Why Only Christianity?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
05-08-2011, 11:01 AM
RE: Why Only Christianity?
I made a thread about this, things I hate about atheist. How they will jump through hoops and scurry about trying to give the theist information he has demanded rather than ending the argument at "What evidence do you have for this said god?"

I frown at all of you.

"We Humans are capable of greatness." -Carl Sagan
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-08-2011, 11:07 AM
RE: Why Only Christianity?
Isn't that the entire point to conversing with theists?
If you don't want to you don't have to, but if you do it is bound to end up that way
so you should take that into account before you begin.

"I think of myself as an intelligent, sensitive human being with the soul of a clown which always forces me to blow it at the most important moments." -Jim Morrison
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-08-2011, 11:26 AM
RE: Why Only Christianity?
(05-08-2011 10:49 AM)gamutman Wrote:  
(03-08-2011 09:11 AM)An_Actual_Theist Wrote:  Why is it that every post I see is about disproving Christianity? Nobbodyon here has ever discussed other valid forms of Theism. For example, what I believe in, an omnipotent being that controls the outcome of quantum events to work his/her/its will on the Universe.

Seems quite a bit more likley than a new Universe forming every time a quantum event orccurs with multiple possibiliteis. (which it always is)

Thoughts?

Isn't that deism or pandeism?




(can't watch video right now, sorry if my post is redundant)
As far as I understand, Deism uses the watchmaker god concept. The "grand architect of the universe". The god who simply set the conditions for the beginning of the universe and doesn't interfere with natural processes. The only "gap" the deist god fills is the one in the very beginning. Pantheism would be a poetic way of using the word god to describe nature, the universe, and everything in it.

The God excuse: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument. "God did it." Anything we can't describe must have come from God. - George Carlin

Whenever I'm asked "What if you're wrong?", I always show the asker this video: http://youtu.be/iClejS8vWjo Screw Pascal's wager.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-08-2011, 11:35 AM
RE: Why Only Christianity?
Why so mean vacuous? most of us on here discussed the reasoning behind the sites focus. I will discuss someone's belief with them from time to time, but that is because if they seem interested in discussing it I am being courteous. If you ask me to prove you wrong then perhaps I will attempt to, at least until I see that you don't want me to =p

I'm not a non believer, I believe in the possibility of anything. I just don't let the actuality of something be determined by a 3rd party.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-08-2011, 11:51 AM
RE: Why Only Christianity?
(05-08-2011 11:35 AM)Lilith Pride Wrote:  Why so mean vacuous? most of us on here discussed the reasoning behind the sites focus. I will discuss someone's belief with them from time to time, but that is because if they seem interested in discussing it I am being courteous. If you ask me to prove you wrong then perhaps I will attempt to, at least until I see that you don't want me to =p

Maybe it is just me, but when I guy asked why do we keep attacking purple unicorns instead of his pink elephant, I don't think "Show me why we should/what is your reasoning for believing said elephant?" is such a bad start.

I do on the other hand think it is pointless to explain why we don't attack the elephant by defending our case.

You all are always on the defensive, stop it.

"We Humans are capable of greatness." -Carl Sagan
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-08-2011, 12:59 PM
RE: Why Only Christianity?
(05-08-2011 11:01 AM)NotSoVacuous Wrote:  I made a thread about this, things I hate about atheist. How they will jump through hoops and scurry about trying to give the theist information he has demanded rather than ending the argument at "What evidence do you have for this said god?"

I frown at all of you.

I'll see your frown and raise you a sneer.
Where's the harm in engagement? Particularly engagement with a tiny, peaceful, speculative group?
Honestly, i don't believe we need to be as hard and humourless as the Calvinists, or whichever sect is on top just now. I don't even believe that fighting them serves a useful purpose. They'll wipe one another out, leaving the field clear - charred and salted, unable to grow anything for 7 generations, but Judeo-Muslim- Christian-free. (Not a bad homing call for hide and seek, what?)

If you pray to anything, you're prey to anything.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-08-2011, 01:01 PM
RE: Why Only Christianity?
(05-08-2011 11:26 AM)Efrx86 Wrote:  
(05-08-2011 10:49 AM)gamutman Wrote:  
(03-08-2011 09:11 AM)An_Actual_Theist Wrote:  Why is it that every post I see is about disproving Christianity? Nobbodyon here has ever discussed other valid forms of Theism. For example, what I believe in, an omnipotent being that controls the outcome of quantum events to work his/her/its will on the Universe.

Seems quite a bit more likley than a new Universe forming every time a quantum event orccurs with multiple possibiliteis. (which it always is)

Thoughts?

Isn't that deism or pandeism?




(can't watch video right now, sorry if my post is redundant)
As far as I understand, Deism uses the watchmaker god concept. The "grand architect of the universe". The god who simply set the conditions for the beginning of the universe and doesn't interfere with natural processes. The only "gap" the deist god fills is the one in the very beginning. Pantheism would be a poetic way of using the word god to describe nature, the universe, and everything in it.

As far as my understanding of the distinctions goes, everything you said about pantheism and deism is true, but I would note that I didn't say pantheism. I said pandeism. Pandeism is not a merely poetic attitude but the more literal idea that god is outside of time and space and is also all of time and space. It takes the first-mover idea from deism and combines it with the pantheistic idea that god is all of nature. It's very similar (almost identical) to Hermeticism. Hermeticism posits that we are all the creation of a universal mind - similar to the Brahman of non-Vedic Hinduism. Pantheism is basically mysticism while pandesism is more esoteric.

I think.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-08-2011, 01:26 PM
RE: Why Only Christianity?
(05-08-2011 01:01 PM)gamutman Wrote:  As far as my understanding of the distinctions goes, everything you said about pantheism and deism is true, but I would note that I didn't say pantheism. I said pandeism. Pandeism is not a merely poetic attitude but the more literal idea that god is outside of time and space and is also all of time and space. It takes the first-mover idea from deism and combines it with the pantheistic idea that god is all of nature. It's very similar (almost identical) to Hermeticism. Hermeticism posits that we are all the creation of a universal mind - similar to the Brahman of non-Vedic Hinduism. Pantheism is basically mysticism while pandesism is more esoteric.

I think.

lol my bad, I guess I ended up reading "pantheism" as soon as I saw "deism and pan...." since I usually see deism and pantheism compared one against the other in writing.

The God excuse: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument. "God did it." Anything we can't describe must have come from God. - George Carlin

Whenever I'm asked "What if you're wrong?", I always show the asker this video: http://youtu.be/iClejS8vWjo Screw Pascal's wager.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-08-2011, 04:48 PM
RE: Why Only Christianity?
(05-08-2011 12:59 PM)Peterkin Wrote:  
(05-08-2011 11:01 AM)NotSoVacuous Wrote:  I made a thread about this, things I hate about atheist. How they will jump through hoops and scurry about trying to give the theist information he has demanded rather than ending the argument at "What evidence do you have for this said god?"

I frown at all of you.

I'll see your frown and raise you a sneer.
Where's the harm in engagement? Particularly engagement with a tiny, peaceful, speculative group?
Honestly, i don't believe we need to be as hard and humourless as the Calvinists, or whichever sect is on top just now. I don't even believe that fighting them serves a useful purpose. They'll wipe one another out, leaving the field clear - charred and salted, unable to grow anything for 7 generations, but Judeo-Muslim- Christian-free. (Not a bad homing call for hide and seek, what?)

Nothing is wrong with engagement, but when a guy asked why you attack the people that believe in magical fairies and wants to know why you don't engage in disproving Zues, Thor, Pink unicorns and the boogieman, then I think it's now just rabble that should be cast aside not worthy of a talk.

What I think I am trying to say is, I am tired of all these low level talks that go on this forum. They are just plain stupid. You have some idiot creationist that comes on this forum with a structure for a god built with toothpicks and you all attempt to bring state of the art construction equipment in here to try and tear it down.

I watched a thread reach around 4-5 pages a few months ago where a guy was linking everything under the sun that a god exists. Five pages of worthless talk, he was a christian. My point is, the argument should have ended at post #2 where someone should have asked what religion he resides to and to defend that; His shit would crumble around him.

Stop letting them back themselves in these makeshift corners of circular reasoning.

"We Humans are capable of greatness." -Carl Sagan
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-08-2011, 04:58 PM
 
RE: Why Only Christianity?
(03-08-2011 02:27 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Show me evidence for the supernatural. If quantum particles and fields are being manipulated by a supreme force in the universe then it must operate outside of nature. So, if you can demonstrate that supernature exists and that it is influencing the quantum world then you can hypothesize that this supernatural influence has an effect on nature. The next step would be to determine what effects it is having on nature. Ergo, is there any evidence that these quantum influences are evident at all? Is this some response to prayer? If so then there is no evidence to suggest that the success rate of prayer is anything other than random chance?

Also, you would have to demonstrate that this quantum influence is intentional and intelligent. Ergo, demonstrate that it is not just some random occurrence and/or another natural process not yet identified.

As stated by others on this thread, please elaborate more on what you mean.

First of all, I never said anything about prayer. Also, I've already posted a link to the video that explains at the end of this post, which will explain a lot if you watch it. Honestly, there is no real test for seeing if the quantum influence is intentional, because highly unlikely events can be attributed to chance or divine intervention. All I know is that electrons can not make decisions on their own, and somehow a choice of where the electron goes is made.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfPeprQ7oGc
(03-08-2011 02:52 PM)monkeyshine89 Wrote:  A few things, my new friend

Quote:Why is it that every post I see is about disproving Christianity? Nobbodyon here has ever discussed other valid forms of Theism

For starters, I do hope you realize you are in an 'atheist' forum, so expect to find topics disproving religion. A lot of topics are focused on Christianity because many people on this forum were once Christians themselves so therefore most knowledgeable on Christian myths. Also, valid theism? As apposed to what... invalid theism, that makes no sense. As this is your first post it's a little presumptuous to make judgments on the entire forum for the few posts you probably read.

Quote:For example, what I believe in, an omnipotent being that controls the outcome of quantum events to work his/her/its will on the Universe.

That's all fine and dandy... so what exactly is your point? Also, you are not the only 'theist' on this forum, HBAF for instance, is a highly respected 'resident theist'.

Quote:Seems quite a bit more likley than a new Universe forming every time a quantum event orccurs with multiple possibiliteis. (which it always is)

um... what? Is this a personal theory or do you have ANY evidence for that claim? I'm sorry but this last part is absolutely incoherent, it seems as if you threw a couple of big 'sciencey' words together randomly.

Quote:Thoughts?

It takes guts to go somewhere that you know the majority will not agree with you. I also have to say that irrelevant posts and rambling nonsense will generally be ignored. Expect to provide evidence for your conclusions. Lastly, remember, respect is a two way street, gotta give some to get some. Gambatte!
Please realize that what I'm saying makes sense before you blow off this post as BS
Watch this for an explanation, and there was actually an article in Scientific American about this, I'll post it if I find it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfPeprQ7oGc

(05-08-2011 11:35 AM)Lilith Pride Wrote:  Why so mean vacuous? most of us on here discussed the reasoning behind the sites focus. I will discuss someone's belief with them from time to time, but that is because if they seem interested in discussing it I am being courteous. If you ask me to prove you wrong then perhaps I will attempt to, at least until I see that you don't want me to =p

Well, okay, can you please prove me wrong?
Haven't had a decent debate in a while.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfPeprQ7oGc is the video that explains my evidence.
Sorry if i am spamming it, just seems like a lot of people need to see it to be able to follow, which I understand.
(05-08-2011 11:51 AM)NotSoVacuous Wrote:  
(05-08-2011 11:35 AM)Lilith Pride Wrote:  Why so mean vacuous? most of us on here discussed the reasoning behind the sites focus. I will discuss someone's belief with them from time to time, but that is because if they seem interested in discussing it I am being courteous. If you ask me to prove you wrong then perhaps I will attempt to, at least until I see that you don't want me to =p

Maybe it is just me, but when I guy asked why do we keep attacking purple unicorns instead of his pink elephant, I don't think "Show me why we should/what is your reasoning for believing said elephant?" is such a bad start.

I do on the other hand think it is pointless to explain why we don't attack the elephant by defending our case.

You all are always on the defensive, stop it.

This isn't a purple unicorn or a pink elephant. This is a belief held among various members of the scientific community based on observing an actual event. This is a real thing, there are FACTS behind it.
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: