The Doctrine of Doubt

[TEG]

2 hours ago, Lost_more_then_Once said:

It's a point from seeing the replies of @TEG leads to the issue that my presence , regardless of my intentions, will be assumed as a negitive with negitive intentions.  So perhaps I should leave on my own terms before the sentiment grows and people are reaching for their torchs and pitchforks.

 

It’s not an assumption, it’s what you are doing.  Everyone else is responding to what you are saying, I am responding to what you are doing.  And I am going to say this because I think some people don’t really see it.  You started out with a disingenous “I have a question” when your real intent was to evangelize in a forum intended for ex-christians.  Then you chose to preach to said ex-christians from the fairy tale book of Jonah, of all things (I still can’t get over that).  You equate your conviction that god is real with objective evidence, and do not appear to understand the concept.  Your response to my comment about the believer’s fallacy was basically, “Oh, yeah? Well, you do it too” when it is you who are here to convert us, not the other way around (and I personally do not give a damn what you believe).  Having come to a group of ex-christians to challenge their beliefs, you complain about being “under interrogation” (maybe you expected us to be converted with astonished looks on our faces, like in a chick tract).

Then you started trying to take control of the group by directing us to answer your “icebreaker” questions, and continued by starting a new thread and telling us we had to respond to it to get you to answer us (calling us hypocrites in the process).  Then you went clear over the top:

“I won't respect your opinions on this current topic that try to cause doubt until you can at least attempt to breach the topic in the linked conversation on doubt.”

WTF.  You are in no position to dictate to us or anyone else the conditions for your respect.  Then you had the balls to tell me that I am the one who should go elsewhere, and taunted me to tell you to leave.  There are several emojis that would be appropriate here.  But I am going to leave the rest to everyone else.  Or at least those who want to stay on the merry-go-round.  Respond however you want.

[midniterider]

Deleted. Later post somewhat better. 

[Joshpantera]

On 2/10/2020 at 1:50 AM, Lost_more_then_Once said:

In other words a person needs to find the things in the world that are reliable and a solid foundation.  People or ideas that they can depend on and rely on.

 

I'll cut right to the chase. Uncertainty is a firmer and much more solid foundation than certainty. And that can be easily demonstrated.

 

Do you agree or disagree? 

 

Everything in existence, to the extent of mere existence itself, stems from a foundation of uncertainty. 

[TruthSeeker0]

3 hours ago, TEG said:

 

It’s not an assumption, it’s what you are doing.  Everyone else is responding to what you are saying, I am responding to what you are doing.  And I am going to say this because I think some people don’t really see it.  You started out with a disingenous “I have a question” when your real intent was to evangelize in a forum intended for ex-christians.  Then you chose to preach to said ex-christians from the fairy tale book of Jonah, of all things (I still can’t get over that).  You equate your conviction that god is real with objective evidence, and do not appear to understand the concept.  Your response to my comment about the believer’s fallacy was basically, “Oh, yeah? Well, you do it too” when it is you who are here to convert us, not the other way around (and I personally do not give a damn what you believe).  Having come to a group of ex-christians to challenge their beliefs, you complain about being “under interrogation” (maybe you expected us to be converted with astonished looks on our faces, like in a chick tract).

Then you started trying to take control of the group by directing us to answer your “icebreaker” questions, and continued by starting a new thread and telling us we had to respond to it to get you to answer us (calling us hypocrites in the process).  Then you went clear over the top:

“I won't respect your opinions on this current topic that try to cause doubt until you can at least attempt to breach the topic in the linked conversation on doubt.”

WTF.  You are in no position to dictate to us or anyone else the conditions for your respect.  Then you had the balls to tell me that I am the one who should go elsewhere, and taunted me to tell you to leave.  There are several emojis that would be appropriate here.  But I am going to leave the rest to everyone else.  Or at least those who want to stay on the merry-go-round.  Respond however you want.

I agree completely. All this is presented with a very "I'm being reasonable" persona with some mixed in passive aggressiveness every once in awhile, ie "maybe I should take my leave before I'm treated too much like a POS here." 

 

I don't know if others are seeing through this act but the tactics are pretty clear to me. 

[midniterider]

5 hours ago, LogicalFallacy said:

 

We do. No one here simply says I doubt that and walks away. Extensive reasons for a persons position are often given. You just seem to be lumping everything into one or to catch phrases.

 

 

We present hypothetical situations which are then called false hypotheticals by the believer because they know their religion wont hold up to logical scrutiny if he engages in them. 

Redneck Prof presented biblical contradictions but the believer wont engage because they know their religion won't hold up to logical scrutiny.  

 

What other strategies of logic will our believer refuse to engage in?

 

 

[midniterider]

10 minutes ago, TruthSeeker0 said:

I agree completely. All this is presented with a very "I'm being reasonable" persona with some mixed in passive aggressiveness every once in awhile, ie "maybe I should take my leave before I'm treated too much like a POS here." 

 

I don't know if others are seeing through this act but the tactics are pretty clear to me. 

 

My conclusion: Evangelist

 

 

[Joshpantera]