really? you just pulled that out? You know good and well that getting the 10 commandments removed from a courthouse has nothing to do with atheists spreading their beliefs. It is them being responsible citizens and calling out the government when it fails to live up to the 1st amendment. Atheists do this because of their beliefs. Very simple. We all act based on our beliefs. It would be irrational not to do so. Atheism is not a belief. It is the non-acceptance of the claim that there are gods. An atheist is someone who is certain that God does not exist, someone who has compelling evidence against the existence of God. I know of no such compelling evidence. Because God can be relegated to remote times and places and to ultimate causes, we would have to know a great deal more about the universe than we do now to be sure that no such God exists. To be certain of the existence of God and to be certain of the nonexistence of God seem to me to be the confident extremes in a subject so riddled with doubt and uncertainty as to inspire very little confidence indeed Carl Sagan - 1981 Cats and dogs lack belief. Atheism is the position where a human mind establishes a belief that there is no God. I've seen OC use this very argument, word-for-word, in other forums. It's flawed on two counts. First, it's a logical fallacy known as an appeal to or argument from authority. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority Sagan's areas of authority lay in the fields of astrophysics, astronomy and cosmology. Outside of those fields, whatever he said about atheism should not be taken as either authoritative or representative. I never said it was true because Sagan said it. That's an argument from Authority which I did not engage in. My appeal is to the English language as we see here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mymistake Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 So, OrdinaryClay, what about my offer to debate the merits of hard atheism beyond a reasonable doubt? You are acting as if hard atheism is untenable but I am willing to defend it the way I define it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrdinaryClay Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 Regardless of Sagan's statement this is false. Many atheists are soft atheists so that their views are not much different than agnostics. However I am a hard atheist. I would be happy to debate with you regarding the merits of my position that we know beyond a reasonable doubt that all gods are fiction. However you will have to agree to a condition that you must not mischaracterize this as "beyond all doubt". We send convicts to prison with "beyond a reasonable doubt" and this level of evidence can still be wrong. So I will not tolerate being mischaracterized as claiming that I cannot be wrong. If you want to debate with me then you must use objective evidence and logic to demonstrate there is reason to doubt all gods are fiction. Then there appears to be no difference between "soft atheism" and agnosticism. Also, the term "soft atheism" is a phrase not a word. The discussion is about the word atheism not English language phrases. I will only engage in debates that allow the true definition of evidence as defined by the English language. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/evidence?s=t Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fernweh Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 Regardless of Sagan's statement this is false. Many atheists are soft atheists so that their views are not much different than agnostics. However I am a hard atheist. I would be happy to debate with you regarding the merits of my position that we know beyond a reasonable doubt that all gods are fiction. However you will have to agree to a condition that you must not mischaracterize this as "beyond all doubt". We send convicts to prison with "beyond a reasonable doubt" and this level of evidence can still be wrong. So I will not tolerate being mischaracterized as claiming that I cannot be wrong. If you want to debate with me then you must use objective evidence and logic to demonstrate there is reason to doubt all gods are fiction. Then there appears to be no difference between "soft atheism" and agnosticism. Also, the term "soft atheism" is a phrase not a word. The discussion is about the word atheism not English language phrases. I will only engage in debates that allow the true definition of evidence as defined by the English language. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/evidence?s=t What was the title of this thread again? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator TrueFreedom Posted April 25, 2014 Moderator Share Posted April 25, 2014 Regardless of Sagan's statement this is false. Many atheists are soft atheists so that their views are not much different than agnostics. However I am a hard atheist. I would be happy to debate with you regarding the merits of my position that we know beyond a reasonable doubt that all gods are fiction. However you will have to agree to a condition that you must not mischaracterize this as "beyond all doubt". We send convicts to prison with "beyond a reasonable doubt" and this level of evidence can still be wrong. So I will not tolerate being mischaracterized as claiming that I cannot be wrong. If you want to debate with me then you must use objective evidence and logic to demonstrate there is reason to doubt all gods are fiction. Then there appears to be no difference between "soft atheism" and agnosticism. Also, the term "soft atheism" is a phrase not a word. The discussion is about the word atheism not English language phrases. I will only engage in debates that allow the true definition of evidence as defined by the English language. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/evidence?s=t I take it that you expect your opponent to provide all of this evidence, as defined by the English language. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mymistake Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 Regardless of Sagan's statement this is false. Many atheists are soft atheists so that their views are not much different than agnostics. However I am a hard atheist. I would be happy to debate with you regarding the merits of my position that we know beyond a reasonable doubt that all gods are fiction. However you will have to agree to a condition that you must not mischaracterize this as "beyond all doubt". We send convicts to prison with "beyond a reasonable doubt" and this level of evidence can still be wrong. So I will not tolerate being mischaracterized as claiming that I cannot be wrong. If you want to debate with me then you must use objective evidence and logic to demonstrate there is reason to doubt all gods are fiction. Then there appears to be no difference between "soft atheism" and agnosticism. Also, the term "soft atheism" is a phrase not a word. The discussion is about the word atheism not English language phrases. I will only engage in debates that allow the true definition of evidence as defined by the English language. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/evidence?s=t I do believe I put a space between the two words when I wrote "soft atheism". I try to use proper spacing every time I use a phrase that isn't a single word but thanks for the tip. We should probably do so in a new thread. I presume you want it in the Lion's Den unless you say otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts