Hi from Theo

[Theo]

Hi all,

For some time I've been looking for a good forum where there's friendly but passionate discussion and debate about all the questions and subjects that matter - hopefully, this is the one!  I'm a theist, more specifically a Christian, who perhaps doesn't fit within any particular denomination belief-wise.  I'm interested in discussing arguments for atheism and agnosticism as well as arguments against the truth of Christianity.

I'm a secondary school teacher based in Hampshire, UK, go to a C of E church, and enjoy playing and listening to all kinds of music, chess, the Great Outdoors, and good ales!

Look forward to meeting some of you!
T

[necrobitsch]

Huzzah! Welcome! I'm hopelessly new too. I'm very much an atheist (although if I had to pick an afterlife, I'd say Valhalla sounds pretty tempting.) but I like theists who're capable of arguing with the power of rational logic. If it makes my brain work, it's a good thing.

[Davin]

Welcome.

[Roganthis72]

sup, from newb to newb

[Tank]

Hi Theo

Welcome aboard!

Regards
Chris

[McQ]

Welcome to the forum!

[DropLogic]

Hi all,

For some time I've been looking for a good forum where there's friendly but passionate discussion and debate about all the questions and subjects that matter - hopefully, this is the one!  I'm a theist, more specifically a Christian, who perhaps doesn't fit within any particular denomination belief-wise.  I'm interested in discussing arguments for atheism and agnosticism as well as arguments against the truth of Christianity.

I'm a secondary school teacher based in Hampshire, UK, go to a C of E church, and enjoy playing and listening to all kinds of music, chess, the Great Outdoors, and good ales!

Look forward to meeting some of you!
T

Welcome Theo! - Be forewarned however.  Saying things like "the truth of Christianity" doesn't really paint the picture of an open minded theist.  Atheism doesn't require an argument either, since non-belief in the unseen does not require proof.

[The Magic Pudding]

ello Theo

[Theo]

Welcome Theo! - Be forewarned however.  Saying things like "the truth of Christianity" doesn't really paint the picture of an open minded theist.  Atheism doesn't require an argument either, since non-belief in the unseen does not require proof.

My apologies - I didn't mean to sound dogmatic!  What I meant was that I am interested in arguments against the proposition 'Christianity is true' (with 'Christianity' defined minimally as a particular set of propositions about God, the world, Jesus, etc).

Atheism doesn't require an argument either, since non-belief in the unseen does not require proof.

Under the modern definition (as "nonbelief" with respect to the existence of God or gods) atheism makes no claims, so of course requires no argument.  But by this definition, agnostics are "atheists" as they don't believe in God, as are babies, plants and rocks (as they have no beliefs whatsoever).  So really, it's not a very useful definition.  

You do make the claim, though, that God is "unseen".  By this, do you mean that God has not been observed with the five senses, or that God has not been observed whatsoever?  If it is the first, then that does not seem to be sufficient reason for nonbelief.  If it is the latter, then you are making the positive claim no religious experience has ever been an actual experience of God, which itself requires justification.  A final possibility is that you mean that you yourself have not experienced God - but that is obviously not sufficient for nonbelief (I have never observed a quark, for example).

Your thoughts?

[Theo]

Huzzah! Welcome! I'm hopelessly new too. I'm very much an atheist (although if I had to pick an afterlife, I'd say Valhalla sounds pretty tempting.) but I like theists who're capable of arguing with the power of rational logic. If it makes my brain work, it's a good thing.

Thanks for your welcome!  If I may ask a question: what do you consider to be the strongest argument for theism?

[The Magic Pudding]

Thanks for your welcome!  If I may ask a question: what do you consider to be the strongest argument for theism?

Quaint novelty attraction for tourists.

[necrobitsch]

Huzzah! Welcome! I'm hopelessly new too. I'm very much an atheist (although if I had to pick an afterlife, I'd say Valhalla sounds pretty tempting.) but I like theists who're capable of arguing with the power of rational logic. If it makes my brain work, it's a good thing.

Thanks for your welcome!  If I may ask a question: what do you consider to be the strongest argument for theism?

Hm. I'd say Fear of the Unknown.

I was raised in the tropics and moved from Thailand to Scotland from university. I never knew how dark and cold winter could get despite being warned that it would be a shock to the system.

Around Midwinter I began to realise just why ancient man would sacrifice fellow human beings to ensure the sun returned. And if it wasn't for the awesome power of science that made me understand that the earth rotated and that spring and summer would return, I would have been first in line to stab the offering up good and proper to get the sun to come back again.

When things are so bewildering that there is seemingly no rational or logical argument, or the arguments that exist are too bewildering and intimidating to grasp, faith steps in. Which isn't really an argument for proof in there being a higher power, but it certainly explains (for me, at least) why putting your faith in a higher power can be so appealing.

[wildfire_emissary]

Howdy! You're gonna like it here if your mind is always open.

[DropLogic]

Welcome Theo! - Be forewarned however.  Saying things like "the truth of Christianity" doesn't really paint the picture of an open minded theist.  Atheism doesn't require an argument either, since non-belief in the unseen does not require proof.

My apologies - I didn't mean to sound dogmatic!  What I meant was that I am interested in arguments against the proposition 'Christianity is true' (with 'Christianity' defined minimally as a particular set of propositions about God, the world, Jesus, etc).

Atheism doesn't require an argument either, since non-belief in the unseen does not require proof.

Under the modern definition (as "nonbelief" with respect to the existence of God or gods) atheism makes no claims, so of course requires no argument.  But by this definition, agnostics are "atheists" as they don't believe in God, as are babies, plants and rocks (as they have no beliefs whatsoever).  So really, it's not a very useful definition.  

You do make the claim, though, that God is "unseen".  By this, do you mean that God has not been observed with the five senses, or that God has not been observed whatsoever?  If it is the first, then that does not seem to be sufficient reason for nonbelief.  If it is the latter, then you are making the positive claim no religious experience has ever been an actual experience of God, which itself requires justification.  A final possibility is that you mean that you yourself have not experienced God - but that is obviously not sufficient for nonbelief (I have never observed a quark, for example).

Your thoughts?

So, because I have not heard, seen, tasted, felt, or smelled god, I don't have sufficient lack of evidence to dismiss he/she/it's existence?  Perhaps unseen was the wrong word to use.  Humanity has set God up to be conveniently invisible.  I fully agree that religious experiences do happen to people legitimately.Edit: By this I mean, people who are indoctrinated or feel a need to belong so badly that they let themselves be brainwashed by charismatic religious 'leaders' often claim religious experiences.  I full disagree, however, that the invisible sadist in the sky (as defined by man remember) is the cause of those experiences.  
Comparing religious experience, which is a personal and individually observed phenomena, to quarks, which have tangible proof of existence is incorrect as well.
Why do you subscribe to the christian god and none others?

[fleamailman]

the goblin showed, saying "...if one settles for belief, either for or against god, then one does ones religion, or ones atheist stance too for that matter, a disservice here, for simply one hasn't bothered to find out for oneself...", actually the goblin often saw this whole stupid argument as "those stubborn mules on one side against those compliant sheep on the other", where the answer was staring them in the face all along, uttering "...be not a mule, nor a sheep, where one makes those decisions to the best of ones judgment here and if one gets dammed for being honest to oneself about it, so be it then, for god or no god, the humbug is when ones faking it  just for the reward if offers, where god wouldn't want that of his followers then, no, for he wants those who actually know him, not those who just believe in him..."