A Christian Framework

[Wololo]

From now on, I'm going to reply only to people who can be respectful and civil. The rest of you can just read this thread or ignore me. Some of you seem to be interested in a reasonable discussion, so I will address your concerns, as long as I'm given the opportunity to find the very start. If you feel I'm still making assumptions, point them out. I don't mind starting at the beginning with Descartes and cogito ergo sum. If you treat me with decency, I will be nice and reasonable

 

As a note, I'm not here to prove the existence of God. That is something that cannot be done. What I want to do though is give you an idea of how my perspective fits together in a Christian sense. At the very least I hope that some of you will eventually understand and find it reasonable, even though you don't agree. I'm here to learn from you, and I hope that you can learn from me too. No sales pitch, no evangelism...I don't know how I can make it clearer. Let's start at the beginning again. I'll address some of the posts above and maybe we can get started. Let's leave this rocky start behind, because I don't think it does justice to your community as a whole. I understand you've dealt with a lot of crap from people like me, so let's turn over a new leaf. If I can't find anyone here that's truly interested in an honest, respectful discussion, then I would be wasting my time and I'll go...but I'd rather not.

 

Let's reason together, please.

[Orbit]

"QUOTE  What I want to do though is give you an idea of how my perspective fits together in a Christian sense. END QUOTE

 

So why have a sham debate? Why not just tell us outright?

[mymistake]

At the very least I hope that some of you will eventually understand and find it reasonable, even though you don't agree. 

 

 

I'm afraid that your goal is unrealistic.  You are not going to find validation here because this is a place for people who have done the same searching and arrived at the opposite conclusion.  It doesn't bother me that you have religion as long as you don't hurt anybody with it.  Enjoy your religious freedom.  But I am quite certain that you will produce no evidence or logic that convinces me that Christianity is reasonable.  I have exhausted the topic and I have seen it all.  Many others here feel the same.

[Wololo]

"QUOTE  What I want to do though is give you an idea of how my perspective fits together in a Christian sense. END QUOTE

 

So why have a sham debate? Why not just tell us outright?

 

It will be a debate. I already know that my worldview differs from yours. I'm sorry if you got the impression I was trying to prove the existence of God. He certainly enters the discussion at some point and I want to show that it is plausible for him to exist, but that's sort of secondary. The debate part is more along the lines that you will not agree and there will be back and forth of questions and answers related to the general systems of belief.

 

All of you have a philosophical framework, and I'm interested to explore that. If you feel you don't have one, maybe I'll help you get an understanding for what it is you do hold as beliefs. You may not think of it like a framework and like a whole thing, but everything you about you fits together into a picture.

 

 

I'm totally ready to prove or explain my assertions, but you won't let me know what you think yourselves. Everyone I have ever discussed philosophy with (plenty of nonbelievers like you. They seemed to be intelligent and well educated. Can't say the same here) has provided me with a nice, well explained general idea of how they think the world works to them. That's because they know philosophy. It's not a matter of dogma to be defended. It's just that they actually knew about the subject matter.

You tend to forget the crowd with whom you chose to attempt this discourse. We are not just nonbelievers. It is that which you seem not to understand. We are those who were true believers probably much as you are now and perhaps for some of us far more fundamental believers than you. We not only participated In church, but many of us were church leaders. We studied the Bible intently and know it far better than the vast majority of Christians ever knew it. We really thought it was all true. And then, in various ways, we came to see we had been deceived and that Christianity is a filthy lie.

 

That, my friend, is why we don't accept what someone who comes here to "enlighten" us says. That is why we demand evidence. We have been deceived once and never shall be deceived again.

 

Rather than complain about how you have been treated since you voluntarily entered our domain, why don't you back up your claims and address the issues that have been raised?

 

 

Yes, you all come from various Christian backgrounds. That I expected. In fact, one of you is a Biblical scholar with a doctorate in that field and I'm interested in studying his work. That sort of diversity should strengthen the discussion because your insight is valuable. The reason I'm frustrated is that none of you seem to be willing to share an outline of your beliefs. I'm getting one-liners, jokes, and mockery. It's hard to listen to silliness.

 

Regardless of our beliefs, we do have much in common. All of you don't want to be deceived again. You know what it's like to be scorned and spurned and to see hypocrisy and corruption. You know what it's like to pray and hear silence. I do too. We all have dealt with the same issues, which is why I am genuinely curious to know more about you...it's just that my interest is in a certain direction. I'm not here to make claims. I'm actually hear to discuss, share, and learn. If I haven't come across that way, I apologize. I have a tendency to leap in and jump start instead of easing in.

 

assertion # 1    god exists

 

start there…. thanks!

 

 

Oh.. and I'd be mighty interested if you have the ability to tell me what my philosophy is, that would be quite a trick  

 

If you're serious, I'm more than happy to start a dialogue about what sort of framework holds your perspective together.

 

My philosophy:

 

Ideas should stand or fall on their own merit.  If one idea is going to overturn another or several others than the concept must have superior merit.

 

 

Great claims require great objective evidence.  

 

That's a good start. I will address this.

 

 

I reject your response. Voltaire - "Define your terms." If you won't share your own philosophy, I cannot share mine properly. I need to know what the opposition holds to. I cannot frame my beliefs for you without knowing what your own stance is and how you think.

 

Why not? Does your sales pitch philosophy change depending on my philosophy?

 

 

I want to communicate effectively with you. Right now I work in a call center, which is the very business of communication. In order to talk to people and truly understand them (and have them understand me), I need to know about them. The way I talk to you will change based on what I know of you. I could talk to you like you're highly educated and familiar with upper level thinking, or I can talk to you like a child...or anything in between. It all depends on the context of the discussion. If you show me you're knowledgeable or intelligent, I will treat you like it. If you are nasty and disrespectful, I will respond to it.

 

 

At the very least I hope that some of you will eventually understand and find it reasonable, even though you don't agree. 

 

 

I'm afraid that your goal is unrealistic.  You are not going to find validation here because this is a place for people who have done the same searching and arrived at the opposite conclusion.  It doesn't bother me that you have religion as long as you don't hurt anybody with it.  Enjoy your religious freedom.  But I am quite certain that you will produce no evidence or logic that convinces me that Christianity is reasonable.  I have exhausted the topic and I have seen it all.  Many others here feel the same.

 

 

That's why I'm not here to convince you of something you rejected. That would hardly be respectful. I'm sorry if it came across that way. I don't expect you to find it reasonable, but that's part of why I want to discuss. I want to learn the hows and whys. I want to experience such things firsthand. At the same time, I'm going to present you something that is different. Perhaps you will perceive it as a variation on a theme, but it will not be identical. I feel that I bring something to table, so perhaps some of you will look at it and you'll be able to nod and move on with your life without feeling anger or repulsion or exhaustion. If you're not interested in discussion, then I'm fine if you sit on the sidelines and ignore me.

[Roz]

You do know there is the arena or colosseum for formal debate if you wished to post there.  Why did you post in the lions' den when you could've posted what you wanted to say over to the formal debate section?

Just asking out of mere curiosity, it would've seemed a more logical place.

[FreeThinkerNZ]

 

 

The way I talk to you will change based on what I know of you. I could talk to you like you're highly educated and familiar with upper level thinking, or I can talk to you like a child...or anything in between. It all depends on the context of the discussion. If you show me you're knowledgeable or intelligent, I will treat you like it. If you are nasty and disrespectful, I will respond to it.

It is disrespectful to suggest that anyone here might not be as knowledgeable, intelligent, or adult as you are.  Most of the people who have posted in this thread have degrees, often postgraduate, in subjects of their choice (I do, and in one of my postgraduate courses I scored 93%) or they have the wisdom of the world (which means they are just as intelligent but didn't spend a fortune to get a tertiary education).  Just because I freely admit I have little interest in physics, does not mean I am unintelligent or lacking in sufficient knowledge to debate with you.

[midniterider]

This has become illogical and none of you are actually listening. Can you 'stop' for a moment and listen?

 

1) I have backed up the truck here to move the discussion outside of God temporarily due to the loud protesting that I was making an assertion without backing it up. I understood and agreed that we could back up so that the foundation could be discussed. If you feel I'm making assertions (which you do), then point them out, and I will step back to address them.

 

You have removed God from the discussion table because people wanted you to provide evidence of your assertion that God exists. I'm not interested in some philosophical mental gymnastics that show God 'must' theoretically exist, let's just have a real conversation with God. Have him do something simple like take us both to Dennys. You know, some REAL WORLD activity, not some philosophical conceptual baloney. Show the me the Jesus. In person. Drinking coffee and joking with the waitresses. Or IS YOUR GOD ONLY A MENTAL CONSTRUCT?  

 

2) Rather than accepting that I had agreed to the terms, instead you're continuing to come after me (which is ad hominem because you're addressing me and not my arguments.)

 

We know what ad hominem is. It's the personal attacks against Christians that occur when the Christians assert something, like saying God exists, then deflect questions and requests for you to back up your assertions. It makes us angry when Christians do this.

 

3) I fully intend to explain the assertion (and the others), but I need to know where you stand in order to do so. I made a blind attempt to explain the general structure of my beliefs, and clearly since they are so vastly different from yours, it came across as a bunch of further assertions. I'm willing to back up further, but clearly you're not. This is why I have to know what you generally believe.

 

The only reason you would need to know where I stand (my profile says 'monistic idealist') is so you can adjust your eventual sales pitch aka Christian framework to sound similar to what my philosophical framework is in order to eventually get me to buy your Jesus.

 

4) I DO assert that all of you have a philosophical framework, even if you don't consciously spend time thinking about it. It doesn't have to be rigid. It's still a general framework. If you can't explain to me in philosophical terms what you believe, then you can't discuss philosophy with me. If you're so 'educated' about philosophy, then you know full well what your beliefs are and you're just trolling me.

 

Are we here to discuss philosophy or answer the question why you believe God exists?

 

5) Controlling the debate? Hahaha. Yes, my philosophy is integral to the discussion and to my beliefs, but if you don't tell me what you believe philosophically, I'm giving you free reign to push and pull me all over the place. I'm just putting my foot down and saying enough. If you're not going to share info with me about how you think, I'm not going to discuss. There's no point.

 

Giving you free reign to push you all over the place? Nah, that's bullshit. Ok, my philosophy is that God does not exist. Lets start there. :-) Now why do you think he does exist? Just keep it simple for a simpleton like me to understand. I'm not reading Nietsche or Voltaire or Plato to try to understand your reasoning about why God exists. Those dead philosophers are irrelevant. 

 

 

6) I have said nothing about persecution. You're just being unreasonable...as a regular person. None of you have demonstrated that you can debate like a civilized human being or in fact, that you know anything about science or philosophy. I take that back. There has been one person that has posted a few links that I'll have a look at. Aside from that, it's been mockery and ignorance.

 

Are we discussing philosophy or science? I'm just interested in how you know that God exists other than "I believe he does." Please show us God.

 

I expected better from such a vibrant community.

 

What you expected was a group of idiots who like to badmouth Jesus, but instead you found a group of intelligent people who are asking you questions that you can't answer so you are backpeddling and trying to maintain control of the debate by telling us to stop using ad hominem, and backup our attacks (with evidence) against your mere assertions that God exists. Currently you are attempting to baffle us with bullshit about your philosophical framework which will eventually roll around to the idea that Jesus is real...though I guaran-fucking-tee that after all is said and done, God will remain a mental construct and Jesus will not drink coffee with us at Dennys because he doesn't exist.

[Wololo]

You do know there is the arena or colosseum for formal debate if you wished to post there.  Why did you post in the lions' den when you could've posted what you wanted to say over to the formal debate section?

Just asking out of mere curiosity, it would've seemed a more logical place.

 

It's not really a formal debate though. I don't know. I guess it's probably going to turn into more of a discussion than a debate. We will see how things progress, and if the moderators want it to be moved, they can do so. I trust their judgment. I'll work on addressing some of what's already been asked.

[FreeThinkerNZ]

From now on, I'm going to reply only to people who can be respectful and civil. The rest of you can just read this thread or ignore me. Some of you seem to be interested in a reasonable discussion, so I will address your concerns, as long as I'm given the opportunity to find the very start. If you feel I'm still making assumptions, point them out. I don't mind starting at the beginning with Descartes and cogito ergo sum. If you treat me with decency, I will be nice and reasonable

 

As a note, I'm not here to prove the existence of God. That is something that cannot be done. What I want to do though is give you an idea of how my perspective fits together in a Christian sense. At the very least I hope that some of you will eventually understand and find it reasonable, even though you don't agree. I'm here to learn from you, and I hope that you can learn from me too. No sales pitch, no evangelism...I don't know how I can make it clearer. Let's start at the beginning again. I'll address some of the posts above and maybe we can get started. Let's leave this rocky start behind, because I don't think it does justice to your community as a whole. I understand you've dealt with a lot of crap from people like me, so let's turn over a new leaf. If I can't find anyone here that's truly interested in an honest, respectful discussion, then I would be wasting my time and I'll go...but I'd rather not.

 

Let's reason together, please.

 

Are you referring to Ex-Christian.net or the atheist community in general?  Either way, you can form whatever opinion you like of our behaviour, and no doubt will.  We are not responsible for your feelings and I am not interested in how you see either of these communities.  These communities were doing and will do just fine whether you approve of them or not.  

[Wololo]

 

 

 

The way I talk to you will change based on what I know of you. I could talk to you like you're highly educated and familiar with upper level thinking, or I can talk to you like a child...or anything in between. It all depends on the context of the discussion. If you show me you're knowledgeable or intelligent, I will treat you like it. If you are nasty and disrespectful, I will respond to it.

It is disrespectful to suggest that anyone here might not be as knowledgeable, intelligent, or adult as you are.  Most of the people who have posted in this thread have degrees, often postgraduate, in subjects of their choice (I do, and in one of my postgraduate courses I scored 93%) or they have the wisdom of the world (which means they are just as intelligent but didn't spend a fortune to get a tertiary education).  Just because I freely admit I have little interest in physics, does not mean I am unintelligent or lacking in sufficient knowledge to debate with you.

 

 

Nope, no assumption was made. I was merely explaining the lengths I would go to. I don't know where you are. Show me. Poking fun and making jokes doesn't help me think highly of those who do it.

[Guest afireinside]

Moral framework?

 

It's a universally LEARNED socially responsible outlook on life, seperate from religion which has stagnated or reversed the progress made while existing as a society. It's simple. Learn things, listen to wisdom gained from others experiences, value your life, value others, work hard for a progressively better, safer, healthier community. Simple shit-until religion corrupts it

[FreeThinkerNZ]

 

 

 

 

The way I talk to you will change based on what I know of you. I could talk to you like you're highly educated and familiar with upper level thinking, or I can talk to you like a child...or anything in between. It all depends on the context of the discussion. If you show me you're knowledgeable or intelligent, I will treat you like it. If you are nasty and disrespectful, I will respond to it.

It is disrespectful to suggest that anyone here might not be as knowledgeable, intelligent, or adult as you are.  Most of the people who have posted in this thread have degrees, often postgraduate, in subjects of their choice (I do, and in one of my postgraduate courses I scored 93%) or they have the wisdom of the world (which means they are just as intelligent but didn't spend a fortune to get a tertiary education).  Just because I freely admit I have little interest in physics, does not mean I am unintelligent or lacking in sufficient knowledge to debate with you.

 

 

Nope, no assumption was made. I was merely explaining the lengths I would go to. I don't know where you are. Show me. Poking fun and making jokes doesn't help me think highly of those who do it.

 

We don't to do it help you. And, your opinion of me is about as important to me as the piece of lint I just brushed off my sleeve.

[Wololo]

 

This has become illogical and none of you are actually listening. Can you 'stop' for a moment and listen?

 

1) I have backed up the truck here to move the discussion outside of God temporarily due to the loud protesting that I was making an assertion without backing it up. I understood and agreed that we could back up so that the foundation could be discussed. If you feel I'm making assertions (which you do), then point them out, and I will step back to address them.

 

You have removed God from the discussion table because people wanted you to provide evidence of your assertion that God exists. I'm not interested in some philosophical mental gymnastics that show God 'must' theoretically exist, let's just have a real conversation with God. Have him do something simple like take us both to Dennys. You know, some REAL WORLD activity, not some philosophical conceptual baloney. Show the me the Jesus. In person. Drinking coffee and joking with the waitresses. Or IS YOUR GOD ONLY A MENTAL CONSTRUCT?  

 

2) Rather than accepting that I had agreed to the terms, instead you're continuing to come after me (which is ad hominem because you're addressing me and not my arguments.)

 

We know what ad hominem is. It's the personal attacks against Christians that occur when the Christians assert something, like saying God exists, then deflect questions and requests for you to back up your assertions. It makes us angry when Christians do this.

 

3) I fully intend to explain the assertion (and the others), but I need to know where you stand in order to do so. I made a blind attempt to explain the general structure of my beliefs, and clearly since they are so vastly different from yours, it came across as a bunch of further assertions. I'm willing to back up further, but clearly you're not. This is why I have to know what you generally believe.

 

The only reason you would need to know where I stand (my profile says 'monistic idealist') is so you can adjust your eventual sales pitch aka Christian framework to sound similar to what my philosophical framework is in order to eventually get me to buy your Jesus.

 

4) I DO assert that all of you have a philosophical framework, even if you don't consciously spend time thinking about it. It doesn't have to be rigid. It's still a general framework. If you can't explain to me in philosophical terms what you believe, then you can't discuss philosophy with me. If you're so 'educated' about philosophy, then you know full well what your beliefs are and you're just trolling me.

 

Are we here to discuss philosophy or answer the question why you believe God exists?

 

5) Controlling the debate? Hahaha. Yes, my philosophy is integral to the discussion and to my beliefs, but if you don't tell me what you believe philosophically, I'm giving you free reign to push and pull me all over the place. I'm just putting my foot down and saying enough. If you're not going to share info with me about how you think, I'm not going to discuss. There's no point.

 

Giving you free reign to push you all over the place? Nah, that's bullshit. Ok, my philosophy is that God does not exist. Lets start there. :-) Now why do you think he does exist? Just keep it simple for a simpleton like me to understand. I'm not reading Nietsche or Voltaire or Plato to try to understand your reasoning about why God exists. Those dead philosophers are irrelevant. 

 

 

6) I have said nothing about persecution. You're just being unreasonable...as a regular person. None of you have demonstrated that you can debate like a civilized human being or in fact, that you know anything about science or philosophy. I take that back. There has been one person that has posted a few links that I'll have a look at. Aside from that, it's been mockery and ignorance.

 

Are we discussing philosophy or science? I'm just interested in how you know that God exists other than "I believe he does." Please show us God.

 

I expected better from such a vibrant community.

 

What you expected was a group of idiots who like to badmouth Jesus, but instead you found a group of intelligent people who are asking you questions that you can't answer so you are backpeddling and trying to maintain control of the debate by telling us to stop using ad hominem, and backup our attacks (with evidence) against your mere assertions that God exists. Currently you are attempting to baffle us with bullshit about your philosophical framework which will eventually roll around to the idea that Jesus is real...though I guaran-fucking-tee that after all is said and done, God will remain a mental construct and Jesus will not drink coffee with us at Dennys because he doesn't exist.

 

 

There is no empirical evidence. God is not empirical. I'm sorry. He's just not. He's not just a mental construct either. The only thing physical about God was Jesus, and while his existence is more or less agreed upon, his divinity is hotly contested. God himself is not physically accessible though. Again though...not jumping into an assumption that he exists...just answering your questions.

 

No, ad hominem is when you attack your opponent instead of the arguments. Don't resort to jokes or mockery. I don't care if you lampoon my beliefs. Go ahead.

 

Point 3. Just no. No. No. Thank you for the note about monistic idealism. I'm not here to convert you. Enough. Get over it.

 

I'm here to lay out a framework for my beliefs which will demonstrate that it is plausible that God exists, among other things. I am also here for a general philosophical discussion that is better suited for this subforum because of its heated nature.

 

Mm...seems you're not interested in philosophy. If you want evidence or proof that's easy and empirical, I'm sorry. I don't have it. It doesn't exist. The only reason I would control a debate is if you don't understand the subject matter. Not meaning an offense, but I have discussed things comfortably with other atheists and ex-Christians and there is generally a balance between us.

 

My argument for God is not empirical. It's philosophical. Sorry, you've got the wrong guy.

 

No, you're asking the wrong questions. You're asking questions that aren't relevant. The empirical evidence isn't there. God, if he exists, does not, and cannot be physical and still be his entirety. He can't be fully God and still be empirical. Put him in your box, and walk away then. Maybe you can talk to someone else about Jesus and Dennys.

 

 

From now on, I'm going to reply only to people who can be respectful and civil. The rest of you can just read this thread or ignore me. Some of you seem to be interested in a reasonable discussion, so I will address your concerns, as long as I'm given the opportunity to find the very start. If you feel I'm still making assumptions, point them out. I don't mind starting at the beginning with Descartes and cogito ergo sum. If you treat me with decency, I will be nice and reasonable

 

As a note, I'm not here to prove the existence of God. That is something that cannot be done. What I want to do though is give you an idea of how my perspective fits together in a Christian sense. At the very least I hope that some of you will eventually understand and find it reasonable, even though you don't agree. I'm here to learn from you, and I hope that you can learn from me too. No sales pitch, no evangelism...I don't know how I can make it clearer. Let's start at the beginning again. I'll address some of the posts above and maybe we can get started. Let's leave this rocky start behind, because I don't think it does justice to your community as a whole. I understand you've dealt with a lot of crap from people like me, so let's turn over a new leaf. If I can't find anyone here that's truly interested in an honest, respectful discussion, then I would be wasting my time and I'll go...but I'd rather not.

 

Let's reason together, please.

 

Are you referring to Ex-Christian.net or the atheist community in general?  Either way, you can form whatever opinion you like of our behaviour, and no doubt will.  We are not responsible for your feelings and I am not interested in how you see either of these communities.  These communities were doing and will do just fine whether you approve of them or not.  

 

 

Everyone together. Just like we do just fine without you, you do fine without us. I don't care if you're interested in my feelings or not. I know that people like you don't speak for the greater reality of intelligent atheism. There are plenty of respectable, nice atheists that are willing to discuss things in a civil manner. Those are the people I will respect.

[centauri]

 

As a note, I'm not here to prove the existence of God. That is something that cannot be done. What I want to do though is give you an idea of how my perspective fits together in a Christian sense. At the very least I hope that some of you will eventually understand and find it reasonable, even though you don't agree.

Assuming that a "god" exists, which I'll allow as being possible, I assume from your profile that you think "Christ" is this god.

Naturally, that's a popular Christian motif, one that I rejected years ago.

Reason has virtually nothing to do with believing Jesus is "God".

[Wololo]

Moral framework?

 

It's a universally LEARNED socially responsible outlook on life, seperate from religion which has stagnated or reversed the progress made while existing as a society. It's simple. Learn things, listen to wisdom gained from others experiences, value your life, value others, work hard for a progressively better, safer, healthier community. Simple shit-until religion corrupts it

 

Which is precisely what I would argue too. If only you guys cared to think about what I say. Religion is not something on the outside. It is something that you live in whether or not you believe it's religion.

[Guest afireinside]

 

 

 

 

The way I talk to you will change based on what I know of you. I could talk to you like you're highly educated and familiar with upper level thinking, or I can talk to you like a child...or anything in between. It all depends on the context of the discussion. If you show me you're knowledgeable or intelligent, I will treat you like it. If you are nasty and disrespectful, I will respond to it.

It is disrespectful to suggest that anyone here might not be as knowledgeable, intelligent, or adult as you are. Most of the people who have posted in this thread have degrees, often postgraduate, in subjects of their choice (I do, and in one of my postgraduate courses I scored 93%) or they have the wisdom of the world (which means they are just as intelligent but didn't spend a fortune to get a tertiary education). Just because I freely admit I have little interest in physics, does not mean I am unintelligent or lacking in sufficient knowledge to debate with you.

Nope, no assumption was made. I was merely explaining the lengths I would go to. I don't know where you are. Show me. Poking fun and making jokes doesn't help me think highly of those who do it.

What? We can't poke fun of a faith system that sodomized us for years?

[FreeThinkerNZ]

 

 

This has become illogical and none of you are actually listening. Can you 'stop' for a moment and listen?

 

1) I have backed up the truck here to move the discussion outside of God temporarily due to the loud protesting that I was making an assertion without backing it up. I understood and agreed that we could back up so that the foundation could be discussed. If you feel I'm making assertions (which you do), then point them out, and I will step back to address them.

 

You have removed God from the discussion table because people wanted you to provide evidence of your assertion that God exists. I'm not interested in some philosophical mental gymnastics that show God 'must' theoretically exist, let's just have a real conversation with God. Have him do something simple like take us both to Dennys. You know, some REAL WORLD activity, not some philosophical conceptual baloney. Show the me the Jesus. In person. Drinking coffee and joking with the waitresses. Or IS YOUR GOD ONLY A MENTAL CONSTRUCT?  

 

2) Rather than accepting that I had agreed to the terms, instead you're continuing to come after me (which is ad hominem because you're addressing me and not my arguments.)

 

We know what ad hominem is. It's the personal attacks against Christians that occur when the Christians assert something, like saying God exists, then deflect questions and requests for you to back up your assertions. It makes us angry when Christians do this.

 

3) I fully intend to explain the assertion (and the others), but I need to know where you stand in order to do so. I made a blind attempt to explain the general structure of my beliefs, and clearly since they are so vastly different from yours, it came across as a bunch of further assertions. I'm willing to back up further, but clearly you're not. This is why I have to know what you generally believe.

 

The only reason you would need to know where I stand (my profile says 'monistic idealist') is so you can adjust your eventual sales pitch aka Christian framework to sound similar to what my philosophical framework is in order to eventually get me to buy your Jesus.

 

4) I DO assert that all of you have a philosophical framework, even if you don't consciously spend time thinking about it. It doesn't have to be rigid. It's still a general framework. If you can't explain to me in philosophical terms what you believe, then you can't discuss philosophy with me. If you're so 'educated' about philosophy, then you know full well what your beliefs are and you're just trolling me.

 

Are we here to discuss philosophy or answer the question why you believe God exists?

 

5) Controlling the debate? Hahaha. Yes, my philosophy is integral to the discussion and to my beliefs, but if you don't tell me what you believe philosophically, I'm giving you free reign to push and pull me all over the place. I'm just putting my foot down and saying enough. If you're not going to share info with me about how you think, I'm not going to discuss. There's no point.

 

Giving you free reign to push you all over the place? Nah, that's bullshit. Ok, my philosophy is that God does not exist. Lets start there. :-) Now why do you think he does exist? Just keep it simple for a simpleton like me to understand. I'm not reading Nietsche or Voltaire or Plato to try to understand your reasoning about why God exists. Those dead philosophers are irrelevant. 

 

 

6) I have said nothing about persecution. You're just being unreasonable...as a regular person. None of you have demonstrated that you can debate like a civilized human being or in fact, that you know anything about science or philosophy. I take that back. There has been one person that has posted a few links that I'll have a look at. Aside from that, it's been mockery and ignorance.

 

Are we discussing philosophy or science? I'm just interested in how you know that God exists other than "I believe he does." Please show us God.

 

I expected better from such a vibrant community.

 

What you expected was a group of idiots who like to badmouth Jesus, but instead you found a group of intelligent people who are asking you questions that you can't answer so you are backpeddling and trying to maintain control of the debate by telling us to stop using ad hominem, and backup our attacks (with evidence) against your mere assertions that God exists. Currently you are attempting to baffle us with bullshit about your philosophical framework which will eventually roll around to the idea that Jesus is real...though I guaran-fucking-tee that after all is said and done, God will remain a mental construct and Jesus will not drink coffee with us at Dennys because he doesn't exist.

 

 

There is no empirical evidence. God is not empirical. I'm sorry. He's just not. He's not just a mental construct either. The only thing physical about God was Jesus, and while his existence is more or less agreed upon, his divinity is hotly contested. God himself is not physically accessible though. Again though...not jumping into an assumption that he exists...just answering your questions.

 

No, ad hominem is when you attack your opponent instead of the arguments. Don't resort to jokes or mockery. I don't care if you lampoon my beliefs. Go ahead.

 

Point 3. Just no. No. No. Thank you for the note about monistic idealism. I'm not here to convert you. Enough. Get over it.

 

I'm here to lay out a framework for my beliefs which will demonstrate that it is plausible that God exists, among other things. I am also here for a general philosophical discussion that is better suited for this subforum because of its heated nature.

 

Mm...seems you're not interested in philosophy. If you want evidence or proof that's easy and empirical, I'm sorry. I don't have it. It doesn't exist. The only reason I would control a debate is if you don't understand the subject matter. Not meaning an offense, but I have discussed things comfortably with other atheists and ex-Christians and there is generally a balance between us.

 

My argument for God is not empirical. It's philosophical. Sorry, you've got the wrong guy.

 

No, you're asking the wrong questions. You're asking questions that aren't relevant. The empirical evidence isn't there. God, if he exists, does not, and cannot be physical and still be his entirety. He can't be fully God and still be empirical. Put him in your box, and walk away then. Maybe you can talk to someone else about Jesus and Dennys.

 

 

From now on, I'm going to reply only to people who can be respectful and civil. The rest of you can just read this thread or ignore me. Some of you seem to be interested in a reasonable discussion, so I will address your concerns, as long as I'm given the opportunity to find the very start. If you feel I'm still making assumptions, point them out. I don't mind starting at the beginning with Descartes and cogito ergo sum. If you treat me with decency, I will be nice and reasonable

 

As a note, I'm not here to prove the existence of God. That is something that cannot be done. What I want to do though is give you an idea of how my perspective fits together in a Christian sense. At the very least I hope that some of you will eventually understand and find it reasonable, even though you don't agree. I'm here to learn from you, and I hope that you can learn from me too. No sales pitch, no evangelism...I don't know how I can make it clearer. Let's start at the beginning again. I'll address some of the posts above and maybe we can get started. Let's leave this rocky start behind, because I don't think it does justice to your community as a whole. I understand you've dealt with a lot of crap from people like me, so let's turn over a new leaf. If I can't find anyone here that's truly interested in an honest, respectful discussion, then I would be wasting my time and I'll go...but I'd rather not.

 

Let's reason together, please.

 

Are you referring to Ex-Christian.net or the atheist community in general?  Either way, you can form whatever opinion you like of our behaviour, and no doubt will.  We are not responsible for your feelings and I am not interested in how you see either of these communities.  These communities were doing and will do just fine whether you approve of them or not.  

 

 

Everyone together. Just like we do just fine without you, you do fine without us. I don't care if you're interested in my feelings or not. I know that people like you don't speak for the greater reality of intelligent atheism. There are plenty of respectable, nice atheists that are willing to discuss things in a civil manner. Those are the people I will respect.

 

There you go again, conflating intellect with civility.

[Guest afireinside]

 

 

Moral framework?

 

It's a universally LEARNED socially responsible outlook on life, seperate from religion which has stagnated or reversed the progress made while existing as a society. It's simple. Learn things, listen to wisdom gained from others experiences, value your life, value others, work hard for a progressively better, safer, healthier community. Simple shit-until religion corrupts it

Which is precisely what I would argue too. If only you guys cared to think about what I say. Religion is not something on the outside. It is something that you live in whether or not you believe it's religion.

Morality exists OUTSIDE religion, without all the craziness surrounding religion.

[midniterider]

I'm totally ready to prove or explain my assertions, but you won't let me know what you think yourselves. Everyone I have ever discussed philosophy with (plenty of nonbelievers like you. They seemed to be intelligent and well educated. Can't say the same here) has provided me with a nice, well explained general idea of how they think the world works to them. That's because they know philosophy. It's not a matter of dogma to be defended. It's just that they actually knew about the subject matter.

 

Sounds like sweeping ad hominem against us. :-) 

 

There is no need to know about me to discuss your philosophy. It's YOUR philosophy , not mine. I'm just using common sense. The subject matter is pretty simple really: Why do you believe that God exists? What is your evidence? Show me this God. No need to be a philosophy major to either understand or answer the simple question. Answering the question does not require Plato or other philosophers.

 

We all used to believe in Jesus, but it didnt work for us. That's why we don't believe anymore. Why should we believe in Jesus or God? Why is this important? Do you get a commission?

[Guest afireinside]

It's like the guy who gets a black belt in martial arts but knows he can't deliberately attack people even though he wants to so he can prove he's a good fighter. He goes out in public and baits people until they lash out and take a swing at him then he goes all Van Damme on their asses in "self defence". Just take a swing Wololo, throw the first philosophical punch then it's on!

[Guest afireinside]

I won't fight though, I'm a lightweight, I'll just stand nearby shooting my mouth off.

[midniterider]

There is no empirical evidence. God is not empirical. I'm sorry. He's just not. He's not just a mental construct either. The only thing physical about God was Jesus, and while his existence is more or less agreed upon, his divinity is hotly contested. God himself is not physically accessible though. Again though...not jumping into an assumption that he exists...just answering your questions.

 

Alright then. :-) I'm not an atheist. This wine I'm drinking is turning me into a debate wuss. Dammit! :-) I agree that God, as defined as an old guy sitting on a throne in heaven is probably baloney. Nor do I buy Christianity anymore. Got tired of it. I don't like rules nor being told what I should believe. Nor rulebooks.

 

I'm more into Zen, Advaita, Eastern philosophy, Upanishads, The Gita, Nisargadatta Maharaj, Ramana Maharshi, though they could all be full of baloney as well. I like the idea that I may be the entire universe and that all things are related. What I don't like is subservient worship to the non-empirical. I dont like being feared, guilted or shamed into believing something which is why I rejected Christianity years ago. It's fear-based bullshit. Tithing is absurd as well. Pastors should get a real job doing real work. 

 

Yes, friends , I caved. I spilled my guts to Wololo. :-) Now it's time for more wine!

[FreeThinkerNZ]

I won't fight though, I'm a lightweight, I'll just stand nearby shooting my mouth off.

Good for you, afireinside.  We need more of that round here sometimes.

[pratt]

show me your boobs and i will show you my balls,,,,,

 

oh, no, the other fellow use the dirty word, no i would not have it, apologise or i will not show you my balls,,,,

 

oh, the other guy dont know about ad hocmsigfbvisn whatever shit that is, so i will not present my balls,,,,,

 

oh, i think you guys are poking my ass now, i will not show you my balls,,,,,,

 

IN ACTUAL FACT, you got no balls to show,,,,,,,,, just a pussy,,,,

 

Get on with your premise, your argument and lets go at it,,,,,

[midniterider]

I won't fight though, I'm a lightweight, I'll just stand nearby shooting my mouth off.

 

Kick him in the Nietsches.