Faith, Logic, and Freedom

[TABA]

35 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

Screw off dickhead.

Enough.  Wanna spend some time in the Time-Out Chair?

[Edgarcito]

8 minutes ago, TABA said:

Enough.  Wanna spend some time in the Time-Out Chair?

Look dude, why do you facilitate his incessant badgering...  You JUST asked how RS could improve the conversation essentially but refuse to moderate your buddy.  I don't care where I sit... just do your job....better.

[◊ Weezer ◊]

this whole argument is reminding me of playground arguments in grade school.

[TABA]

1 minute ago, Edgarcito said:

Look dude, why do you facilitate his incessant badgering...  You JUST asked how RS could improve the conversation essentially but refuse to moderate your buddy.  I don't care where I sit... just do your job....better.

Badgering (which you are free to ignore) is one thing.  Name-calling is another.  You do not need to respond to this.

[walterpthefirst]

1 hour ago, Edgarcito said:

Oh come on Walter....you said by necessity that our conversations needed to be laid out at your pace and rules....that I might understand better .... which is largely another term for your need to control and diminish.  Don't blame anyone but yourself.  It really really gets old regardless of how smart you are or the needs as a result.  Stop already.

 

Faith, Logic, and Freedom - Page 20 - The Lion's Den - Ex-Christian.Net

 

Posted October 25, 2022

 

  On 10/25/2022 at 7:19 PM, DarkBishop said:

I've been debating on whether or not to invite a preacher from my old church to come debate here. But in a lot of ways I think the road to deconversion is a road that has to be found. Not thrust upon you.

 

He told me to keep sending him things that disprove God. That he feels it strengthens his faith. There is a whole arsenal here. Thats why I'm debating it within myself. 

 

RankStranger replied...

 

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.  And I'm sure he thinks the same thing when trying to bring you back to Jesus.

 

There have been cases where Christians came to this site to Defend Jesus and ended up de-converting... but that was a long time ago and the internet was still young.  I don't think it's too likely in this day and age.

 

I'd say if you like the guy... let it be.  If he's a dick, send him here and we'll tie him in a knot 

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Your accusation is shown to be false by what I've cited above, Ed.

 

RS used to be able to ask and answer questions with anyone without imposing any special conditions.

 

Since I haven't changed in the interim and the way this forum operates hasn't changed either...

 

...whatever problem he has with answering questions now is down to him.

 

If today's RS won't freely answer questions but yesterday's would, then how is that my fault?

 

 

 

And weren't you once the End3 who left this forum and later came back under a new 'secret' identity, only revealing the truth about yourself when one of us recognized your style of writing?  It was probably your 'Christian' use Anglo-Saxon expletives and personal insults that gave you away.

 

So much for your moral high ground!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[RankStranger]

3 hours ago, TABA said:

 

Rank, since the discussion between you and Walter has not been an unqualified success, maybe you and I can try it.  

 

Circling all the way back to the distant land of Thursday, you made the statement above.  I do not hold the universe responsible for things that happen, whether I consider them good or bad.  It’s basically rocks crashing into rocks, on various levels, with different consequences at different times and in different places.  
It seems we share the idea that the universe is not to be either blamed or thanked for things that happen.  
 

But you go on to say that the same reasoning applies to god: he just is.  
Am I understanding you correctly?  He just is, and shouldn’t be blamed for the bad things that happen?
 

 

 

Yes, you understand me correctly for the most part.  The only correction I'd make is the use of the word 'should'.  Should is a funny word that I try to avoid.  

 

I don't know what you or Ed or anybody else 'should' do or 'shouldn't' do.  That's up to y'all.  But I no longer see any point in shaking my tiny fist at the heavens.  

 

And for anybody who thinks they can/should blame God for [insert complaint here]... go for it.  Let me know how that works out.

[Edgarcito]

14 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said:

 

Faith, Logic, and Freedom - Page 20 - The Lion's Den - Ex-Christian.Net

 

Posted October 25, 2022

 

  On 10/25/2022 at 7:19 PM, DarkBishop said:

I've been debating on whether or not to invite a preacher from my old church to come debate here. But in a lot of ways I think the road to deconversion is a road that has to be found. Not thrust upon you.

 

He told me to keep sending him things that disprove God. That he feels it strengthens his faith. There is a whole arsenal here. Thats why I'm debating it within myself. 

 

RankStranger replied...

 

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.  And I'm sure he thinks the same thing when trying to bring you back to Jesus.

 

There have been cases where Christians came to this site to Defend Jesus and ended up de-converting... but that was a long time ago and the internet was still young.  I don't think it's too likely in this day and age.

 

I'd say if you like the guy... let it be.  If he's a dick, send him here and we'll tie him in a knot 

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Your accusation is shown to be false by what I've cited above, Ed.

 

RS used to be able to ask and answer questions with anyone without imposing any special conditions.

 

Since I haven't changed in the interim and the way this forum operates hasn't changed either...

 

...whatever problem he has with answering questions now is down to him.

 

If today's RS won't freely answer questions but yesterday's would, then how is that my fault?

 

 

 

And weren't you once the End3 who left this forum and later came back under a new 'secret' identity, only revealing the truth about yourself when one of us recognized your style of writing?  It was probably your 'Christian' use Anglo-Saxon expletives and personal insults that gave you away.

 

So much for your moral high ground!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You do understand the words pedantic and patronizing.  I don't think any of us appreciate your using these qualities in a respectful dialogue.  Me, RS, Aik.  If you might quell those tendencies, I think everyone might appreciate the tone.

[walterpthefirst]

3 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

You do understand the words pedantic and patronizing.  I don't think any of us appreciate your using these qualities in a respectful dialogue.  Me, RS, Aik.  If you might quell those tendencies, I think everyone might appreciate the tone.

 

And all the other members might appreciate you and RS giving straight answers to simple questions.

 

How can a respectful dialogue take place when you two 'Christians' do their best to avoid doing that?

 

Put your own houses in order before talking to us about respect.

[Edgarcito]

1 minute ago, walterpthefirst said:

 

And all the other members might appreciate you and RS giving straight answers to simple questions.

 

How can a respectful dialogue take place when you two 'Christians' do their best to avoid doing that?

 

Put your own houses in order before talking to us about respect.

Then you please need to define how our subjectivities might adequately come together with respect.  I notice you said you appreciate articulate definitions, etc.  RS said he did not want to discuss with you on that level of formality.  Then that leaves you with the ball in your court with respect to finding alternative means instead of responding with "you and RS giving straight answers....", placing the blame/burden on us to provide for your needs.  It appears that you are unable to communicate in informal dialogue as it doesn't provide your sense of someone giving you a straight answer.  

 

Please answer this, yes or no.  Are you able to have an informal conversation without articulating every thought to it's exhaustive end.

[walterpthefirst]

2 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

Then you please need to define how our subjectivities might adequately come together with respect.  I notice you said you appreciate articulate definitions, etc.  RS said he did not want to discuss with you on that level of formality.  Then that leaves you with the ball in your court with respect to finding alternative means instead of responding with "you and RS giving straight answers....", placing the blame/burden on us to provide for your needs.  It appears that you are unable to communicate in informal dialogue as it doesn't provide your sense of someone giving you a straight answer.  

 

Please answer this, yes or no.  Are you able to have an informal conversation without articulating every thought to it's exhaustive end.

 

I don't need to do any of what you say. 

 

Instead, I'm now going to describe the elephant in the room.  The one which you know is there and which you would rather stay hidden.

 

Threads like this one, running to 35 pages, wouldn't be exist if the Christians participating in them gave honest and direct answers to the questions put to them.   The threads would be over in much less time and with much less aggravation. 

 

Why?  Because then the flaws, misconceptions and illogic of their beliefs would be quickly exposed by their honest answers.  The game would be over.  They would be unable to give any credible reason for their beliefs.  

 

But by refusing to answer, by requiring special conditions, by dodging and equivocating and deflecting, the Christians can keep the game going.   

 

That's the real issue here.  Not anyone's lack of respect, nothing to do with definitions or formality vs informality.  That's all a smokescreen for the real issue.

 

Not answering questions.

[◊ Weezer ◊]

OMG!  Would the last one leaving the room turn out the light?

[Edgarcito]

Just now, walterpthefirst said:

 

I don't need to do any of what you say. 

 

Instead, I'm now going to describe the elephant in the room.  The one which you know is there and which you would rather stay hidden.

 

Threads like this one, running to 35 pages, wouldn't be exist if the Christians participating in them gave honest and direct answers to the questions put to them.   The threads would be over in much less time and with much less aggravation. 

 

Why?  Because then the flaws, misconceptions and illogic of their beliefs would be quickly exposed by their honest answers.  The game would be over.  They would be unable to give any credible reason for their beliefs.  

 

But by refusing to answer, by requiring special conditions, by dodging and equivocating and deflecting, the Christians can keep the game going.   

 

That's the real issue here.  Not anyone's lack of respect, nothing to do with definitions or formality vs informality.  That's all a smokescreen for the real issue.

 

Not answering questions.

Problem is logic and science only extend so far.  You certainly understand this per your previous admissions and don't like to acknowledge it yourself...i.e., "a straight answer".  I understand completely what you are saying, but diminishing someone's beliefs is essentially diminishing them.  I have a disdain for people that do that intentionally.....which is what I battle against.  You sir, do that intentionally...to hurt others.  Big difference.

 

 

 

[RankStranger]

1 hour ago, Edgarcito said:

Look dude, why do you facilitate his incessant badgering...  You JUST asked how RS could improve the conversation essentially but refuse to moderate your buddy.  I don't care where I sit... just do your job....better.

 

I like this post.

[RankStranger]

1 hour ago, walterpthefirst said:

 

Faith, Logic, and Freedom - Page 20 - The Lion's Den - Ex-Christian.Net

 

Posted October 25, 2022

 

  On 10/25/2022 at 7:19 PM, DarkBishop said:

I've been debating on whether or not to invite a preacher from my old church to come debate here. But in a lot of ways I think the road to deconversion is a road that has to be found. Not thrust upon you.

 

He told me to keep sending him things that disprove God. That he feels it strengthens his faith. There is a whole arsenal here. Thats why I'm debating it within myself. 

 

RankStranger replied...

 

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.  And I'm sure he thinks the same thing when trying to bring you back to Jesus.

 

There have been cases where Christians came to this site to Defend Jesus and ended up de-converting... but that was a long time ago and the internet was still young.  I don't think it's too likely in this day and age.

 

I'd say if you like the guy... let it be.  If he's a dick, send him here and we'll tie him in a knot 

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Your accusation is shown to be false by what I've cited above, Ed.

 

RS used to be able to ask and answer questions with anyone without imposing any special conditions.

 

Since I haven't changed in the interim and the way this forum operates hasn't changed either...

 

...whatever problem he has with answering questions now is down to him.

 

If today's RS won't freely answer questions but yesterday's would, then how is that my fault?

 

 

 

And weren't you once the End3 who left this forum and later came back under a new 'secret' identity, only revealing the truth about yourself when one of us recognized your style of writing?  It was probably your 'Christian' use Anglo-Saxon expletives and personal insults that gave you away.

 

So much for your moral high ground!

 

 

 

 

I'd like to clarify a couple of points:

 

1.  I've always been the same jackass you see before you, little different than when I was an Atheist.

 

2.  I give not a single rat's ass what your 'expectations' are.  I will engage you in formal debate if and when I want.  Here and now, I have no interest in that.  But you are more than welcome to point out any logical fallacies on my part, so I can explain which assumptions you're mistaken on.  Or dishonesty on my part.  Criticize away- I'm here for it.  Just don't go running to the unmentionables when you don't get an answer you like.  I know you're not a chickenshit.  But that sure is a chickenshit move, and it's not the first or second time I've seen you do it.  It speaks to your character, but character isn't set in stone.

 

3.  In posting here, I have never agreed- even implicitly- to abide by rules of formal debate, much less at the end of some unmentionable's whip.  I have posts on this site going back to 2005 attesting to that.  Not that that makes me special in any way.  But I have been present (even if only reading occasionally during my sabbatical) to watch this site bloom into a community like none I've ever seen before or since... and then stagnate into what it is today.  I don't think you understand how tedious and patronizing your pseudo-formal 'debate' style is, and it sure isn't helping whatever mission you think you're on. 

 

4.  I'm only entitled to one thing on this site:  To type into this little box unless/until unmentionables have had enough of my shit.  What do you feel entitled to here, Walter?

 

5.  Please note that I haven't called you a single name, lest you go running to your unmentionables.

 

 

[RankStranger]

2 hours ago, Edgarcito said:

Next you will be accusing him of not using the same entry for particular definition....that it's his problem because he's not using the right or word......if you haven't already.  Which btw is an attempt to bloviate with your fucking science over our subjectivity.  Screw off dickhead.

 

He doesn't understand the difference between science, and pop-science-informed dogma.

[RankStranger]

2 hours ago, Weezer said:

this whole argument is reminding me of playground arguments in grade school.

 

Some folks can't help but run to the teacher.  I can see how a nanny-state like Britain would breed that mentality.

[TABA]

That’s it for now.  This thread stopped being useful to anybody some time ago.  

[TABA]

I’m going to unlock this thread again, to see if people can engage respectfully.  Anybody who finds it unproductive or otherwise negative is free to not participate further.