To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 22470
22469  |  22471
Subject: 
Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Mon, 20 Oct 2003 20:36:17 GMT
Viewed: 
906 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Justin Pankey wrote:

Atheism is not a religion, although I know Xtians like to think that it is.

This is because it takes "faith" to NOT believe in God because you have to
have faith in such fatally flawed teachings as evolution,etc. or regarding
whatever other theories you have about what got us here.

Justin, your comment betrays a fundamental misunderstanding about the nature of
atheism.  Consider the following statements:

A:  I believe that God does not exist.
B:  I do not believe that God exists.

Do you see that these two statements are inherently different?  The first is a
statement of belief (in the notion that God does not exist), while the second is
a statement of a lack of belief (in the notion that God exists).  To put it
another way, the first is a statement of positive belief in a negative, while
the second is a statement of negative belief in a positive.

It is a misrepresentation for you to claim that I, as an atheist, *believe* in
the nonexistence of something.  There are those who may indeed believe that God
doesn't exist, but you are correct to identify such belief as a statement of
faith.

My statement, that I do not believe that God exists, is a statement of non-faith
rather than faith.

Understood and agreed...Using Atheism was a bad example...most everything else I
said has been snipped.  Again I refute Richard's statement that merely calling
yourself a Christian makes you a Christian and refer you to the 2 definitions
for "Christian" I qouted earlier from my Random House Dictionary.

That is what I mean by below...that your actions/words show your true beliefs.

For instance I could claim to be a Muslim and yet state that Christ is the Son
of God (not merely a prophet) and should be more highly regarded than Mohamed.

I've claimed to be a Muslim-but holding a view completely contrary to the major
fundemamentals of the religion- shows my claim to be false.

Again my main point is that the KKK and Neo Nazi's are NOT Christians because
their actions are completely contray to the teachings of Christ.

In addition, the theory of evolution is not fatally flawed except in the
desperate dreams of certain religious groups who are unable or unwilling to
accept the overwhelming evidence of empirical observation.

There are numerous books that refute the claims, point out missing links, reveal
statistical impossibilities, etc.  I am not blinded by faith.  If someone could
reconcile all of these inconsistancies to me maybe they could make me a believer
(or at least an "accepter" :o)  You should thoroughly examine the claims of
Scientists who happen to be Christians and be able to rebut those claims before
you accept the "theory" of evolution.

I'm not looking to debate evolution as I don't have time for that level of
debate here.  I'm primarily debating what I believe is a false assumption about
what make somebody a Chritian based on defintion.  If Richard has a dictionary
that states something different, there's not much I can do about that, but at
least I've tried to point out that it makes little sense.

Further I'd be more interested in your response to a question I posed Richard
last night.  Framed differently, I'm basically asking if there is no God and no
universal truth or morality...who gets to decide what is right...someone
peaceful like Richard or the Hitlers and Saddams of the world?  What would give
you the right to say they are wrong?  True there have been many wars fought over
religious differences and that is tragic, but Hitler and Saddam would be just as
evil without claimimg any religion.  If all religion were eliminated, peace
still would not exist.



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) If you can recommend any such books I would be greatly interested to explore them. I would steer you away from such authors as William Lane Craig, William Dembski, or Michael Denton, all of whom commit grievous logical and statistical errors. (...) (21 years ago, 20-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
 
(...) Justin, your comment betrays a fundamental misunderstanding about the nature of atheism. Consider the following statements: A: I believe that God does not exist. B: I do not believe that God exists. Do you see that these two statements are (...) (21 years ago, 20-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

220 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR