Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon
I'm an Agnostic Theist which I consider to be a very open-minded perspective. I believe that there is some kind of super natural, but I believe that there's no way of knowing. A lot of the religion debates have been between Catholics/Christians vs. Atheists. Typically, I don't see arguments between religions. I tend to stay away from Atheist vs. Christian "discussions," because they all have pretty much ended the same way:
|
There are 2 major reasons you see arguments most often between christians and atheists:
-1) In North America and UK, Christianity is the most common religion.
-2) Because of reason 1, Christianity has the largest effect on us as a society, out of any religion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon
1. Christian presents valid argument from quoting the Bible
|
>Quote from bible to prove some point in the bible.
Sorry, but that doesn't work. It's a logical fallacy unless you're just trying to prove that "It says this in the bible."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon
2. Atheist presents valid argument, mentions something about science, and the fact that you can't SEE a supernatural being.
|
WELL, if the only reason people didn't believe in god is because we can't physically see him, I'm sure there would be far less atheists. We can't measure god in any way. There's no proof in the physical universe that a god exists. In fact, there's evidence of the contrary if we go by the claims made by the religions I know a thing or two about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon
3. Christian mentions belief and not necessarily needing to have any facts.
|
Sure, we don't need facts to have a belief. However, unless there is at least one shred of evidence for an extraordinary claim, why should I believe it? Faith? Faith is just accepting things without evidence. Why would I have faith in something, when the faith is blind?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon
4. Both of them start throwing out random shit escalating into an argument. "How can you believe in God if you can't see him?"
|
Wow. Have you actually heard people use that in an argument? I can't see oxygen, but I'm fairly certain it exists. Really, I think this is an unfair representation of an atheist's argument.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon
can't present a valid argument on the belief of the existence of God...
|
Well, of course a sceptic is going to dismiss claims about god if there is a lack of evidence.
[quote=Brandon;950467]Then once the Christian ends the discussion through frustration, the Atheist pretty much wins because
a) no one has evidence to prove God exists[/QUOTE}
As the person making the positive claim, it's their burden to prove that point. You can't shift the burden of proof by saying, "You can't prove he doesn't exist." That's not how things work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon
but only evidence to prove that you can't disprove the existence of God. Even still, that argument will continue on and on until the Atheist is convinced that the Christian is a moron, possessed by the Devil, etc.
|
First part: Shifting the burden of proof.
Second part: An atheist wouldn't think that a theist is possessed by the devil. An atheist probably wouldn't believe in the devil, since the devil is a type of deity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon
b) the very fact that a Christian would first end the discussion through frustration is proving a point (when it really doesn't) that religions have no credible evidence why they believe that the religion is true.
|
No, the fact that a person presents no credible evidence is proof that the person has no credible evidence. If a theist presents a claim that is credible, I'll listen to it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon
Atheists 300,000,000,000 and counting points against Christians 0 points while Christianity has a somewhat to do with a little something something called faith.
|
Faith, by definition is blind. It doesn't prove anything. Nor do personal experiences. What we experience to be true is often false.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon
I think the discussions are effectively useless.
|
While I respect your opinion on this, I think I'll have to disagree. I think these discussions are very important, because it's important to spread the truth. If you think that your belief is truth, a discussion about your belief should only strengthen it, right? Also, doesn't it matter to YOU that what you believe is true?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon
It's really a conversation on the battle of wits.
|
Yes,a lot of it is based on wits. However, another large part of it is what information or evidence actually exists.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon
And very rarely do people know about different perspectives and shit at an early age because...let's face it...up until you got a career and shit, you got other shit to learn...why the fuck would I want to spend time looking up different perspectives on the universe and shit.
|
If you have other shit to learn than the perspectives of different people, then children should not be indoctrinated into a religion at such a young age. Yes, it goes both ways. Yes, it IS important. It's important to provide a child with as many viewpoints as possible, and educate the child on the universe. That's what Science, History, and English classes are for. Sure, you don't specifically have to look up other peoples' views on a certain point, but why wouldn't you try to find out about the universe? It's important to learn critical thinking in any way that we can.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon
You can sure as hell bet that I'll probably be doing that when I'm 60+ years old, because we are never going to find out whether God exists, who is right who is wrong, because we have only discovered a fraction of the truth.
|
Well, maybe we won't ever find out if there was an intelligent designer, but the more we learn, the easier it will be to dismiss some ridiculous claims.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon
Am I willing to have a discussion with anyone about religion? Not really...not because I'm close-minded, but because I know nothing about it.
|
Well, if you know nothing about a religion or religious view, and you're not willing to discuss it because you don't know about it, isn't that a little bit closed-minded? Maybe I'm reading into this wrong.
So, to the
OP: Obviously I like discussing religion. The truth matters to me. So does equal representation in congress. Religion is interesting, and so is science. With so many religious things affecting me, I think it's very important to discuss. There is supposed to be a separation of church and state, people still get into power based on their religious affiliations and laws are still dismissed because the majority of a population shares some religious view. That isn't fair. So if you think I have no reason to discuss religion when I don't believe it, you're simply wrong. If for NO other reason, I discuss it because I like to.