You offer an imbalanced position. I agree that atheists wish to engage theists in debate and are 'happy' when a theist declares that they no longer believe in the god/ religious dogma that they did believe in — universeness
I was asked to teach math. But I refused. Only privately once in a while. Physics and math. In schools it's preaching. Teaching is preaching. And the young ones must learn by law. I didn’t wamt to be some refined slavedriver — Haglund
The balance is in favor of the atheists. Why should they feel happy if they succeed in taking someone's theism? — Haglund
Seriously? you argue in favour merely because others argue against? — universeness
They did not take it, they exposed its lack of evidence — universeness
The devil is just god dressed in red, wearing a mask with a couple of horns.Yes. But not as playing advocate of the devil. I don't believe in the devil. I believe in gods, so I offer stuff against the atheists. Arguments, reasons, examples, knowledge, etc. — Haglund
They did not take it, they exposed its lack of evidence and in doing so have freed some of its enslaved/duped/conned minds. The balance is in the favour of the atheists because they have better arguments compared to the theists. — universeness
Theism has other means to proof than theists . By obliging theists to adopt these means, the take god away. — Haglund
theists unlike atheists have a duty to convert, therefore it's normal for theists to attempt to convert although many don't practice that. but it's not normal for atheists since atheism is about disbelief in God, not about spreading religion.I say you offer imbalance, as you do not cite the many examples of theist attempts to convert people to their cause. — universeness
I don't think much of Rod Liddle. He is a Church of England theist who holds some very suspect viewpoints. I don't think he could produce a balanced piece on atheism if his life depended upon it. — universeness
The devil is just god dressed in red, wearing a mask with a couple of horns. — universeness
This makes little sense to me. — universeness
We can turn the table and ask atheist to see the gods are no fantasy by adopting a non-scientific proof. There are enough of these proofs — Haglund
Yeah, good luck with that! Turn, turn that table until you can turn that table no more.
Perhaps all that table turning will make your gods appear and I can say wow! you were correct all along.
I wouldn't bet your life on that happening if I were you. — universeness
The gods in your head! — universeness
No, I just could not understand the context of your words in English? It was your English that made little sense to me. — universeness
theists unlike atheists have a duty to convert, therefore it's normal for theists to attempt to convert although many don't practice that. but it's not normal for atheists since atheism is about disbelief in God, not about spreading religion.
That's why I find these "new atheists" practicing "atheist religion" strange, they are forming some sort of a church. — SpaceDweller
Why shouldn't I turn the table and accept the scientific way of proof? — Haglund
Yeah well English is not my native language. What I meant is that we could ask the scientist another way of proving things — Haglund
they are happy with the method they have as it is better than any alternative you offer — universeness
lol, fanatics do exist, but this is not conversion.such as, "join us, or suffer in hell for eternity." — universeness
atheists enjoy "out of context" methods because it's the easiest way to undermine theist dogma, mostly because a lot of theist are not apologists, atheists use it as well known tool for attack.'out of context, sound bite technique,' he commonly employs — universeness
And that's exactky where the digma appears! — Haglund
Yours? Or what you claim is theirs? — universeness
atheists enjoy "out of context" methods because it's the easiest way to undermine theist dogma, mostly because a lot of theist are not apologists, atheists use it as well known tool for attack — SpaceDweller
Richard Dawkins — SpaceDweller
The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully. — Richard Dawkins
The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully. — Richard Dawkins
atheists enjoy "out of context" methods because it's the easiest way to undermine theist dogma, mostly because a lot of theist are not apologists, atheists use it as well known tool for attack — SpaceDweller
This quote is perfect example for "out of context" method, because he puts forward presumably only negative connotations without asking or saying anything why is that so? — SpaceDweller
I even had a person who earned his living as a theist of Protestantism say to me that he knew a secret truth that was not known by many but was accepted by the highest authorities in both the protestant and catholic faiths.
It was a few years later when he was a little pissed one night at a gathering and he said that the god of the old testament was overthrown by the god of the new testament. I think that was the big secret he was talking about. Perhaps he was just 'winding me up,' I have no idea but I did think he was a bizarre theist after that. That was about 25 years ago and I have never seen him since.
Some strange fruits grow on those theistic burning bushes. — universeness
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.