Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
But it does happen. Both ways. Atheists do become Theists, and Theists do become Atheists.
I realize that. It happens all the time.fantôme profane;1411330 said:
And some atheists want to paint theists as naive and unintelligent. And some atheists on this forum are just convinced that all theists hate them. They are so convinced that a civil dialogue is damned near impossible, because they're looking for reasons to be insulted. The bottom line, in my opinion, are that most atheists are just as ethical and decent as many theists. They aren't hateful jerks who hate everything that pertains to spiritual things. They're good neighbors and good parents. On the other hand, most theists aren't stupid. They are every bit as intelligent and rational as atheists. They've come to a different conclusion about God than atheists have, but that doesn't mean they have a brain the size of a pea. We're not all that different, but we always seem to be fighting. Not discussing, not disagreeing, not debating, but fighting, insulting and accusing. It's pathetic, and both sides are to blame.
What did I get myself into? Do you really see me as some kind of atheist-bashing religious fanatic?
This is not a comment about you. I am not talking about you personally. I am talking only about what you posted.
And yes, that particular post where you said (with a wink) that Beaudreaux would ignore the evidence that he claimed would be convincing to him, in that post you were clearly expressing the idea that Atheists are closed minded.You know what? I bet it wouldn't be.
Okay, well let me tell you why I made that comment. Months ago, probably more than a year ago, I started a thread in which I posed a question to atheists in which I described a scenario which, to me, would clearly be evidence that there was a God. I asked the atheists on RF if this particular series of events that I described would cause them to rethink their lack of belief in God. There were a couple who said it would, but by far the biggest majority said things like, "Well, I would assume that other factors were at work here and that it wasn't God who made things turn out as they did." They really did try to come up with every conceivable reason imaginable why the situation I described could not have been God's doing. Very few were willing to even consider it as a possibility. I really didn't even debate with them, because I started the thread in a DIR forum. I wanted to see how open-minded they were, and found that most of them were determined that to disprove God's hand was in any way involved.fantôme profane;1411369 said:
It was intended, primarily, to be flippant. Hence the wink. It seems to me as if a mountain has been made out of a molehill. But again, it was not my intention to offend. I think I'd better just shut up and get out of here. :run:
No...peace of mind is peace of mind. Making a blind man see is healing.
Yes, I think this might be true. But if it only works if they know about it, don't you think it looks like it's their mind, not God?
Here's the exchange:
So the poster said it would be convincing to him, and you told him, no, he would disregard the evidence, even if it were there. Maybe you don't consider that dishonesty, but since I base my beliefs on the evidence, I certainly do.
Right. The problem isn't you, Katzpur, it's my reactions. Keep telling yourself that, and you'll feel much better.
I don't know what kind of person you are. All I know is your posts here. In order to win an argument, you accused the person on the other side of lying. Cheap, dishonest, tactic. I wouldn't resort to it. You keep your own standards.
Please draw it to my attention when it happens, so I can rectify it.
Thank you.
Beats the pain of examing your actions, I guess.
First of all, Beadreax wasn't in that thread, was s/he? Prejudiced much? Second, go back to the thread. Read my answer.
That probably also beats admitting you were wrong.
To each his own. When it comes to something like prayer, the only evidence that really matters to me is personal expereince. If that makes me closed-minded and you open-minded, then so be it.
And those are the exact words I used. I said, "Anyway, if that remark was as hurtful as you are saying it was, I'm sorry. I really am." Apparently that was not good enough. I don't have a hard time apologizing when I've said something to offend, but I do draw the line at groveling.
Personal experience can be a source of evidence, but it takes rigorous application of control. For example, for a week, every time you pray, write down what you prayed for, and what you would consider to be granting the prayer. For example, if you pray for a relative to be healed, write down what you would consider healing. Write it down before you check out the results. Then, within the specified time period, record how many of your prayers were actually granted. I think you'll find, as have those before you, that any results external to you will be granted at the exact same rate as had you not prayed.
It wouldn't work, Auto. You'd have to believe in God in order for that to happen. You can't force yourself to believe, and words said without faith that God is listening truly are ineffective. So let's just let this one go. I hesitated to even post on this thread, and I now know it was a mistake. I'll try to keep that in mind the next time I see this topic raised.
It is really amazing to me the mental gymnastics Christians will do to maintain a belief, including trying to co-opt new age concepts like "peace of mind." Are you actually trying to tell me that if my 9 year old daughter (who is an angel and the light of my life) was diagnosed with terminal cancer that it would be better for her to have peace of mind than to be healed of that cancer? Are you serious?
