The difficulty of talking to Atheist

[bhsmte]

As long as churches don't run a large profit from year to year and stay out of political campaigning/fundraising, I am fine with tax-free status for churches.

Churches are actually very similar to the many non-profit hospitals we have in the United State and some of those hospitals, have huge profits (revenue beyond expenses required to run the business).

The only difference between for profit and non-profit, is what you can do with the money. Hospitals that make large profits, typically put the excess into capital equipment, expanding the hospital or building a new hospital building, which is why you constantly see hospital owned buildings being constructed.

Churches that make large profits do the same, they either increase the size of their church campus or they have to dump the money to help others in need, that meet the guidelines of a non-profit church.

The last church I went to, was one of these mega churches. It had a new auditorium that seated over 7.000 people and a campus that would rival a small college. Their lead pastor, also flew all over the world as one of those "celebrity" type pastors.

 

[Eight Foot Manchild]

Fine, let's go there. I'm glad you're willing to, since it's where the discussion belongs anyway. But I don't think you're gonna like it since it doesn't have anything "tangible" to hang your hat on.

That depends. If all you can do in support of your initial naked assertion is follow the typical theist tactic of piling more naked assertions on top of it, you can bet I won't be satisfied.

Let's see if that's what you did...

God is a living being

Naked assertion. You're off to an abysmal start.

who makes His own decisions according to His own will.

Naked assertion.

He grants to those who are seeking Him the means of understanding Him.

Naked assertion.

So spiritual truth is something you are given by God.

Naked assertion.

But you have to seek after God first in order for Him to grant you that understanding.

Naked assertion.

Yes, that is, in fact, exactly what you did. No attempt whatsoever made at actually outlining a workable epistemological model. Nothing but a rephrasing of the assertion you started with - that 'god' imparts 'spiritual' truth. You are in the same exact place you started. I dismiss your assertions out of hand.

 

[Aldebaran]

That depends. If all you can do in support of your initial naked assertion is follow the typical theist tactic of piling more naked assertions on top of it, you can bet I won't be satisfied.

Let's see if that's what you did...



Naked assertion. You're off to an abysmal start.



Naked assertion.



Naked assertion.



Naked assertion.



Naked assertion.

Yes, that is, in fact, exactly what you did. No attempt whatsoever made at actually outlining a workable epistemological model. Nothing but a rephrasing of the assertion you started with - that 'god' imparts 'spiritual' truth. You are in the same exact place you started. I dismiss your assertions out of hand.

Yep! "Out of hand" sums it up pretty accurately. Closed-mindedness at work here.

So, can you give me the workable epistemological model of the relationship you have with your closest loved one? Or is your relationship not scientifically-based? Do you have any objectionable evidence of the actual relationship, or is it based on words and assumptions of trust, which I believe you would classify as naked assertions?

Seriously, you're over-complicating something that is so simple.

 

[Eight Foot Manchild]

Yep! "Out of hand" sums it up pretty accurately. Closed-mindedness at work here.

Dismissing vacuous naked assertions out of hand is not being 'closed minded'. The definition of 'open minded' is not 'willing to believe things for no reason' as you seem to think.

So, can you give me the workable epistemological model of the relationship you have with your closest loved one?

Empiricism.

Was that supposed to be hard or something?

Seriously, you're over-complicating something that is so simple.

Requiring that people substantiate their assertions before I take them seriously is not 'over-complicating' things. That's as basic and rudimentary a request as it is possible to ask of a claim.

 

[Colter]

"Mathematics, material science, is indispensable to the intelligent discussion of the material aspects of the universe, but such knowledge is not necessarily a part of the higher realization of truth or of the personal appreciation of spiritual realities. Not only in the realms of life but even in the world of physical energy, the sum of two or more things is very often something more than, or something different from, the predictable additive consequences of such unions. The entire science of mathematics, the whole domain of philosophy, the highest physics or chemistry, could not predict or know that the union of two gaseous hydrogen atoms with one gaseous oxygen atom would result in a new and qualitatively superadditive substance — liquid water. The understanding knowledge of this one physiochemical phenomenon should have prevented the development of materialistic philosophy and mechanistic cosmology.

Technical analysis does not reveal what a person or a thing can do. For example: Water is used effectively to extinguish fire. That water will put out fire is a fact of everyday experience, but no analysis of water could ever be made to disclose such a property. Analysis determines that water is composed of hydrogen and oxygen; a further study of these elements discloses that oxygen is the real supporter of combustion and that hydrogen will itself freely burn.

Your religion is becoming real because it is emerging from the slavery of fear and the bondage of superstition. Your philosophy struggles for emancipation from dogma and tradition. Your science is engaged in the agelong contest between truth and error while it fights for deliverance from the bondage of abstraction, the slavery of mathematics, and the relative blindness of mechanistic materialism.

Mortal man has a spirit nucleus. The mind is a personal-energy system existing around a divine spirit nucleus and functioning in a material environment. Such a living relationship of personal mind and spirit constitutes the universe potential of eternal personality. Real trouble, lasting disappointment, serious defeat, or inescapable death can come only after self-concepts presume fully to displace the governing power of the central spirit nucleus, thereby disrupting the cosmic scheme of personality identity."Urantia Book 1955
​

 

[Deidre32]

The fact that this thread has gone all the way to 39 pages, should tell us..it's not hard to talk to us atheists.

 

[Eight Foot Manchild]

"Mathematics, material science, is indispensable to the intelligent discussion of the material aspects of the universe, but such knowledge is not necessarily a part of the higher realization of truth or of the personal appreciation of spiritual realities. Not only in the realms of life but even in the world of physical energy, the sum of two or more things is very often something more than, or something different from, the predictable additive consequences of such unions. The entire science of mathematics, the whole domain of philosophy, the highest physics or chemistry, could not predict or know that the union of two gaseous hydrogen atoms with one gaseous oxygen atom would result in a new and qualitatively superadditive substance — liquid water. The understanding knowledge of this one physiochemical phenomenon should have prevented the development of materialistic philosophy and mechanistic cosmology.

Technical analysis does not reveal what a person or a thing can do. For example: Water is used effectively to extinguish fire. That water will put out fire is a fact of everyday experience, but no analysis of water could ever be made to disclose such a property. Analysis determines that water is composed of hydrogen and oxygen; a further study of these elements discloses that oxygen is the real supporter of combustion and that hydrogen will itself freely burn.

Your religion is becoming real because it is emerging from the slavery of fear and the bondage of superstition. Your philosophy struggles for emancipation from dogma and tradition. Your science is engaged in the agelong contest between truth and error while it fights for deliverance from the bondage of abstraction, the slavery of mathematics, and the relative blindness of mechanistic materialism.

Mortal man has a spirit nucleus. The mind is a personal-energy system existing around a divine spirit nucleus and functioning in a material environment. Such a living relationship of personal mind and spirit constitutes the universe potential of eternal personality. Real trouble, lasting disappointment, serious defeat, or inescapable death can come only after self-concepts presume fully to displace the governing power of the central spirit nucleus, thereby disrupting the cosmic scheme of personality identity."Urantia Book 1955
​

Why do you keep posting this worthless bilge?

 

[Eight Foot Manchild]

The fact that this thread has gone all the way to 39 pages, should tell us..it's not hard to talk to us atheists.

The 'difficulty' is that we don't blindly accept supernaturalist naked assertions, so they have no clue how to deal with us.

 

[Belk]

Fine, let's go there. I'm glad you're willing to, since it's where the discussion belongs anyway. But I don't think you're gonna like it since it doesn't have anything "tangible" to hang your hat on.

God is a living being who makes His own decisions according to His own will. He grants to those who are seeking Him the means of understanding Him. So spiritual truth is something you are given by God. But you have to seek after God first in order for Him to grant you that understanding.

Very well. What means does he provide to understand him?

 

[Aldebaran]

The 'difficulty' is that we don't blindly accept supernaturalist naked assertions, so they have no clue how to deal with us.

I have no clue on how to deal with a number of things. Brick walls are one of them. Man-children are another.

 

[Aldebaran]

Very well. What means does he provide to understand him?

A brain. Relationships with people around us. Simplicity.

God's word is written simply enough that even a child can understand it. Even if that child is 8 feet tall.

 

[PsychoSarah]

I disagree on taxing charitable donations of any kind.

I agree that creationism has no place in secular schools nor the Atheist agenda.

-_- there is no atheist agenda, I don't understand why people think there is one.

 

[Eight Foot Manchild]

I have no clue on how to deal with a number of things.

One of those things being people who possess reasoning skills.

 

[Eight Foot Manchild]

A brain. Relationships with people around us. Simplicity.

God's word is written simply enough that even a child can understand it. Even if that child is 8 feet tall.

Even as a child, I possessed enough basic reasoning skills not to fall for this garbage. Unbeliever since day one of Miss Heflin's Sunday school class.

 

[Aldebaran]

Even as a child, I possessed enough basic reasoning skills not to fall for this garbage. Unbeliever since day one of Miss Heflin's Sunday school class.

Yet as an adult, who thinks of himself as a man-child, you still come to sites like this to talk about the same "garbage" you didn't believe since day one of Miss Heflin's Sunday school class. Where's the "basic reasoning" in that?

 

[Eight Foot Manchild]

Yet as an adult, who thinks of himself as a man-child

You're really, really desperate to try and manufacture some kind of point out my screen name. This is indicative of how utterly bereft of substance your position is, as if I needed any more proof.

you still come to sites like this to talk about the same "garbage" you didn't believe since day one of Miss Heflin's Sunday school class. Where's the "basic reasoning" in that?

My reasons for coming to this site, as well as other theistic sites, as well as engaging believers in person, are as follows,

-Irrational beliefs are harmful to society, and should be publicly scrutinized and exposed
-I share a planet with believers, and it's good to stay abreast of what they believe, as it affects me
-It's interesting

In that order.

Anything else I can clear up, or are you done pretending to have a clue who I am and what my motives are?

 

[Aldebaran]

You're really, really desperate to try and manufacture some kind of point out my screen name. This is indicative of how utterly bereft of substance your position is, as if I needed any more proof.

You have to admit that you pretty much invite some comment on your screen name when you call yourself a manchild.

My reasons for coming to this site, as well as other theistic sites, as well as engaging believers in person, are as follows,

-Irrational beliefs are harmful to society, and should be publicly scrutinized and exposed

So you come here to judge. Nice.

-I share a planet with believers, and it's good to stay abreast of what they believe, as it affects me

It's nice to see an unbeliever finally admit that what happens as a result other peoples' beliefs and actions can affect them. Up to this point, I've only heard that the atheistic views expressed by some here are nothing I should be concerned about because it doesn't affect me or how I live. Looks like you and I are of the same mind.

 

[Deidre32]

The 'difficulty' is that we don't blindly accept supernaturalist naked assertions, so they have no clue how to deal with us.

Lol yes, the dilemma continues to be that one side requires objective truth whe the other side doesn't. Guess which side is which?

 

[Chany]

-_- there is no atheist agenda, I don't understand why people think there is one.

It's probably the need to be able to identify a single group of people as a single whole. The atheist, as it is currently known, didn't really come into fruition until a few centuries ago. Even then, it is only within the last 50-100 years that the atheist position has gone from strange oddity to semi-popular. People see a group of people with the same name and that some of them share common values, so they try to lump the vast majority as one.

It's also easier to engage in a stereotype than the actual positions. Despite beliefs to the contrary, atheism probably has the widest variety of positions within its members because of the utter lack of unified principles beyond "I don't believe in a god". From Mill to Marx to Rand to Chomsky to Nagel to Nietzsche to Singer to Russell, the atheist/agnostic crowd is very different in its views. Some people simply can't accept that the rejection of god hypotheses opens the door to pretty much anything, so we all have to share some common values.

 

[Aldebaran]

Lol yes, the dilemma continues to be that one side requires objective truth whe the other side doesn't. Guess which side is which?

It can be an asset to not require so much in order to move ahead. Being low maintenance has its advantages.