Theists, is MDB a hostile environment?

[_Some Schmo]

How would you feel if I told you that it's normal to feel this way at your age (you know, like a self assured dumb ass), but maybe one day, you'll grow up? I bet that would come off as super cool, huh?

I’d shrug it off. I already know how Christians on this board appreciate my effort to understand their faith.

Cool. I guess it's fair to shrug off the nonsense you direct my way too (not that I needed your permission for that; just so that we have mutual understanding).

That is exactly how you wrote it.

No. You misunderstand. If only you'd take the time to understand me! Why must you argue against strawmen?!

So what? Why, when it comes to evidence Schmo, we have to know the attributes of the being we seek, don’t we? I don’t look for Bigfoot in the ocean, and you don’t look for God at the North pole.

Have you been out looking for Bigfoot? See, I don't see much point in that. There are lot of ideas I don't take that seriously. Maybe I should if I want people who believe in Bigfoot to gain a deeper understand of their faith in him, huh?

The comparison isn’t about what is better; it’s about trying to figure out how we go about looking for such a thing. What were the neurons and synapses doing in your head when you read this:

Since the attributes are so wildly different, the methods for assessing the beliefs in God and Santa are completely different. You are glossing over all of this, as if this is some kind of obvious fact, but it isn’t.

Still glossing Schmo. Where is that finely honed scientific mindset that allowed you to discard all that nonsense religion? Can’t confirm or deny anything empirical if you don’t carefully lay out what you are looking for in the first place.

So, I guess what you're saying here is that the moment someone tells you of any belief, no matter how crazy it may seem on the surface, you will carefully listen to every detail of that belief before you dismiss it? Because who knows? Maybe they have killer reasons for believing it, right? I mean, we've got to assess it based on the reason they believe it, right? And of course, it shouldn't matter if you've heard those reasons before, because who knows? Maybe they'll say it in a brand new way that you've never heard.

Well I really believe I'm 20 feet tall. Let me know when you want to sit down and discuss the reasons for this.

You’re wish is my command! Here are three simple and logically valid arguments for the God I’ve been describing thus far, if you can show me them to be mere nonsense, I’d appreciate it. These belong to Alexander Pruss, he has two PhDs (Philosophy and Mathematics) and is a damn good Philosopher. I can already guess how you will handle this…

Yes, knowing that you've predetermined how I'll handle these makes me even more motivated to tell you.

You don’t understand the arguments, so you’ll accuse them of wordplay and mental masturbation. You’ll make a demand for “real” evidence and not these games.

*phew*

Well that's a relief. Now I don't need to expend the effort here. Thank goodness you're clairvoyant.

Funny you should mention those arguments, by the way. I was talking to this theist the other day and he mentioned that possibly, the Principle of Sufficient Reason (PSR) is true. He said all the theists have been talking about that. It was at that point that I fell to my knees and begged god to forgive my impertinent disbelief.

You're more theist than you're letting on.

There it is! I’m not a real Atheist because I think theistic arguments deserve respect and a close hearing! Just as Pahoran accuses LDST of not being a real Saint, Schmo joins Marg and a host of Dawkfags who view me with suspicion because I’m critical of fellow atheists.
Always happens.

Nothing like a little disingenuous quoting to make a hilarious point, huh, philosofag? (OMG, is that funny, or what? Cutting, too! How will you ever get off the floor now that I've called you philosofag? Huh? HUH?!)

Wait... I'm criticizing you and you're an atheist. That must mean I'm really a theist in disguise. Of course, that's exactly what what I meant by that comment. Holy crap, I've been exposed! Ooooohhhh, the humanity!

[_Buffalo]

That's cute and everything, but your characterization of Santa as a diabetic does violence to the sacred imagery of the Father Christmas mythos. :(

There is no sacred imagery, a man as fat as coca cola depicts him if gonna be shackeled with a Wilford Brimley like diabeetus

This would be a lot like comparing god to a bearded, schizophrenic hobo, wouldn't it? I'm not sure if you're aware, but Santa wasn't invented by some marketing team in the 1950s.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Nicholas

There is at least as much potential for divine sacridity there as there as there is for Jesus.

And of course, we all know that when any comparison is made between two ideas, those ideas must be identical in every way, otherwise the comparison is moot. Because, of course, the whole point of comparing things is to look not for key similarities, but exact similitude. Right?

List the key similarities.

Both started out as mere mortals
Both worked miracles in their lifetime
Both known for generosity
Both beautified post-mortem
Both pay attention to the misdeeds and good deeds of believers, and reward or withhold reward appropriately
Both have some degree of omnicience - an ability to see your secret acts
Both celebrated on the same day - Dec 25
Both frequently used as an argument from ignorance - ("where did the presents come from?" "where did the stars come from?")
Both used by those in positions of authority as a means of behavior control in true believers
Both part of the same pantheon
The lives of both were embellished with charming myths in the centuries after their deaths.

[_MrStakhanovite]

Cool. I guess it's fair to shrug off the nonsense you direct my way too (not that I needed your permission for that; just so that we have mutual understanding).

I was under the impression that was our mutual understanding.

No. You misunderstand. If only you'd take the time to understand me! Why must you argue against strawmen?!

I understand it all too well. This is why you playing this card instead of carefully explaining what you mean.

So, I guess what you're saying here is that the moment someone tells you of any belief, no matter how crazy it may seem on the surface, you will carefully listen to every detail of that belief before you dismiss it?

Yes, if a person comes to me and wants to express a deeply held belief to me, I give them my full attention.

Because who knows? Maybe they have killer reasons for believing it, right?

Right, and I might even learn something.

I mean, we've got to assess it based on the reason they believe it, right? And of course, it shouldn't matter if you've heard those reasons before, because who knows? Maybe they'll say it in a brand new way that you've never heard.

Or maybe you’ll discover a new way to look at an old argument or problem!

Well I really believe I'm 20 feet tall. Let me know when you want to sit down and discuss the reasons for this.

This just isn’t clever, and isn’t a good example of a reduction to absurdity, since it lacks the sincerity of a deeply held belief. This is you trying to come up with some ad hoc reason to deny what probably looks obvious to you in hindsight.

Yes, knowing that you've predetermined how I'll handle these makes me even more motivated to tell you.

You don’t have anything to tell, that is the barest truth there is. You don’t understand those three arguments for the existence of God, but you’ll readily call those beliefs nonsense.

You are not much different from BCSpace in that regard. Always got a shallow quip for something, but when someone presses you for more, you try to find ways to back out.

Funny you should mention those arguments, by the way. I was talking to this theist the other day and he mentioned that possibly, the Principle of Sufficient Reason (PSR) is true. He said all the theists have been talking about that. It was at that point that I fell to my knees and begged god to forgive my impertinent disbelief.

Not that you knew this but, those three arguments could be used to establish just what exactly someone means when they say “God”, and your charge of “nonsense” couldn’t stick.

[_marg]

There it is! I’m not a real Atheist because I think theistic arguments deserve respect and a close hearing! Just as Pahoran accuses LDST of not being a real Saint, Schmo joins Marg and a host of Dawkfags who view me with suspicion because I’m critical of fellow atheists.
Always happens.

The vast majority of my posts are with atheists, rarely do I discuss with theists on this board. I'll discuss with people (atheist or theists) who claim there are good arguments for God's existence and they initiate the discussion, but otherwise I have no interest in arguing a generic deistic God's existence. That's why I was interested in dialoguing with you re Dawkin's book which you said was poorly argued re "the god hypothesis". Typically when I read on here an attack on Dawkin's I find it's a strawman argument. So to dialogue with you about Dawkins' makes one an automatic "Dawkfag" apparently.

As far as my suspicion regarding you, just so we're clear I am skeptical that you grew up in a completely atheistic household and/or that you've never held a god belief. I view lots of things with suspicion but I've never been suspicious that you are currently an atheist.

And that's all I'm interested in saying in this thread, as long as my name is left out and people don't express erroneous assumptions of what I think.

[_MrStakhanovite]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Nicholas
There is at least as much potential for divine sacridity there as there as there is for Jesus.

Try reading the top:
This article is about the 4th century saint. For the popular figure in Western folk-legend, see Santa Claus.

Both started out as mere mortals

God was never a mortal.

Both worked miracles in their lifetime

God has never had a lifetime.

Both known for generosity

The Christian God is known for his Grace, generosity doesn’t come near that.

Both beautified post-mortem

God never died.

Both pay attention to the misdeeds and good deeds of believers, and reward or withhold reward appropriately

God’s Grace is not granted for good deeds.

Both have some degree of omnicience - an ability to see your secret acts

God’s Foreknowledge knows the act, you seem to be describing some kind of seer.

Both celebrated on the same day - Dec 25

God is worshiped and celebrated every day around the world.


What a surprise, Buffalo is trying to use the lame “Jesus Myth” lists to compare God to Santa. What a surprise! Another Ex-Mormon with an incompetent understanding of basic Christianity posting with all the charm of the little coils of personality my pug leaves on the lawn.

Get off Wikipedia and read a book. God is a necessary being, not some contingent thing.

[_MrStakhanovite]

And that's all I'm interested in saying in this thread, as long as my name is left out and people don't express erroneous assumptions of what I think.

Hey Scottie!

[_Ceeboo]

Ahhhhh?






Peace,
Ceeboo

[_Ceeboo]

And why is Marg always starring at me?

[_Some Schmo]

Cool. I guess it's fair to shrug off the nonsense you direct my way too (not that I needed your permission for that; just so that we have mutual understanding).

I was under the impression that was our mutual understanding.

I figured as much.

I understand it all too well. This is why you playing this card instead of carefully explaining what you mean.

Really? Funny how you'll take a theist's word for it but not mine.

Yes, if a person comes to me and wants to express a deeply held belief to me, I give them my full attention.

I'm happy for you. If you go to the back of the room, there should be a cookie for you.

Right, and I might even learn something.

...

Or maybe you’ll discover a new way to look at an old argument or problem!

You? Learn something? Wow... I got the impression you already thought you knew everything. Hmph.

Well I really believe I'm 20 feet tall. Let me know when you want to sit down and discuss the reasons for this.

This just isn’t clever, and isn’t a good example of a reduction to absurdity, since it lacks the sincerity of a deeply held belief. This is you trying to come up with some ad hoc reason to deny what probably looks obvious to you in hindsight.

No, you're wrong. I can imagine myself being 20 feet tall, so it's completely reasonable for me to believe it. Don't tell me what I should and shouldn't believe. I don't see why you're dismissing it out of hand. You should just take my word for it. After all, I did say it was a deeply held belief of mine. Did you even try to understand why I believe it? Walk the walk, man.

You don’t have anything to tell, that is the barest truth there is. You don’t understand those three arguments for the existence of God, but you’ll readily call those beliefs nonsense.

I never tire of the "I know you better than you know yourself" argument. Classic!

You are not much different from BCSpace in that regard. Always got a shallow quip for something, but when someone presses you for more, you try to find ways to back out.

Ooooo, extra points for comparing me to a board dumb ass. Nice move. How do I counter...?

I know! You're just like marg! All you want to do is argue with other atheists!

(How was that? Pretty good, huh?)

Not that you knew this but, those three arguments could be used to establish just what exactly someone means when they say “God”, and your charge of “nonsense” couldn’t stick.

Oh no, you're absolutely right. How could anyone argue with that? I've got nothing. I admit it. How can my knowledge of what I understand and don't understand compete with your knowledge of what I understand and don't understand? It would be silly of me to even try. And as a footnote, you're not arrogant at all.

If there's one thing you've taught me, Stak, it's that unless we all think like you, get philosophy majors, and come to the exact conclusions you have based on the information at your disposal, our reasons for being atheist are unjustified. We're all just stupid dawkfags (OMG... give me a second... I just cracked myself up there... need to recompose myself... goddamn, that never gets old...) who are too idiotic to understand how to argue against the grand ontological argument and other obscure arguments put forth by... well, anyone you approve of, natch, because they're just so complex and esoteric and stuff, so we should just shut the “F” up. Thank you for this killer life lesson.

Can I throw rose peddles in your path, oh great and wise intellectual? Please... it would be such an honor for me.

[_Morley]

I think the problem can be laid at the door of LDS theology, and the lack of depth, therein. Joseph Smith was a religious genius, but other than a few dabblers like Nibley and Roberts, not much has developed in Mormon religious studies in the past 150 years. All energy seems to be devoted to defensively guarding Fortress Joseph Smith.

Because of this, apostates tend to believe that all religions and belief systems are intellectual wastelands. Many don’t realize the profundity of thought that has evolved in Judaism, Islam, or Catholicism (for example) during their advancement over the past couple of millennia.