Why do you participate in the Religion/Theology forum?

[More Than A Feeling]

Have you learned anything from being here? Do you think that you will actually change anyone’s mind? Are you just generally looking for support for your own outlook on these matters? Can any of us really say anything new in a debate that has been going on for centuries, and will likely continue for centuries more? (Because really, this forum generally boils down into an theist v. atheist mentality, with “spiritual but not religious” people caught in the middle.)

I participated because I thought, as someone who was raised atheist and converted to Christianity, I could offer a unique perspective on matters. But as I have delved more deeply into my faith, I find the gulf between atheists and myself growing greater, and I don’t think I have anything to offer any more that isn’t duplicated by others. I find myself reading the same old, same old, and reacting in a way that doesn’t do me nor anyone else any good.

I don’t think what I have to say will do anyone any good, because most of us have such strong stands on these matters already. Nor have I really learned anything, but perhaps that is my own shortcoming.

The bottom line is that I am seriously reconsidering whether I should continue to participate in this forum. What do you all get out of it?

[saltpoint]

1. There are always interesting people on the DU boards, and most of

us enjoy running into them.

[More Than A Feeling]

2. True, and I enjoy that as well.

I was addressing this particular board, which seems to be defined by one particular divide.

[saltpoint]

3. Well, the interesting people are as likely to wander in to that board

as the others, right?

[arwalden]

4. I'm Here To Convert Believers Into Atheists.

:rofl: Your pods are ready.

<< The bottom line is that I am seriously reconsidering whether I should continue to participate in this forum. >>

But seriously now... based on this thread of yours (and other posts of yours in this forum) it seems to me that you would probably be happier in one of the more heavily regulated Christian "groups".

I'd never tell you to leave... that decision is ultimately up to you. But since you're so open with your question, I feel that I can also be open with my observations.

Unless you're just seeking sympathy, and I doubt that's the case, then it sounds to me like you've already made up your mind what you're going to do (or not do, as the case may be).

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[arwalden]

11. Ooph! Heh. Heh-heh! --- BWA-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!

<< the atheist Evangelical attitude >>

[varkam]

80. Perspective. N/T

[arwalden]

95. I'll Say! -- It's Quite A Skewed, Myopic And Chauvinistic One...

... that they have.

It's all very frustrating and insulting, to be sure... but sometimes, despite their best efforts, it can be extremely amusing.

[Goblinmonger]

14. If you can't engage in a discussion of your beliefs

without feeling threatened, then this probably isn't the place for you. You should be more solid in your beliefs. They have groups for you to do that.

And I disagree with your statement that atheists mock religion out of the blue and as a habit. The only time that really happens is when the discussion gets really heated.

[papau]

17. Why does demanding respect mean I feel threaten? I agree with you

that some of the atheist posts are indeed "non-mocking" - but relatively very few - IMHO.

[TechBear_Seattle]

22. This is not the forum for "demanding" anything

Not even respect. My understanding of the R/T board is that this is a forum for discussion and debate on matters
religious and theological. To have a free exchange of ideas, it is necessary to point out the flaws as well as the strengths. If your faith is unable to withstand critique, you should refrain from R/T and stick to the boards that are more strictly moderated.

[arwalden]

23. For Some Folks Of A More Sensitive And Delicate Nature......

...I'm certain that less-than-flattering sentiments or ANY words that were short of abject reverence would be considered to be "mocking". (There's just no pleasing some folks.)

[Goblinmonger]

27. Whatever

It seems to me that "respect" to you means that I can't say what I think but you can say what you think. I think that the Christian god is no different than any other fairy tale or mythology. I shouldn't say that because it "mocks" you. You think that the Christian god is real. Somehow saying THAT, though, doesn't "mock" me. Why is that? I am not saying you should shut up, but if you get to say what you think, why can't I?

[arwalden]

29. "Double Your Standards, Double Your Fun"

I'll give you a hint... it begins with the letter "H".

[TechBear_Seattle]

32. Next time this comes up, try...

Arguing that the one and only god is Brahman. Or that all the Olympians must be worshipped in the time-honored manner (all the major ones, at least.) Be vigorous and firm in pressing your case, and cry about not being respected when others challenge your assertions. Maybe, if you present yourself as a fellow theist, certain people will feel less threatened.

:rofl:

[Donald Ian Rankin]

118. I'm afraid I think you're demonstrably wrong.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=214x59928

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=214&topic_id=58202&mesg_id=58202

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=214&topic_id=58007&mesg_id=58007

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=214&topic_id=56774&mesg_id=56774

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=214&topic_id=55467&mesg_id=55467

That's just the most obvious examples of atheists mocking religion out of the blue; I think that five threads on the top page is enough to justify "as a habit".

[beam me up scottie]

120. You couldn't be more wrong. NONE of those threads mock religion.

Mock·ing
a.

Imitating, esp. in derision, or so as to cause derision; mimicking; derisive.

Could we please reschedule the daily anti-atheist snit?

I have a headache and I'm sick of explaining the obvious to the oblivious.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

122. No, I'm afraid we couldn't.

As and when the problem of atheists who are more interested in insulting than discussing goes away, I'll stop pointing it out. If you want to dismiss that as a "snit" you're welcome to do so, but I'm afraid I think that name-calling is a poor substitute for rebuttal.

Incidentally, how long did it take you to find a definition of "mocking that fitted your purpose? The first three found from googling "dictionary" were

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=mocking

1: To treat with ridicule or contempt; deride.
2a: To mimic, as in sport or derision. See Synonyms at ridicule.
2b: To imitate; counterfeit.
3: To frustrate the hopes of; disappoint.


http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=51318&dict=CALD

Which is a longish entry; but includes

"2 to make something appear stupid or useless" and "when you laugh at someone or something in an unkind way:"


http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/mocking

1 : to treat with contempt or ridicule : DERIDE
2 : to disappoint the hopes of
3 : DEFY, CHALLENGE
4 a : to imitate (as a mannerism) closely : MIMIC b : to mimic in sport or derision


This, and the "a" you've left at the beginning of your thing, suggests strongly to me that you've very carefully selected a subset of the definition so as to exclude what you want to exclude, which I'm afraid I regard as a very cheap trick. By the definitions I've given above, which I think do a more adequate job, you'll find that all the threads I've posted are mocking.

Incidentally, to trade one one-liner for another, you're not explaining the obvious, you're denying it. There *are* a great many posts on this forum with the specific (and sometimes even sole) intention of offending the religious and mocknig religion (note: not just "posts offensive to the religious" - those are perfectly acceptable); trying to deny it when I can point at the posts in question is, to use a phrase I've never seen outside an internet discussion forum but which I think fits the bill, "intellectually dishonest" (as is your selective-definition trick).

[beam me up scottie]

128. ROFLMAO! Google "mocking" and click on the definition link on the right.

For the internet(s)-challenged, that WAS the first definition I found.

In the event that my instructions are too difficult to understand, here is the url: http://www.answers.com/mocking&r=67

To quote my next door neighbor's kid; "Duh."

This, and the "a" you've left at the beginning of your thing, suggests strongly to me that you've very carefully selected a subset of the definition so as to exclude what you want to exclude, which I'm afraid I regard as a very cheap trick.

A cheap trick?

You mean like falsely accusing me of dishonesty when in fact, the post I was replying to was the one that was intellectually dishonest?

Oops!

Silly BMUS! :spank:

That's the definition of a hypocrite!

Incidentally, to trade one one-liner for another, you're not explaining the obvious, you're denying it. There *are* a great many posts on this forum with the specific (and sometimes even sole) intention of offending the religious and mocknig religion (note: not just "posts offensive to the religious" - those are perfectly acceptable); trying to deny it when I can point at the posts in question is, to use a phrase I've never seen outside an internet discussion forum but which I think fits the bill, "intellectually dishonest" (as is your selective-definition trick).

Oh brother. :eyes:

Since my post only refers to the five ops in question, your claim that I somehow explain or deny every other atheist post in this forum is absurd.

I've just provided proof that the definition of the word "mocking" I posted was complete and not "selective" as you claim, so your assumptions give the impression of being paranoid as well as ridiculous.

And you really should get out more, the phrase "intellectually dishonest" is most definitely used outside of internet forums.

As and when the problem of atheists who are more interested in insulting than discussing goes away, I'll stop pointing it out.

Could that post be a little more delusional? (not to mention incoherent)

Look, up there in the sky!

It's a bird!

It's a plane!

No, it's Captain Theotherkidsarealwayspickingonme!
:rofl:

So, when did the other athIEst die and make you leader of the Junior Theist Avengers?

Contrary to your opinion that we persecute them, the theists in this forum hold their own.

Or haven't you met Tallahassee Grannie?

As a matter of fact, a select group of them habitually insult atheists.

Of course, acknowledging their insults would ruin the whole hero thing, wouldn't it?

Oh, right, I forgot.

Ignoring them makes it easier to portray the theists as hapless victims who need protection from the mean old atheists.



Ironic, isn't it?

DU atheists give DU theists more credit than their self appointed attack doggies.

By the definitions I've given above, which I think do a more adequate job, you'll find that all the threads I've posted are mocking.

Again, NONE of the ops in the threads you cite mock religion.







Let's take a look at the ops whose authors are allegedly "mocking religion out of the blue":

JAHWEH: WANTED - For Genocide, War Crimes and Mass Murder

If you're not familiar with the Nuremberg Files, they are a website (and numerous mirror websites) which are run by opponents of abortion, who view it as a crime against humanity. By gathering evidence against doctors who perform abortions, they hope to prosecute them like the Nazi leadership was prosecuted in Nuremberg (hence the name) after World War II.

This is an excerpt from, and link to, another website.
Posting it in this forum does not in any way "mock" religion.

God Lied

In Genesis, we find:

2:16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the
garden thou mayest freely eat:

2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

But they didn't die, did they?

This is a valid opinion and question about a biblical contradiction.
Again, it does not mock religion.

Star Trek & The Five Lights

I believe this was posted before on DU but I was reminded of it while reading a thread here tonight and thought I'd share it.

This is an outstanding essay about an atheist's struggle to understand his lack of belief and acknowledge it publicly.
It does NOT in ANY way, mock anyone or anything.

I posted it here because I enjoyed it immensely the first time I read it, and I wanted to share it with new posters in this forum.


If you continue to claim that I am "mocking" religion by posting it, you are calling me a liar.

Not that it would be surprising, actually, considering the source, but it would be an excellent illustration of how far some posters are willing to go in order to vilify atheists.

Religion and rationality go together like kittens and pick-axes

Normal disclaimer: Believe WHATEVER you want; worship WHOMEVER you want. I don't care. As long as you don't force it on my by proselytizing or legislation, knock yourself out. Oh, and if you post about your beliefs in an open forum like this, I think it is fair game for discussion (which will, sadly for some, include people saying your views are not correct).

Here is another valid opinion by a DU atheist who contends that belief in the supernatural cannot be defined as rational.
Posting definitions to support opinions (pretty much like you just did, except it didn't work out so well for you) does not constitute mockery.

I believe religion is the greatest danger to humanity at this time. ...

As a young man I had hoped that if we ever could work it out with the Russians and Chinese there would be peace in our World, at least to a very significant degree. And now we find ourselves in a period of time where religions are threatening the safety of the entire World. The terrorism that has been destroying the lives,peace,and stability of our World in the name of Islamic Holy War cannot be denied. It has been going on for a very many decades now. In the past Christians have surely done their part to torment others. And if you go back in history it has been the same for many religions. As far as I am concerned the most popular religions are institutionalized insanity. As a World,we have to turn away from this non-sense to save ourselves. I do believe the most popular religions do stem from a fear of death. That is why they promise some sort of after life and that is what they center their beliefs around. What do you think about all this ? ...Oscar

And yet again, another valid opinion, albeit a controversial one, that does not mock religion.
This poster is hardly the first person to comment on the adverse effects of religion on society, either on or off DU.

So now you're suggesting DU atheists shouldn't be allowed to criticize religion?

How liberal.








:thumbsdown: Overall, a pathetically weak attempt to vilify DU atheists.

Trying to redefine the opinions of others and falsely attribute motives to those with whom you disagree only works if one has a hero fantasy and an axe to grind.

It reminds me of the tactics employed by someone else who uses hyperbole to distract from the facts.





:

[salvorhardin]

131. Careful BMUS

Next thing you know they'll be accusing Answers.com of mocking Christianity. This is what I saw when I went to the page you linked:


I don't know if that's irony but it sure is funny.

[beam me up scottie]

132. BWAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA !!!

Priceless!!!

[Name removed]

133. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

134. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Jo March]

167. Then what is the purpose of the Atheist/Agnostic forum?

Why come here and post things about how we are all idiots, deluded, stupid, mentally ill, etc.? What is the point of that?

That would be the equivalent of me going to the A/A forum and posting about my beliefs and trying to convert everyone there.

[beam me up scottie]

168. That's a group, arnheim. This is a forum.

Forums are for discussion, questions and debate.

Groups are for like minded individuals to discuss their topics without having to explain or defend their opinions.

And Goblinmonger doesn't "post things about how we are all idiots, deluded, stupid, mentally ill, etc.?" here.

Most of us don't.

The people who do post comments like that are usually challenged by DU atheists and/or their posts are deleted by the mods.

Gobby's thread about respect: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=214&topic_id=58210

He's one of the good guys.

:hi:

[Jo March]

169. I understand what you are saying (group vs. forum)

But "discussion, questions and debate" are one thing - flat-out insults are another thing entirely.

I wasn't referring specifically to Goblinmonger when I said that people post things about how we are all idiots, deluded, etc., etc. Those posts are here. I can find you plenty of links.

I have respect for others but it's getting a bit ridiculous in this forum. I am not offended by anyone asking me to explain my beliefs or why I believe the way that I do.

I am offended by "Jeebus", "your evil God", "irrational believers", "Buy-bull" and other references like that. It is hurtful, hateful and lacking in respect.

I'd love to come to this forum and discuss things like the rapture without having a nonbeliever drop in and post, "Your Gawd is evil if he'll kill everyone. How can you believe something so stupid? All believers are delusional." That is not discussion, debate or even a question worth answering.

Gobby, I wasn't trying to single you out. I just don't understand all of the nastiness towards believers from some fellow DUers. It just makes no sense.

I'm not trying to convert anyone here or judge anyone here or condemn anyone here. I'm just asking for respect.

Sigh, I guess Alert is really going to have to be my friend.

[beam me up scottie]

170. Sure, point out the insults, I'll alert on them and they'll be deleted.

The mods are very strict in this forum and I respect their decisions.

Respect for believers is different than respect for religious beliefs.

Or shouldn't DUers be allowed to criticize the fundies?

[Jo March]

171. I am my beliefs

My beliefs have made me who I am. I try to be loving, patient and nonjudgemental. The Lord knows that I fail at times but I keep trying.

I'll just alert when the disrespect shows up but if folks would just be a bit more respectful of one another, alerts wouldn't be needed.

The fundies - well, how much respect have they shown atheists and believers such as myself? I can understand why DUers would criticize the fundies. I am trying to be more understanding of them but it is very difficult.

I try even harder to be respectful of my fellow DUers, however, because I consider most of the folks here to be extended family who are like-minded and trying to change the world for the better. :loveya:

[beam me up scottie]

172. I understand that.

That's why I addressed the issue with Brentos: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=214x59386#61112

It's also why I'm usually the first person to call out atheists who are being disrespectful.

[Jo March]

173. I seem to be sticking my foot in my mouth tonight

Sigh. I think that I'll go find some sackcloth and ashes now...

[beam me up scottie]

174. Don't worry about it. Ask T.Grannie how she stays so cool in here.

It's hard to get a feel for other posters when you're looking at hundreds of posts, little skirmishes and major flame wars in a thread like this.

I wish these monster threads would just die and stay dead, they seem to cause offense long after the posters have kissed and made up.

[Evoman]

28. OH THE IRONY

Lol...nice. Calling us evangelical atheists (i.e insulting us) and then demanding respect.....tell me you see the irony, Papau. C'mon baby, you gotta see the irony.

[arwalden]

30. Is It "Disrespectful" To Point Out Irony?

<< C'mon baby, you gotta see the irony. >>

:rofl:

[Goblinmonger]

33. I think

papau wears glasses that have a triple filter on them. They block out UV, irony, and hypocrisy. They are a little pricey, but they make his life easier.

[TechBear_Seattle]

36. Those are the Bush model, right?

I've seen them in the stores. Nice, but they come with a huge price tag that I'm unwilling to pay. :hide:

[Goblinmonger]

39. Those are the ones.

It's hard to put your integrity, honesty, and thoughts on credit, so they usually demand them right up front to get the glasses.

[hunter]

67. I'm here to brawl.

I'll be honest.

The separations between Church and State keep the Unites States strong.

Whenever these walls break down, the United States is weaker.

Religious extremists of any sort who would take over the machinery government to enforce their faiths are dangerous. A faith that cannot stand on its own without government support and enforcement is a weak faith.

Too many Christians especially are EXACTLY the sorts of hypocrites that Christ spoke AGAINST.

[Igel]

5. A bunch of things.

I don't know that it's changed my mind about anything I believe. But if I wanted to change my mind and was just looking for reasons, I'm sure I could find them in all sorts of places.

Why do I read what I read here, compose far more posts than I submit, and even submit those that I do?

(1) Sometimes there's an argument that I find interesting. I explore it, often tacitly, and my thinking either hones my own arguments. A few times I've decided I'm less sure than I used to be; sometimes I decide that I believe something a bit more securely. Sometimes it's caused me to find a gap in what I believe, and I have to fill it in; or I realize that there's an alternate interpretation, and I have to decide which I agree with (if either, or if a decision is even possible).

(2) Sometimes there's an argument posted that lacks some crucial fact--one that could clinch the argument, or one that knocks a gaping hole in it--or that posits a fact I can't agree with. Argumentation here is frequently collective and interactive, so I collect and interact.

(3) Sometimes it's interesting to see what the range of beliefs are. I may think them ill-founded, mistaken, or even loony, but I try to deal with them with at least a modicum of respect. In some threads I post what I believe, certainly not mainstream or probably shared by anybody else in DU, and others find what I believe to be ill-founded, mistaken, or even loony. I profit from learning the range, and from whatever response I get. I assume others do, too.

(4) Sometimes a post will involve an argument, but arguments, IMHO, need to involve agreed-upon facts. Agreeing upon a set of facts can be an interesting process; seeing the facts that are proposed and searching to see if they're probable, plausible, or unlikely (with 'certain' and 'ludicrous' being the extremes on the scale) can be worthwhile. They're facts I wouldn't normally run across, and I find that either confirming or casting doubt on a fact is sufficient motivation for me to rummage; but in the absence of that motivation, I wouldn't care.

(5) Sometimes an OP asks a question, or wants a range of facts and opinion to examine in order to try to draw order out of chaos, or to see what kinds are arguments are needed or proper. It's fairly easy to misconstrue what others believe; it's possible for people to be blinded as to the implications of their own belief. Interaction, even with those of unlike mind, can be illuminating.

Esp. for someone like me, unchurched these many years.

Happy Passover and Days of Unleavened Bread, if you're so inclined. :-)

On edit: I think people searching for a belief system to call their own don't typically do well here, and those that are dogmatic about having others accept their beliefs--unless they're atheists--don't do well here. And for the record, since some people pointedly have no beliefs (as they define the term), I use 'belief' to not obligatorily indicate belief in a divinity or some sort of revelation, but in the rightness or wrongness of any sort of plausibly unprovable moral precept.

[Zebedeo]

69. Very well put

You have articulated it better than I could have, but your post captures my reasons as well.

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[arwalden]

9. A-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!

<< toning down the atheist's you're stupid /must convert to atheism message on DU's R/T forum is all that one can hope for >>

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

"Convert to atheism?" :eyes: That just cracks me up me every time! :rofl:

<< there will be more than enough not so pleasant atheists available >>

Oh stop it... we all know that's just more CODE TALK for "atheists who won't sit down and shut up". --- Just go ahead and say what you mean: "uppity atheists who don't know their place".

[RaleighNCDUer]

10. Hell, I'd just be content if y'all would stop calling my atheism

a religion.

[China_cat]

15. Atheism is a religion like bald is a hair color.

[RaleighNCDUer]

18. I like that!

I'm going to steal that phrase, if you don't mind.

LOL!

[China_cat]

21. Don't mind it at all

I stole it about 15 years ago from a list of Blue Wave tag lines. It IS appropriate, however.

[papau]

20. There are many more such witty sayings on the many atheists sites on the

net

If you need links I'll be glad to give them to you.

Of course if a group it acts like they are into a religion, I accept the idea they are acting on their true beliefs and deserve all the respect a religion is given. Even if they call their religion "atheism".

[arwalden]

52. Ah-HA! --- Here's Another Example, My "Friend".

<< Even if they call their religion "atheism". >>

Please stop calling atheism a "religion" or a "belief" or a "belief-system".

[papau]

56. As the atheist always says - I am only telling the truth as I see it.

:-)

[arwalden]

63. Really? That's Interesting. -- Which Atheist Always Says That?

Unfortunately, the DU rules don't even permit calling a liar a liar even when he's lying.

<< I am only telling the truth as I see it. >>

That's no defense for your insults. Whether you believe something to be true or not does not give you Carte Blanche to be able to insult atheists. Your "truth" is an illusion and even if you actually believe your "truth" that atheists are baby-killers, you still can't say it.

[SidDithers]

97. Wow, that didn't take long...

You, from yesterday...

"I agree - it is ok to be a non-believer, everyone does have a right to
their own thoughts and beliefs - and no one should throw any belief system in your face."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=214&topic_id=59244&mesg_id=59330

Thanks for not throwing a belief system in my face.

Sid

[Inland]

88. You know, it's not necessary to keep battling over the vocabulary.

Fact is, atheism is defined as a lack of a belief in a deity. That's it. That's all.

Where you are confused is by the fact that your correspondents clearly do have a belief system, as shown by the vociferous and constant repetition of assertions about the nature of religious and themselves. That belief system just isn't part of, or compelled by, atheism. But they clearly have belief systems that different from, or additional to, merely not believing in a god.

They are sure that as long as they don't have a religious belief, they are on the side of the angels, so to speak. THAT is the belief system.

What exactly are the parameters of the belief systems of your correspondents, besides a clear distaste for the religious as a group and belief of just about anything bad about religion and the rationality/good of the atheist? I don't know. So much time and effort gets spent on ragging on religion and in denying even having a belief system for the sole purpose of distancing themselves from anything even approaching religion, that your correspondents just don't come up much more.

Your argument over the meaning of the word "atheism" prevents the examination of and discussion of your correspondents' beliefs and ends the discussion at their lack of belief in a deity. Given that the former is important politically and the latter isn't going to change and may not even matter to you (you really weren't expecting to convert anyone here, were you?), I don't know why you would keep the discussion where it is only comfortable for everyone involved.

Now, as I admit to actually having a belief system, I can go to GD and actually discuss matters of the day. So what IS R&T good for?

[TechBear_Seattle]

35. There are some atheists who take a theological stand...

regarding the non-existence of God. Ie, there are some bald people who make a deliberate hair style choice to shave it all off :hi:

[papau]

57. The fundi "stand" is not a theological stand - but it sure looks like the

atheist's stand. Then again maybe the fundi stand is just as theological driven as the atheist stand?

This is so complicated!

:-)

[arwalden]

64. ~

<< This is so complicated! >>

Yeah... I see that you appear to be struggling.

[papau]

74. :-)

BMUS calls my use of a :-) to show my enjoying your wit (and that was witty) and not getting mad a "passive aggressive phony" ploy.

I have stopped using the happy face on replies to her posts, and if the happy face bothers you I will of course stop.

I just wish the progressive board called DU had a religion and theology forum that discusses progressive actions. Say, we could copy the spin /attitude /structure used by the Unitarians since they do have atheists and progressive theists - including progressive Christians - working together toward progressive goals.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

160. She said that? Amazing! Must be ESP. (If I believed such a thing existed)

Either that or she plagiarized me. But that would be bad, because plagiarism is quite an unethical practice, don't you agree?

[Goblinmonger]

16. Don't hold your breath

cause it ain't going to happen. The irony is that many see atheists saying what they believe to be rude and mocking while them calling atheism a religion is no big deal. :crazy:

[TallahasseeGrannie]

126. Well, here I am a week late

on this thread.

You know, I am going to be real and admit something. I have a friend who calls herself an atheist, and God forgive me (you know what I mean) when she'd tell me that I'd tell her that I felt she had a ...gulp...belief system, because she is a scientist, married to one of the world's most famous physicists, and believes completely in the sanctity of the scientific method. I realize now that was insensitive on my part. But I'd like to explain why I did it. It really was not belittling HER choices but rather attempting to find commonality with her. I realize now that my consciousness has been raised by A/Ag's here that to her, it could have come across as dismissive.

We have many other things in common: we are both mothers, grandmothers, teachers, and have a very similar world view on other issues.

I think the issue of belief/disbelief was at that time such an enormous gulf between us that it frightened me. It doesn't anymore. Her husband died two years ago and she expressed a wonder "where he had gone." Not that she suddenly believed in an afterlife, but she was dealing with his sudden disappearance from her life, and it was curious to her. Then I realized that belief or not, we all are living in a great and grand mystery and botton line is we just don't know.

[salvorhardin]

12. I'm so sorry I am not pleasant enough

Can I kiss your feet?

[arwalden]

13. ~

:rofl:

[notadmblnd]

31. Washing his feet, not kissing them would be the christian thing to do.

sorry, being raised southern baptist made me say that.

[salvorhardin]

38. I know

I was using feet as a polite euphemism for another body part.

[TechBear_Seattle]

26. And the theists "You're stupid / must convert or burn in Hell" posts?

Or are theists the only people who should have their beliefs respected?

[muriel_volestrangler]

8. I think I sometimes offer bits of information

that people might not otherwise see. Occasionally my opinions might help change someone's views - though I don't know if they ever have. While the opinions are bound to have been expressed by someone somewhere before, that doesn't mean we've all heard them before. I've been able to correct people on some facts. I certainly learn some things here (some trivial, like the 'other' 10 Commandments ending in not boiling a kid in its mother's milk; some more substantive, like the theory that Christianity was a development of Osiris-related religious practices).

Also I participate here to cheer up some American atheists who feel a bit surrounded; a friendly word from a country when being an atheist is very normal may brighten their day a little.

[papau]

19. cheer up some American atheists? - A good cause for sure - but R/T is

mis-named.

[muriel_volestrangler]

24. It's eminently well named

We discuss religions and theology here, and their place in society. Just as the 'Guns' forum isn't a preserve for those who think they are an unalloyed good for society, so Religion and Theology has posts both for and against religions.

[papau]

40. "AND THEIR PLACE IN SOCIETY" - is all that ever discussed

If a Conversion away from the topic heading conversation is the intent of both the Gun forum and the R/T forum, seems it is much more polite in the gun forum.

[arwalden]

44. Discussions topics are held threads

that started the thread starters original posts forums that they come with regard their interests. Polite threads disagreement arguments discussions with computer forum. Atheists have with lot disrespect from theists other around. Seems to me.

[papau]

50. can't argue with that - you do mocking quite well - any other skills?

:-)

[arwalden]

54. Many More Skills. But You'd Whine About Those Too.

[muriel_volestrangler]

62. You'd expect most threads to have some relation to society

on a political board. If this was a philosophical board, maybe you'd see more abstract discussion. But I don't remember seeing any disruption of religious topics by atheists by insisting on dragging them into the connections with our society. There are some abstract discussions here - they just don't seem to go very far.

[TechBear_Seattle]

25. Specifically because moderation here is more... well, liberal

I am here for the free exchange of ideas. Other boards, including the atheist one, are more closely moderated to keep things on the designated topic. The purpose of this board, I understand, is to allow a more free exchange of ideas, which of necessity include the ability to critique and point out perceived weaknesses and flaws, as well as strengths. The policy of the moderators seems to be to allow this free exchange and to step in only when things degenerate into a flamefest or otherwise get out of hand.

I have learned a great deal here that would have been impossible to learn in a more moderated forum.

[Evoman]

34. Honestly?

I am going to be completely honest. I come to this forum because its fun to challenge other peoples beliefs. And I like when you guys challenge my non-beliefs. It keeps me on my toes as well...I prefer not to argue about religion in real life (because its not my place to challenge others beliefs if they aren't challenging me). However, when people START arguing with me, or I have a forum for debate (such as an evolution/creation debate in class, or even an online forum like this) I wanna be able to cut em down. And this is good practice.

I guess I argue religion on this forum because thats what it is designed for. Why are any of us here if we just want to circle jerk with our own kind? If you want to talk about whether Jesus was great, or just good, go to the christian forum. If you want to argue whether Jesus is great, or is a figment of your imagination, well...thats what this forum is for.

Understand yet?

[Goblinmonger]

37. I'm with you

Challenging your thoughts is the best way to make sure you are on the right path. Most people in here are pretty good at challenging.

But I thought you liked the circle jerks? Were you just saying what I wanted to hear?

[papau]

41. Could there be topics in Religion beyond the atheist "no way" assertion?

Could a few folks discuss the various spiritual happenings in this world, with new and old thoughts on such spiritual happens, without the atheist circle jerk beginning.

I do not believe it is possible on DU.

And in my opinion that fact should make everyone sad.

I know it doesn't cause any sadness in some circles - but I suggest it should.

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[arwalden]

45. Too Much CODE TALK!! -- Why Not Just Say What You Really Feel?

You're tired of having to deal with atheists who won't give deference to believers. Uppity atheists are ruining your fun. You'd prefer it if the atheists would just go back into the closet, eh? Atheists are costing the Democratic party votes. Atheists make Dems look bad.

[TechBear_Seattle]

46. Atheists are traitors and terrorists

Just ask the Current Regime. :hi:

[arwalden]

47. "I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens..."

"I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God. "

~George H.W. Bush

[papau]

49. that's the other party - take up your complaint with them- and try to keep

those that do not feel that way as friends.

Perhaps even vote for them.

[arwalden]

51. Friends Don't Let Friends Call Atheism A Religion.

Friends don't call atheism a belief. Are you a friend? Whose friend are you?

[Name removed]

53. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[arwalden]

58. You Post Insulting Messages Like That...

... and then wonder why atheists have such negative feelings towards theists?

papau :<< Friends that see that atheism is a religion would prefer to not say anything.>>

papau :<< But some atheists seem bored if they are not fighting over the dogma of atheism.>>

Oh dear... are you trying to be funny, or do your insults it just come out that way despite your best efforts?

[Name removed]

48. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Evoman]

60. State your arguement or go cry

"I have yet to see a atheist post that was jumped on in a circle jerk of rejection - by theists, the way the religious posts are jumped on by the atheist."

Lol..you mean, like the post Goblinmonger started about how atheists don't like being told they have belief systems. The post where, upon reading that statement, various theists start telling her she has a belief system?

Just admit it. You hate us. You hate that we argue with you. Or maybe you hate that we argue well? You want us to shut up and bow to your religion like everyday society does. Well, fuck that. Homey don't play that.

If you can't stand the heat, then get out of the kitchen. If you don't like what we have to say, then argue with us. If you can't argue with us, go to your christian forum were everybody will agree with you. I'm sick and tired of this whiny bullshit.

I'm not telling you to shut up...I want you to express your opinion. I want you to argue for what you believe. Its what makes this forum interesting. But if your gonna cry and whine, then maybe your better off somewhere else.

[papau]

75. Oh. would that you could argue well and not just regurgitate the last few

centuries of atheist thought - with nary a nod to all the theists that have refuted those arguments over those same centuries.

[Evoman]

78. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

HAHAHAHAHAHA......*phew*.....snicker..hahahahahahaa

Centuries of atheist thought refuted??? Good god man, not only have atheist thoughts never been refuted, but when atheist do argue, they usually slay theists. Because there is no logic, no rationality to religion. I suppose that if you live in some sort of bizarro world were debate/discussion were based on irrationality or pure emotion, theists would have chance but as it is now??? Puh leeze. St. Augustine...refuted. Pascals Wager...refuted. Science has pretty much lay waste to all that "Thunder is a Mad god", "Disease are Demons", "Humans are made of Clay", "Women are made from ribs", "the universe was started 6000 years ago", "there was a world-wide flood" bullshit. Give me just one example were an atheist has been refuted (lol...especially from atheists 100 years ago...all 5 of them. Because atheism has been a juggernaut of a movement over the past millenium LOL).

[papau]

79. You really need to expand your reading list.if you think that

atheist thoughts never been refuted

:-)

[Evoman]

82. Lol..like I'm some kind of unread moron, right?

My friend, I'm very learned. I have read the bible, I have read the Qu'ran, I have read so much on religion, that I feel like I should have a degree. I have read things from both sides. I have read such literature as Darwin on Trial by Johnson, I have read all the major philosophers. I have taken a large number of philosphy classes in University (about 7 total...almost enough for a minor). I have a bachelors degree in Biochemisty...I specialize in both chemistry and biology. I am doing a master's in Evolutionary Biology. Tell me Papau...have you ever read literature that disagrees with your worldview? Have you ever read entire books on evolution and had some yokel whose never taken a biology class in high school tell you your wrong? Is it any wonder that the majority of people who take the bible literally are uneducated? Is there any wonder that most people who study nature and philosphy in any serious detail no longer believe as you do?

If you read anything besides the bible you'd know that what your saying is bullshit. In fact, why don't you give me a list of your "recommened" reading. I'm always ready to read all those greatttttt refutations.

Evoman

[papau]

94. Retention of data is as important as the reading - the percentage of

scientist who are devoutly religious had stayed the same for the last 75 years - about half.

Guess there are a lot of yokels out here in the real world.

It is good to feel strong in your opinion - and having read a bit of source is good.

The Virginia Seminary Library is where I found a great deal - it might be worth a visit by you. However I suspect whatever is presented is not what you are going to be able to use to say anything is refuted. Much is opinion and then discussion what is false or not false logic.

God is not a proveable, or disprovable, concept. So feel great in your view - just be a little less sure we yokels have it wrong about anything.

[Evoman]

96. Oh?

Over 90 PERCENT of the LEADING scientists are atheists and about 60 percent of ALL scientists are atheists.

Here are some references

L.Larson et al. (1997) Scientists are still keeping the faith. Nature 386:435-436

Larson et al. (1998) Leading Scientists still reject god. Nature 394:313

and just for fun...

Provine, W. (1988) Scientist, Face It! Science and Religion are Incompatible. Scientist 9:10

Nowak et al. (2000) Fairness versus Reason in the Ultimatum Game. Science 289: 1773-1775


Again, my point was simply to tell you that I am extremely well read. I have read A LOT from BOTH sides. There have been no meaningful refutations. Hell, I don't need proof...just give me a DETAILED reading list. Or just something less vague than The Virginia Seminary Library.

Now tell me the truth. Have you read about Evolution in any detail (textbooks or even a pro-evolution book, not a Fundamentalist interpretaion of evolution?).

And notice how I didn't say you yokels were wrong about God. I personally don't have a belief in god, but thats neither here nor there. I was talking about Evolution. Evolution is as much a fact as anything. I'm not talking about the origin of life or the origin of the universe. I'm talking about yokels trying to refute evolution without having read a book about it.

Its true that a large percentage of scientists are religious. But they are NOT fundamentalists with a literal interpretation of the bible. You would be hard pressed to find a biologist or biochemist who thinks adam was made from clay. Because guess what...humans are not made of clay.

You accused me of not being well-read. Now I AM ACCUSING YOU of not being well read. Read something besides books with BIBLE and SEMINAL in the title, my good man.

Evoman

[papau]

99. We had threads on Scientists and God and I posted 12 studies including

yours-

And with 3 page explanation and the reason why the results were what they are.

Again half of scientists of quite religious. The only survey with a good response - 70% -so says.

The NAS number are physical science types who indeed do have a lower percentage of believers - but that is offset by the non-physics/chem types - besides- so what?

Is the way you make a decision is to take a vote - or see where those you consider smart are going? Why not do your own thinking?

As to evolution We are on the same side - indeed progressive theist/Christians are just about 100% on your side. I have posted a great deal on this - and on the two pro-evolution camps that split on the God question - both camps led by a Nobel prise winner in the field.

So why do you want to put us progressive theists down in R/T? No one here is out to hurt you, unless disagreeing with you is what is meant when the atheists says there is discrimination and hurtful posting against the atheist.

Fight the intolerant, and even if they be believers, I will fight to help you win. But R/T needs to close down if the idea is that the site called DU is for all progressives.

As it stands now, DU is for atheist progressives - others can come on board at their own risk. A great way to mobilize 3% of the population, but not a good way to get 51%.

In any case, forgive me for exiting this thread. All that you have requested has been previously provided in my DU R/T posts - including answers to your last post. Feel free to use the search function on my 25,000 posts.

Indeed R/T has not only become an unpleasant, nasty, FU all the time, downer of a board - it has become boring. At one time I thought I'd correct the mis-information - such as your "90 PERCENT of the LEADING scientists are atheists" referring to a NAS survey rather than a survey of all scientists - but there is no point. The average atheist on R/T oozes too much hate and bitterness, albeit covered by a false but constant "we are just telling the truth" motif, to make continued posting worth any non-atheist's time.

You and your friends win - at least this theist is off the R/T board for a while Indeed DU has lost many from the main board itself - but I will continue here. As you know, atheist posts are welcome in any forum - so I am sure we will be seeing each other's posts now and then (of course the ignore button is an option - but I'll have to think about that :-) )

Now we should be able to agree that without my bigoted posts, R/T should be a more pleasant place for the daily atheist circle jerk. :-) You should only have the random theist drop in to interrup your feel better about oneself therapy, and they should actually help since there will be the joy of the new kill - as you think and tell each other that it is the lack of theist debating skills or facts or truth that has let you "win" the day.

A very interesting, albeit sad, situation.


:toast:

[Evoman]

108. THANK YOU for the good post.

"And with 3 page explanation and the reason why the results were what they are.

Again half of scientists of quite religious. The only survey with a good response - 70% -so says.

The NAS number are physical science types who indeed do have a lower percentage of believers - but that is offset by the non-physics/chem types - besides- so what?

My point is not that there are no christian scientists. My girlfriend is a christian scientist (lol..see, I can tolerate christians). My point is that there are no FUNDAMENTALIST scientists. Why do you think this is? Because your average scientist realizes that the scientific method is a superior way of accumulating knowledge. The average scientist realizes that its impossible that humans were made out of clay, that tornadoes are caused by god, and that women were made out of ribs. But you will see people on DU argue that all that shit is true! Instead of saying, "I don't know how life originated but heres a possible hypothesis" like scientists do (even christian scientists), they say instead "I KNOW IT WAS GOD who did it with a wave of his magical hand". Its ridiculous.

You don't know how deeply I respect you if you are not one of the yokels who automatically dismiss scientific theories. I'm glad that you know about evolution and I sincerely apologize for having jumped to conclusions. However, there is no need for a pro-god split. There is no room or need for god in evolution. I'd like to know who this nobel prize winner is...could you give me his name or a link to the thread where this was discussed? I disagree that most christians believe in evolution...I khow plenty of progressive christians who don't. I'd like to see some polls on this ...I think you are wrong.

"Is the way you make a decision is to take a vote - or see where those you consider smart are going? Why not do your own thinking?"

I DO my own thinking. Thats the point. I was never "raised atheist". I was never taken to some sort of atheist church. Its because I did my own reading, my own thinking that I decided that there probably is no god. I don't just, for example, read one anti-evolution book or listen to a preacher, and then think I will dispute a scientific theory from people who literally know 100x as much as I do. And thats what is so fustrating. I've read the ENTIRE bible. I have also read numerous philosphical arguments by theist writers.....way more than your average church-going christian. And 99% of it is bullshit...they haven't read anything I haven't. There is no magic in the bible if your not taught its magic. They have no proof or even evidence, but they still claim they do!

And then these people tell me that I don't have an open mind!! They tell me I'm not well read or that I lack reading comprehension. These people who have spent their entire lives going to the same church. These people who were FORCED to go to their church as children. These people who were punished if they refuse to go to church. These people who have been taught at a tender age that if they don't accept the religion they will burn in hell. These people who know very little about science. These people who can't separate themselves from the constructs of their society. These people who haven't even read the literature THEIR RELIGION IS BASED ON. THESE PEOPLE TELL ME I'M CLOSE MINDED. You think its a coincedence that the kids of muslim parents are muslim. You think its a coincedence that the kids of christians are christians. Oh sure, there are exceptions....but the 1% who don't acribe to the religion of their society are an EXCEPTION, not a rule!

I recant my words about you papau. I am sorry that I make you out as an ignoramus if you are indeed not. If you can honestly tell me that you have read and delved into science, if you can honestly tell me you have researched other religions apart from your own and not blindly accepted what you were taught as a child, than I have nothing but the deepest respect for you, religious disagreements nonwithstanding. I have to be honest, however...when you start making claims that science is a religion and atheism is a religion, it kinda makes me think that you may not know enough about both these things.

I'm not a bad person....non of the atheists here are (although I can't say for sure...I have certain suspicions that Varkam may be Satan in disguise, hehe). And we have continually told you we appreicate you sticking it out and arguing. Thats why we are here. But if you seriously want only religious people in your discussion, why not just post in the christian or believers forums? I just finished checking through the last 4 pages of Religion/Theology posts, and like Zebedeos God Proof thread, most of the posts by theist are targetted towards atheists (and vice versa). If you guys don't want us to post and argue, why bait us? If you honestly want to talk to ONLY other jesus believers, why respond to any of these posts?

[Zebedeo]

165. I call BS

My thread was not "targetted toward atheists." I praised God for his astounding Creation, and pointed out the recent scientific discovery which provides evidence of the first moments of the Creation. I in no way called out any atheists in my post. Numerous atheists did pile on to ridicule and mock me, but my post was just praising God. That's a religious post in a religion forum, my friend. It ain't all about atheism.

[arwalden]

112. You Make It Sound So.... Dirty!

Atheist circle-jerk? Circle-jerk of rejection?

It sounds to me like you want to be able to have discussions where you can remain "unmolested" by atheists. (Heh-heh...how's *that* for sexual innuendo?)

I think that the more more heavily moderated groups (with their specific narrow mission statements) might be something you'll find more to your liking. A "safe place" away from the mean old "predatory" atheists.

[trotsky]

55. Mainly to confront the fundie/literalists right here on DU.

Since liberal Christians rarely if ever do so.

But like others have mentioned, I like to challenge thoughts and have my thoughts challenged. I think that for atheists, since that's how many of us ended up where we are, we like to continue to poke and prod and make sure things still work the same way. Comes with that experimental scientist mindset, I guess. Always testing, making sure what we think is correct as far as we can tell.

[papau]

61. Nicely put - and a very honorable reason - wish it were more

obvious that the game was not telling folks what they believe and then mocking it.

[Goblinmonger]

66. Sounds like

you are describing the game that YOU play with atheism. Perhaps if you stopped playing, you might realize that nobody else is really playing except you.

[papau]

72. I agree the DU atheist goal is to get all other religions off the playing

field so that each thread can be a pure uplifting, ego-boosting, self-esteem generating read for all who are atheist and feel both picked on, superior, and annoyed when others do not acknowledge just how wise, rational, logical, and witty they are.

The game is your game - and on DU we play by your rules. Indeed someone non-atheist being banned and stopped from playing is your folks call - as it is the option to change the game to one where progressive liberals and atheists discuss common goals and leave their differences at the door.

It is not my call - indeed I have no input rights.

[arwalden]

76. OMG! What on EARTH are you talking about?

:eyes: :crazy: :silly: :shrug:

[papau]

77. Drowning out other voices/. look at me look at me posting/ victory

dancing when theists stop posting.

Claims of victory when all that was done was a cut and past from one of the many sites with 10001 debate statements the atheist should make to put down theists - with no discussion of the contra that had developed to the given debate statement point over the centuries (Research seems limited as I can trace back about 100% of the debating points to such sites - and if those sites do not discuss the refutations of the given point over the years, there will be no mention of the prior refutation). Note that claims of victory convey the thought that every discussion must have a "winner" and "loser", rather than just be informative and interesting.

R/T atheists posting seems in general - to me - to be a game - just my opinion.

Indeed the only hard posts to respond to in R/T are from well trained theist that correct my lousy memory, or develop the thought 10 times better than I can. The rest of the posts are a "game" of cut and paste themes from prior centuries atheist thought asserted to be "truth". And I note that those well researched theists rarely come back to R/T - I wonder of it is the tone in R/T?

[arwalden]

84. Uh... Yeah. Whatever, Dude. You're Still Not Making Sense To Me.

Say, listen man... you know... I've got a buddy who posts messages like that, but he's drunk half the time, so it I can understand why his posts sound a bit manic.

Sorry to hear about your lousy memory, man. Bummer. Are you taking anything for it? My mom takes some Elavil and that seems to help her mood AND her memory.

Anyway, if all these things are so important to you, then why do you spend your time in here insulting atheists? If harmony and unity are the most important things (to you) then why not abandon the silly "gotcha" games and put your efforts towards more rewarding and more important things.

If you find these "games" so objectionable, then why are you playing them?

[Evoman]

87. Lol

cut and paste....the only time I've ever cut and paste anythig was when I was giving you those definitions of religion. My plays were original. My arguments come from my own mind. I'm glad you think that I argue so well that you have to say I cut and paste from atheist sites (which, honestly, I have never been too).

If you don't like the game, why do you play it? You play, and then when we beat the pants off you, you start crying and whining. Hell, I can respect someone who comes out for a game. Contrary to what you all think, I love the theists on this board......what I can't stand is all this incessant bitching. And the reason well researched theists dont come back is because there are no well researched theists in the first place. I may seem to be new, but I've been lurking for ever since this forum opened. There was never some Golden Age of well-researched theists on this forum.

Although to be honest, I have gotten sick of all these complaining threads lately. I wish we could all (including you atheists) stop our bitching and get back to tearing each other new holes with some legitimate discussions.

[Zhade]

117. You SHOULD laugh - it's hilarious for him to bitch about alleged c&p...

...when HE'S been caught TWICE plagiarizing other people's works to start threads in this very forum.

Just ask around - someone may have the links.

[WritingIsMyReligion]

124. Okay, atheists/ agnostics/ nontraditional theists.

Let's all clear out of R/T. We don't belong here, 'cause we don't have a religion as traditionalists see it, so we can't POSSIBLY be allowed to post. It's "just a game," after all. Things like separation of church and state and the First Ammendment are "just games."

:eyes:

[beam me up scottie]

129. Nah.

Just ignore the crying.

It's part of the whole persecution thingy.:evilgrin:

[Goblinmonger]

83. Seriously, man

you need to get some sleep or something.

I know this will be a shock, but I normally like you. Today you seem overly paranoid. We aren't out to get you. Most of the vocal atheists have posted in this thread that we post here because we like to argue and have our thoughts challenged. NORMALLY, you are one of the theists that can challenge my posts. Today, you seem off your game and overly tinfoil-hat-like. I'm not trying to mock you here; I am genuinely concerned. Take a break, get some sleep, and come back tomorrow or the next day and see if things don't look a little better.

[catbert836]

59. To teach, and to learn.

1. To learn- I've learned a great deal since I've started posting in this forum. Originally, I was very intolerant of one particular side of the ongoing R/T debate- you all know which one- and having friendly or sometimes not-so-friendly exchanges with that side has helped me to see their point of view, and I've become a much more open and tolerant person.
Also, I enjoy learning about the vast range of beliefs that people have on this forum. It's very interesting to discuss these various beliefs, or non-beliefs, or what have you.

2. To teach- this might sound a little arrogant, but I believe in teaching what I have learned on this forum, such as tolerance and respect, to others who I used to be like. I think the situation in this forum is truly sad, and I hope to make it a better place by doing this.

Well, I hope that answers your question. And I hope you continue to be active on this forum, I've enjoyed your posts.

[LaurenG]

65. I continue to find that

there is always more to learn. I have no clue how much more there is to know, I only know there is a lot. I keep getting this sneaking feeling that others can fill in the blanks with information and opinions that will give me some answers to some of my own questions. Everyone can offer unique perspective on matters as we are all unique. Don't bow out because you don't like something someone says, it is in those moments that we all have the opportunity to adjust our own thinking and behavior. I just can't stop coming here, I usually get here too late as someone else has already stated my own thoughts so all I get to do is read.

[believerinchrist]

68. We are all human beings with different experiences and different beliefs.

I like the challenges to my faith--it makes me think. I respect every person in this forum. Also, believe it or not, I can share some of the depths of my understanding here in a way I can't share anywhere else. Go figure. Anyway, I enjoy all the conversations in which I participate.

[Goblinmonger]

70. It is what many have said here

Just like you need to be REALLY funny to stay alive in The Lounge. I consider myself pretty funny, but I see many threads of mine die a fast death in The Lounge. They sink faster than Jimmy Two-Times in cement shoes.

In R/T, you need to bring your A game of argument. You can't just spout nonsense without several people calling you on it--fast and hard. I like that. Actually I love that. I was a high school debater. I debated in college, got my masters in communication and coached college debate for 8 years before returning to teach high school. I lived for debate. Coached a team that made it to the national finals in college.

That's why I like it here. I can argue with people and they will argue with me. Most of them are pretty damn good. You can't survive long here if you don't bring it. Now, is this tough on people that aren't solid in their beliefs? Yes. Is it tough on people that don't have thick skins? Yes. But DU has a place for them. I can't (and wouldn't) come into a group and argue the same way. But this is a forum.

And the other good thing in my mind, contrary to what many might say, is that there is no herd mentality. If I started spouting nonsense and hatred toward theists, I GUARANTEE YOU that the people that would come down on me the swiftist and hardest would be my fellow atheists. Trotsky, BMUS, sal, allen, strong atheist and the rest would have my balls so fast, the theists would have nothing left to feed on. And I would do the same to them. And they know it. And I think they like that just as much as I do.

So, hey, if you aren't strong in your beliefs, or you don't like being questioned, or you aren't ready to defend yourself, then don't post in R/T. That may sound harsh, but it is what it is. There are other groups more suited for those that are exploring, or don't like to be confronted. Try those places--I promise you won't be bothered there.

But if you like to mix it up--Bring it on. But be prepared to be served (to quote a shitty movie but a hilarious South Park episode).

[believerinchrist]

71. Hey, Goblinmonger--

I'm a high school English teacher--I took the job 4 years ago with no certification (before my kids came, I was an elementary teacher). After quite a few college courses and a series of Praxis tests, I am within a year and a half of being fully certified. I love teaching high school English, which is ironic because English was my worse subject in high school and college.

[papau]

73. "spouting nonsense and hatred toward theists" - LOL - the words we

use and the logic we use appear to have different meanings to each group as we talk past each other.

Trotsky, BMUS, sal, allen, strong atheist, etc., all good folk, are not about to agree that they or you are "spouting nonsense and hatred toward theists" as you repeat what has been said - and refuted by Christians - over the centuries. And there is nothing wrong with that.

It is the "we are here to help you get over your religious stupidity/ignorance/fear of no God" attitude that, while amusing, does not help focus DU on progressive liberal actions.

Trotsky, BMUS, sal, allen, strong atheist, and yourself have obvious strong beliefs about fair play - and in that sense your post is one I can agree with - it is just that you do not seem to want to discuss specific religious concepts or specific religions - you only want to save folks from the error of our ways via a debate conducted with your word definitions and with a refusal to accept that true debate on a board is not only pointless, it is impossible. We all can pull up links to the various arguments on both sides - and their refutation - so the game becomes one of mockery, where the progressive liberal Christian would rather not participate beyond doing whatever is needed as defense.

R/T may serve some purpose, but I do not see how in its current form it develops the progressive coalition. Perhaps we have R/T for some folks amusement, I don't know.

[Goblinmonger]

86. Now that's a little bit of the old papau I can respect

Though I disagree with a couple points.

1. I have seen BMUS go off on an atheist who was being a prick to a theist unprovoked. It was not a pretty sight. I think the two of us like each other, but I have no doubts she would let me know if I crossed the line. Same with trotsky, sal, allen, strong atheist, evoman and many others. We are all very vocal about our thoughts, but we usually play by pretty "fair" argument/debate rules.

2. We do discuss religion and religous concepts with a lot of people. Sure, when it is the same old tried and true literal BS, we may attack a little but, hell, don't come to R/T unless you want to be challenged. Take a look at the discussion with chef (can't remember the whole username). I jumped on her a bit. Then read what she had to say and the discussion with myself and several other atheists was quite civil and I think we found out a lot about each other that we can take away from the discussion. There are many civil discussion like that that don't get talked about like the more heated ones do. And the heated ones aren't bad, in my opinion. Challenging thoughts is a good thing. I like when people challenge what I have to say. Keeps me honest and checks what I am thinking.

R/T isn't here to build a coalition. Though trust me, I know that at the end of the day, I want 98% of you theists on my side in the polls and other political arenas (there are 2% that I am convinced are republican trolls but I won't name names). You are good progressive people and I know that. I challenge you papau because you usually bring your A game and will challenge me back. Today was not one of those days.

[salvorhardin]

90. I'm not here to help you get over anything

But feel free to e-mail me for a referral to a good psychiatrist.

[mistertrickster]

162. This said it had 2 responses . . . oops . . . anyway, here's an invitation

if you like to debate.

My local paper serving a city of over 350,000 has a weblog that chock-a-blog with rabid right-wingers and covert wingers posing as "libertarians."

You should join in the fun. There're no moderators, so you will get death threats. Racist, sexist homophobic hate speech is perfectly normal there. I've been telling them to do something about that, but the editors just don't care.

Enjoy.

http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/

[kwassa]

81. I'm a masochist

[arwalden]

85. Among other things.

[Evoman]

89. No need to get snippy

Unless he actually gets into bigot mode, just lay off

[Desertrose]

101. Part of the charm of this place....

you pretty much have to be one or at least have leanings in that direction. :evilgrin:

[arwalden]

102. Well... It's Either That...

... or an ability to dart into the crossfire and quickly post a couple of "drive-by" and "hit-n-run" type messages before quickly heading out again.

Oh, I'm sure you've seen the type I'm talking about. They are the ones who post one or two quickies... just enough to stir things up a bit by throwing gasoline on a fire, but they never stick around.

After posting their message, you'll find them predictably retreating to safer territory. Once out of harm's way, it's not surprising to find them complaining about how unbearably hot it is in the R/T forum.

[NMMNG]

91. I enjoy debate

I like to keep up on the world of "progressive" religion, just to see what "our" side is doing out there.

I'm also a bit of a masochist.

[FM Arouet666]

92. Monty Python Argument Clinic

Many debates reduce to emotionally charged exercises in contradiction, loads of ad hominem from both sides of the debate, and little common ground gained. So why do I return? I certainly do not wish to convert others to atheism, proselytism is best left to fundamentalists. I guess I return because I am uncomfortable accepting the broad brush stroke of generalization.

Christians are all bigots, they hate gays, hate atheists, if you don't accept christ you go to hell. etc etc. Well, some on this board would agree, but many do not. "Christians believe this or that," tends to be as accurate as "people with moles believe this or that." Seems to me that we are all individuals, some believe, other do not, individuality is still alive and well. An experience unique to a progressive blog, perhaps? ;)

I hope believers have had similar perceptions concerning atheists?

You may choose to avoid this forum, close the debate. Atheists and believers may never fully accept the other's position. Isolation allows one to paint an opponent into a comfortable stereotype, conversation forces one to consider the individual, it may not bring agreement but it is a step toward tolerance. Perhaps tolerance is the best we all can hope for in a debate about religion.

[Behind the Aegis]

93. I don't come here often.

I do have this forum in my favorites, but I haunt other places. When I first started DU, I was all over the place. Now, I spend most of my time doing something else.

Anywho....you ask several interesting questions.

Have you learned anything from being here?

Oh yes! Reading is always educational, even if tripe.

Do you think that you will actually change anyone’s mind?

I don't come in this forum to do that. I will challenge thoughts and ideas, but it is up to the individual to change his/her mind.

Are you just generally looking for support for your own outlook on these matters?

Nope. The idea that anyone has the same outlook as I do would be a little scary. Whereas I see myself as spiritual, I also see the side of logic. Faith and logic are not the same, and never will be; nor should they be.

Can any of us really say anything new in a debate that has been going on for centuries, and will likely continue for centuries more? (Because really, this forum generally boils down into an theist v. atheist mentality, with “spiritual but not religious” people caught in the middle.)

Of course someone can say something new! Time is irrelevant in this debate. New ideas and discoveries are timeless. I do not share the same view you have, however, about the crux of this forum. That statement indicates your thoughts on this forum.

I participated because I thought, as someone who was raised atheist and converted to Christianity, I could offer a unique perspective on matters. But as I have delved more deeply into my faith, I find the gulf between atheists and myself growing greater, and I don’t think I have anything to offer any more that isn’t duplicated by others. I find myself reading the same old, same old, and reacting in a way that doesn’t do me nor anyone else any good.

I can't tell you what to think. However, in my opinion, you do have something to share. Thinking is not feeling. Whether others are already repeating it or others disagree, your personal experience is yours and yours alone. You may not feel your reactions don't do you any good, but how can you determine your thoughts don't do someone else 'any good?' You are you, not someone else. So, IMHO, if you are only out to have others think the way you do, well, then you will not be as successful as you wish. However, if you are trying to inform, then it is up to others to glean what they may.

I don’t think what I have to say will do anyone any good, because most of us have such strong stands on these matters already. Nor have I really learned anything, but perhaps that is my own shortcoming.

I can understand your thinking. However, I will challenge you. Are you doing this (debating here) for you or for others? For every poster, there are many others that just "lurk" and read. Have you ever thought, "maybe I am speaking for those too afraid or unsure of themselves?" If you are doing this for "you," it will be overly frustrating. If you are doing it for what you believe to be the truth and for others, well, it is worth it, no matter the personal toll.

The bottom line is that I am seriously reconsidering whether I should continue to participate in this forum. What do you all get out of it?

Consider what I have said. Try reading a post that you disagree with and waiting before responding. I know, I know....easier said than done! Trust me, there is an issue that I "fail" to do that on all the time! There are some posters that will "push your buttons," try and look past it. This is not easy, and I often fail to do so.

As for, 'what do I get out of this (forum)?' I get perspective. I may not always agree, but I try to understand. One of my favorite posters here (at DU) is "Beam me up Scottie" (BMUS). I may not always agree with her on issues or topics, but I know she is honest (and sarcastic as hell, which I respect). There are those who don't share my opinion on my "pet" topic that I have found respect for because they are respectful toward me, and see me as a complex individual and not a "thing" (Likudnik).

So, if you are questioning your being here, in R/T, is it because you feel others see you as a "thing" or because you are trying to "convert?" If it is because of the former, then, "Buck up! Continue your quest." If it is because of the latter, you might want to move on, because I don't think (my opinion) that is the purpose of this forum (conversion). (I do hope I used "former/latter" correctly. If I didn't, I am sure the grammar 'police' will nail me and I will be able to correct it.)

[thinkingwoman]

98. This is the best forum for "people watching"

I'm a people watcher. I come here for the view.

[Desertrose]

100. Bingo! Ya got that right.

All sorts of interesting people here for sure.

:hi::hug:thinkingwoman
DR

[Strong Atheist]

103. Well, groups are where you go to talk to the people who agree with you.

No "yes men" here in R&T. Depending on my mood, I am here to fight, be conciliatory (yes, I have posted at least two such), explain my views to the world, or just see whats cookin'.

[WritingIsMyReligion]

104. I'm an R/T'er because I love to talk religion.

I despise practicing OR, anyway, but I enjoy comparative/objective religion stuff. 'Tis fascinating, what people believe and why....Offers many insights into the human condition, and since I'd say that religious disparities underlie a vast majority of the world's problems, it's good to talk about these things.

[salvorhardin]

106. I'm with you

I don't believe in any deity or religion, but I am interested in what people believe (or don't believe) and why. It'd be a really boring place if we all believed alike. The one thing I will not tolerate though is bigotry of any flavor.

[beam me up scottie]

105. I come here to whine about atheists to atheists in atheist threads.

Oh, wait...that's not me!

Those tornadoes have me all mixed up.





This is the atheists' church, didn't anyone tell you?

Oh, wait! Ha ha ha, that's not me again!




I'm trying to remember...I think it has something to do with how atheists have infiltrated the government and imposed their not-religious beliefs on everyone else.

Yeah, that's it, and they don't want us to teach creationism in public schools, either.

And it's getting worse, there are too many of them.

We can't stop them!

I know what they're doing, they can't fool me!

They're going to take over the world!!!





Ah, much better, thanks.

I come here to annoy papau, of course.

That's why all the atheists come here.

[salvorhardin]

107. Right

That's our sole reason. Annoy the f* out of papau. :evilgrin:

[WritingIsMyReligion]

109. Those stupid athiests.

They're persecuting the 85% Christian majority!

:wow:

:eyes:

:D

:hi:

[beam me up scottie]

110. Yep.

We bad.

:D

[NMMNG]

111. Yes

Amazing how we're able to wield such power. :silly:

[Proud_Democratt]

159. It was a "MAJORITY" one time....

that believed the world was flat, also.

[Strong Atheist]

113. "I come here to annoy..." ROFLMAO!

:yourock:

[seaglass]

114. I think this is a great forum!

Probably because I have no attachment to belief or no-belief.

I am at the very beginning of my search to find meaning in the mystery of existence.

I think many of you have interesting things to say and I'm glad you're here.:-)

[Goblinmonger]

115. I hope you have a good journey

This is a good place to sort things out as long as you don't mind a challenge. Many people will let you know what they think of your thoughts.

Most of the snarkyness is due to long-running arguments--don't be too intimidated by it.

[Zhade]

116. Why? Because knowledge is my 'religion'.

I seek out answers to everything I can. Learning is, in a way, a drug to me. I can't get enough information.

In the case of this forum, I've learned a lot about the topic and the people interested in it, from my fellow self-informed-for-self-defense atheist fellows to the lone vocal fundamentalist barging around, declaring that his beliefs are The Way and The Truth. The irony is that those believers most insistent that their beliefs are correct are the ones with the weakest faith, ready to crumble at a moment's notice.

I've learned that people can change, as the sterling example Catbert has made of his own journey shows. He used to be one of the (thankfully, pitifully small) gang of arrogant pricks here who think they know my mind better than I do. He changed, and grew, and I'm very sincere when I say that he is one of the more inspirational DUers around. In part, that's because he reminds me of myself.

I used to be a wannabe-fundamentalist, years ago. I tried on no les than three occassions to buy into the belief system of Christianity (Methodist, Church of Christ, and even Mormon). Notice the trendline there - from more liberal to less, more open to narrower, more self-directed to controlled. I think there's a reason for that: I never believed in gods, including the Christian god, and the more restricted the religious view, the more I hoped I'd 'get it' and suddenly believe in god. Never worked, naturally.

But 'Lord', did I try. Try, try, try try try. Never took for a moment. I just couldn't believe what my mind found to be silly and antiquated mythology (sorry if that offends anyone - that's just a recounting of how my mind worked). Because I couldn't believe, I kept dropping religion until a crisis point or upheaval came up in my life (my now-ex-wife becoming pregnant with our son - CoC - or 9/11 - Mormon), at which time I would scurry back into the fold, desperately searching for a line to hang onto in the midst of chaos. Hence the increasingly-hardline nature of my religious pursuit; I wanted THE ANSWER that would give me control over my life.

I was too confused and scared to understand that such an attempt at control was foolish when not backed by sincere belief in the structure of the attempt (and, frankly, maybe foolish, period).

I have since escaped the self-imposed shackles of 'revealed' religion, and distanced myself from the young man who kept lying to himself (and knew it at the same time) about god. I don't, I CAN'T, believe in unproven mythical supernatural beings and the tales surrounding them. I can see both the value and horror of organized religion, and I truly have nothing against believers (even fundies), just any attempt to control others' lives with their beliefs. I may think their beliefs are stupid, or barbaric, but as long as those beliefs apply only to themselves and are not forced on others, they're free to believe whatever they wish.

I come here to learn, the primary motivation for pretty much any reading I do. I learn so much, and it's so important in today's b*s*-is-a-great-Christian-man nation, that I love the forum, even when people wrongly assert that they know my atheism better than I do. The good believers here more than make up for the assholes, and I don't let jerks stop me from learning and speaking up anyway.

I absolutely repudiate your assertion that this is all about "theist versus atheist" here. What we have most of the time is "arrogant jerk who thinks he knows someone's mind better than that person versus person defending themselves". And, to be completely fair, this applies to both theists and atheists (though the number of atheists claiming to know believers' minds is almost infintesimal). That's just a power struggle, and people like that display their arrogance in matters nonreligious as well.

If you think you shouldn't participate, that's your call, of course. Personally, I find the knowledge to be gained far too good to stop posting here.

And as I've said before, I have zero intention of changing anyone's beliefs. Change, if desired, must be self-initiated to be lasting.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

119. Because I know that all atheists have

a system of beliefs and I just want to bug them about it.


just kidding.


I hang here sometimes because I don't have a lot of friends in the real world and if you can along with people here, you can get along with anybody.

[beam me up scottie]

121. Hi T.Grannie!

:hi:

[TallahasseeGrannie]

125. Hi, BMUS

have a great weekend, wherever you are.

[beam me up scottie]

130. Since we don't have any more tornadoes in the forecast,

that will now be possible.

Tornado season is off to an early and deadly start, I hope that the hurricane season doesn't follow suit.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

135. I'm in denial about hurricanes this year

I'm not paying any attention. For two years I've lived on the edge watching the Weather Channel. I've got my stuff ready, but I'm not going to follow it that closely. Rough on the nerves. Especially after Katrina when you see what can REALLY happen. Used to be kind of exciting..no more.

[beam me up scottie]

136. I don't blame you.

I'm already getting used to the tornado watches and warnings.
Like you, I plan on being ready but I refuse to sit by my NOAA radio waiting for doom.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

123. I enjoy arguing

And this forum gives me lots of opportunities for that. I very seldom see any even remotely thoughtful discussion of religion or theology, but I get lots of opportunities to chop logic, which I enjoy.

[kwassa]

127. I laughed when I read this.

I completely agree, and I also enjoy arguing.

[Dervill Crow]

137. It's 2:20 a.m. and nothing is on TV except "paid programming."

I've been through all the other forums that interest me. This is the last stop before trying again to go to sleep.

[Name removed]

138. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[kwassa]

139. this tolerant and open-minded attitude

is why theists just love talking to atheists.

rd_kent
"IMHO, anyone who believes the bible is a literal truth, from the mouth of god himself, MUST be insane, and those who only believe parts of it are true while saying the rest is metaphor are in hypocritaical denial."

[Goblinmonger]

140. I will agree that

the wording is a little harsh.

But....

Do you think that the bible is meant to be taken literally? That every word is directly from the mouth of god? Cause if you do, how do you deal with the contradictions? Most christians on DU seem to agree that taking the bible literally is not a good thing.

If you claim that some is metaphor and some is "truth" then you are being hypocritical. Why would YOU be able to just discount SOME of it? There are good lessons in the bible, but that does not make them TRUTH and it does not mean that it supports that there is a god.

Again, the wording is a little harsh, but the points are valid.

[kwassa]

142. I think that this point is incorrect

goblinmonger:
"If you claim that some is metaphor and some is "truth" then you are being hypocritical."

Metaphor can be truth, for starters, and I treat most of the Bible that way, and I honestly don't see what the hypocrisy is.

In what way is believing in some sections of the Bible and not others hypocritical? As I see it, the Bible is a book assembled and written by men, many different men at many different times. It is often self-contradictory, due to its length and complexity. More errors may have been made as stories were passed down orally before they were transcribed. It is the most natural thing to believe certain things and not others in the Bible. All Christian groups do this by simply emphasizing those passages that mean most to them, and ignoring long sections that don't, or that are simply uninteresting or uninspiring, for a variety of reasons.

[Goblinmonger]

143. Let me see if I can explain

Even as an atheist, I will agree that the Bible contains many lessons that people could use to live their lives in a positive way. It also contains some heinous shit. The problem I have is this:

Someone says that lesson X in the Bible is a good lesson. Same person says that lesson Y in the Bible is a good lesson. I, an atheist, agree. They are solid lessons (love one another, etc). Then they tell me that Jesus is the son of god. I disagree. The person above tells me that it is in the Bible and the bible is the word of god. They even then tell me that I agreed with lesson X and Y. That's the problem I have. If you want to look to it as a lesson book that offers some good stuff, fine. But once you tell me that portions X, Y, and Z of the bible are inspired by god, but that A, B, and C aren't, I have a hard time believing you. Why do you have the insight into what was inspired and what was not?

[kwassa]

144. I think the entire Bible is inspired by the contemplation of God

This does not mean that those inspired ones got it right, necessarily. The problem with the Bible is exactly that, being able to discern that which is of value, and that which isn't. It is also understanding that the most reasonable and intelligent of Christians came come up with different answers, and those of no reason or little intelligence can come up with all kinds of strange things.

[Goblinmonger]

146. But don't you think

that begs the question of why are you so sure your interpretation is right and theirs is wrong. As an English teacher, you can check your interpretation of a work by doing an intertextual comparison. You wouldn't say that Huck Finn is a book supporting slavery, because the entirity of the text doesn't support that. But if you are going to get into homosexuality, the bible is pretty clear it is a sin/abomination. Why can you ignore that in favor of the rest?

[Brentos]

147. I can give several examples

As to insight as to how we can know what was inspired by God....

First, the Bible is a dialog between God and man. The Bible is inspired and contains that which God wants it to contain (at least in the original languages), but is not written fully by God. The Bible tells us this:

Joshua 24: 25 On that day Joshua made a covenant for the people, and there at Shechem he drew up for them decrees and laws. 26 And Joshua recorded these things in the Book of the Law of God. Then he took a large stone and set it up there under the oak near the holy place of the LORD.

This practice continues to this very day. The Jewish leaders meet once a year to add to the Law.

So, how do we know what was God and what was man? The Bible will tell us. Scripture interprets Scripture.

Example:

Deuteronomy 19:21 (New International Version)
New International Version (NIV)
Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society

21 Show no pity: life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.

This sounds harsh for a God of love, but it is the law, right?

Well, what does Jesus say about this section (which is borrowed from the Hammurabi Code):

Matthew 5:38-40 (New International Version)
New International Version (NIV)
Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society

38"You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.' 39But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well.

Jesus is telling the people there, that while they have heard (meaning it was written, as most people heard it spoken from the scrolls being read from in temple), they have it wrong. He is giving them the correct answer.

The Bible is full of this, which is why one must study it for a lifetime and remain in God's Word to understand God's Word fully. People will always learn knew lessons from it from each reading. It also shows how dangerous it is when fundamentalists take out-of-context sections, such as "eye-for-eye" or other "laws" and try to force them down the world's throat, instead of listening to Jesus, who properly translates the Bible for us.

If you prefer old testament, then read the prophets. They will tell you what God really was saying during the sections in Kings and Chronicles (which contradict each other, as they were written by men).

[Goblinmonger]

148. Round and round and round

You don't have a problem with using the bible to prove the bible? Isn't that circular logic?

Since we are looking at fallacies, aren't you begging the question? Where is the proof that Jesus was the son of god and worthy of interpreting (or re-interpreting) the old testament? Oh, yeah, it's in the bible.

Read the prophets? They will clear up the contradictions written by men? Who were the prophets, then? Demi-gods? They were men, too. How do we know they are right?

Do you see how you have started a lazy susan analysis of the bible?

[Brentos]

155. You are right

If you want 100% incontrovertible proof of anything that happened thousands of years ago, no one will ever be able to provide that to you. There is debate today as to events from several years ago that no one agrees on. So in that respect, any non-believer will always win a debate. Heck, people today argue (even at the University of Chicago) that the holocaust did not occur, or that the moon was never reached, or that Iraq had ties to Al Qaeda and weapons of mass destruction.

I am not here to debate whether you believe my beliefs are "real" or not. There really is no point and you win. But, if your questions are about why I believe the way that I do, and you are willing to follow the logic and emotion and thoughts of the process, then I am willing to discuss. That is what I provided you, nothing more...nothing less. I will never prove to you that God exists, you will never prove to me that He doesn't. No point in that debate for me. But, if you want to understand me, then you have to listen to me.

This leads to what this thread is about, Christians here, on this board, feel attacked because if they decide to discuss issues about the Bible, they are attacked about God being fake, worshiping spaghetti, etc., and get distracted from their religious debates. I have no desire to debate someone into belief, nor do I want to pound anything into their heads, or even claim that they are wrong. I wish to spread my ideas to those who will listen without being challenged about that which cannot be proved. Because, as you well know, you cannot lose that debate. I can no better prove that God exists then can I the Flying Ravioli Man exists. Not why I'm here. But, if you want to know why I believe as I do through the Bible, I am willing to debate/discuss. Perhaps I would be better off in a religion thread that actually discusses the internal beliefs of the religion, I guess this was a poor choice by me, and I apologize.

[beam me up scottie]

156. Brentos,

I can't speak for Goblinmonger but I don't think you should have to justify your beliefs and I'm pretty sure he doesn't expect you to either.

Most of us know that we can't convince you to stop believing because we think it's illogical.

And we don't try to.

Faith to us is irrational but most of us don't think believers are.

We can separate you from your religion and when we discuss theology, we forget that you can't always do the same.

There's been a lot of infighting lately because some people try to use science to invalidate religion, while others try to use it to validate it.

I think science is neutral.

That's why I didn't vote or address the subject of this thread.

[Goblinmonger]

157. What BMUS said.

Though I think something you said sounds a little disingenuous upon inspection:

Christians here, on this board, feel attacked because if they decide to discuss issues about the Bible, they are attacked about God being fake, worshiping spaghetti, etc., and get distracted from their religious debates.

A couple thoughts for you. First, there are groups which are more "protected" and might be better suited for discussion between like-minded individuals. The part, though, that I am talking about is the "attacked" part. If you state your beliefs, on this board, you see no problem with that. Nor do I. If I state what I think about your beliefs (albeit some people get a little snarky), you DO have a problem with that. If we are in an open forum like R/T, stating your views means you are putting them out there to be discussed. Let me be honest, I see the christian god as being no different than a fairy tale. Not trying to insult you, but that is how I see it. Why is MY view somehow invalid just because it contradicts your belief. Now, I can ratchet that up or down, obviously, but it is the premise that seems to bother many people.

I will never prove to you that God exists, you will never prove to me that He doesn't. No point in that debate for me. But, if you want to understand me, then you have to listen to me.

I think you will find that most atheists here do want to listen to you and do want to understand you. But to be honest and fair, we also want to challenge you. The "good news" is that we want to be challenged, too. Most of the vocal atheists here kind of like all of that.

Perhaps I would be better off in a religion thread that actually discusses the internal beliefs of the religion, I guess this was a poor choice by me, and I apologize.

Please don't leave on my account. There are groups where you can go with people of the same view and have an unfettered discussion. Hopefully that is a good place for you. But please stay here. Just know that the nature of this forum is to challenge and to debate. Many atheists have indicated that is the reason we come here--for the debate. Please join; you seem a worthy "adversary."

[rd_kent]

151. WHEW! That was painful!

Yet I dont think you supported your argument at all. You just attempted to blind me with...I dont know, what does all that mean?
Seems that is the method of those who really dont have an answer to the question.....BLAH, BLAH, BLAH!

[trotsky]

145. "for a variety of reasons"

The magic words that shed a light on the hypocrisy.

What reasons or methods do YOU use to determine the parts of the bible you take seriously?

Compared to the reasons or methods others use, what makes yours any more valid?

[rd_kent]

150. But THAT is the hypocrisy!!!

Who are you to decide what is "truth" and what isnt in the bible? That is the question most of us have. From my point of view, if you are going to belive some of it and live your life by it, then you dont really believe it at all.

[rd_kent]

149. I agree

My words are a bit harsh, but...... so are incessant bible thumpers who continually attempt to force their views down other peoples throats. All in all, I think my rhetoric is the lesser of two evils.

And thanks for the support!

[Goblinmonger]

152. I agree with you 100%

and I am often guilty of being "a bit harsh." Some would argue that is an understatement. I have said numerous times that people can believe whatever crazy shit floats their boat. But once it is used as a tool against me, then we have problems. That and when you post it in a public forum for comment.

That said, there are a lot of people that, somewhat reasonably, balk at the term "insane" when applied to religion. There are many wonderful theists on DU. Hopefully you will come into contact with them, too.

All memebers of the atheist church get my support :rofl:

[trotsky]

141. Considering the "tolerant and open-minded attitude"

exhibited by some theists, it's not that bad. But at least he put IMHO in front of it. Some of the worst theists on here simply declare their bigotry as if it were the natural state of things.

[arwalden]

153. Yes, You're Right. -- Here's Another One For You...

... it's a classic. The writer of this this rhetorical question appears to be suggesting that such a thing is NOT true, and that the concerns of the atheists have no basis in fact.

"Do they think we are threatening them in some way, that we want to take their rights from them?"

In the context of this excerpt, the word "we" refers to either Christians or other theists.

You wouldn't expect to find someone spouting such intolerant RW talking points on DU... but here they are.

[Zhade]

158. It IS insane to think humans were literally created from clay.

It IS insane to think men have one less rib than women.

It IS insane to think the earth is thousands, and not millions, of years old.

Why? Because there is undeniable, uncontestable evidence that none of those things are true, and indeed are counterfactual.

Is it not NUTS to deny reality in favor of myth when reality stares you in the face - like a literalist counting a male skeleton's ribs and, despite the fact that there are the same number in both sexes, insisting that they must be miscounting, or that the skeleton must have somehow been 'rigged'?

If you're saying we should respect nonsense like that, sorry, never going to happen. IMHO it's INSANE to be a biblical literalist.

[Proud_Democratt]

154. Observation

I like to read people's justification of "fairy tales".

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

161. Yes, I've learned something.

But it's usually the opposite of what the wannabe "teachers" wanted to teach.

[SPKrazy]

163. Occasionally I Read Something Interesting

but for the most part it is the same old arguments

one either believes in a God(s), or they don't

those that do have something in common along those lines, even if they don't agree

those that don't may have other things in common with theists, but they may not be interested in anything but taking out their anger on the world that doesn't agree with them, or some such thing.

Or they could just like to argue, like me.

I don't know why I like to argue. I've always liked it.

I haven't always liked to argue about God, and it probably is a waste of time to be here (my wife thinks so)

So maybe I'm addicted to the intrigue?

[nealmhughes]

164. Because religion is interesting to everyone from the ardent atheist to

the true believer, it is one of the most important parts of every culture, even the supposed absence of it!

Plus, it is rare to be able to discuss metaphysics except in order to try to convert someone one way or another or else to just preach to the choir...

[varkam]

166. Because I've got nowhere else to go!

Where else can I discuss metaphysics, philosophy, and theological concepts? I don't know much, but I do know I don't know everything - if that makes any sense. That being the case, there's always things for me to learn and think about.

Some people do their best thinking in the shower. I do mine in the R/T forums :)

[InaneAnanity]

175. Because I enjoy it

I like talking about this sort of thing. I like arguing with people even if I know I can't change anyone's mind. I like reading about other people's perspectives.

[Random_Australian]

176. Hi there H & E, sorry that your thread turned to flame. Why am I here?

I am learning so much here about how people think, as a complement to my own deep thinking on the matter.

Flamewars are more between the same people than groups.... though I must admit the 'atheists believe' stuff gets rather tiresome.

Yes, we do get the same stuff pretty often, unfortunately.

What I wish to do here is to attempt to bring peace to this forum, I will fail and fail and fail again, but each time I learn something new, each time I get closer to the real world.

My goal in that is to make, one day, peace in the real world; it is my purpose, and in case you are interested, and you sound pretty interesting, I get that purpose from my ability to statistically interpret the world, the physics and math of it. :)

Change someone's mind?

Convert them - no, I don't even want to!
Help others understand others, I sure do!

Though you are right in the subtone of your text - we need to break free of the repetitive responses. They are not good for this forum.

Now I am off to class, then to join the flamewar, with hopes of cooling it a little. :)

[Meshuga]

177. I like reading the flame wars

Just kidding... :-)

I read more than I post and I come here mostly because I'm interested on what people have to say. I also learned many things after reading this forum. And the topic is very addictive. :-)