xian

yes. many many times in this thread. obviously there are very little UNANIMOUS things that any group of people have in common- including Christians.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Atheists have more in common than simply lack of belief in god
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

yup! that is an "in general" statement. In general, Christians believe the Bible is true...but not all Christians.

I can, with a high degree of accuracy, identify atheists purely on these "generally" common (not UNANIMOUS) traits.

for instance...you are an evolutionist....most likely.

Amaranth

There are just too many ways to respond to this. Ah hell, let's try them all:

1) Pot. Kettle. Black.

2) Do you even know what debate is? Claiming that arguing against small points is somehow wrong is absolutely ludicrous.

3) Perhaps if you can't defend your assertions, you shouldn't make them.

4) Xian making a personal attack because someone nit picks an argument. Hypocrisy at its finest.

5) Resonable dialogue, aka Xian is the only one to be crass. Also, no defeating his "logic" - That's rude, you know.


Amaranth

Amaranth

More artful dodging. Rather than admit to a contradictory assertion, our rat attempts to dodge the trap by appending his statement. Hopefully we won't notice that

"Atheists have more in common than simply lack of belief in god"

and

"In general, Christians believe the Bible is true...but not all Christians."

are radically different statements.

I didn't notice. Did you guys notice?

Hawkingfan

My father took the test. Tell me what he is.


FOR EACH OF THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS 1-7, ANSWER "AGREE" OR "DISAGREE"

1. evolution of life from non-life is a likely or certainly a fact of history
DISAGREE
2. science and religion are inherently incompatible
DISAGREE
3. I am familiar with and rapidly recognize the acronym "IPU"
DISAGREE
4. I lack belief in an absolute moral law and absolute right and wrong.
DISAGREE
5. I am inclined to think that advanced alien life exists somewhere in our universe beyond earth.
AGREE
6. uncaused events regularly effect themselves
DISAGREE
7. the 6 senses (if you count the vomeronasal organ- 5 if you do not) is all that is needed to know truth.
DISAGREE

8. I think landoverbaptist.com is a funny website.
a. TRUE
b. FALSE
c. I am not familiar enough with that website to answer

C

9. I agree with a womans right to choose to abort her foetus.
A. TRUE
B. FALSE

B

10. It is inappropriate and/or unscientific to call a foetus a "human being"
A. TRUE
B. FALSE

B

11. Organized religion is responsible for the majority of human atrocities throughout history
A. I agree
B. I disagree
C. Other

B

12. When I die, I fully expect my consciousness and awareness to cease existing, so that the only existence I have after my death is merely the natural particles that once made up my
physical body- returned to the natural universe
A. True
B. False

B

13. The idea that the universe began to exist uncaused from an inflationary quantum fluctuation is reasonable and/or possible.
A. TRUE
B. FALSE

B


----------------------------------
once the first 13 questions are answered, the tester will then gather the answers and serve this portion of the exam:


14. THIS TEST IS WRITTEN BY A CHRISTIAN ATTEMPTING TO PSYCHOLOGICALLY ANALYZE ATHEISTS. IT IS IMPORTANT YOU KNOW THIS. IN THE SPACE BELOW WRITE YOUR THOUGHTS ABOUT THIS TEST BUT DO NOT ADMIT WHETHER OR NOT YOU ARE AN ATHEIST:

Good test!


FOR EACH OF THE FOLLOWING, ANSWER "AGREE" OR "DISAGREE"

15. The Judeo-Christian God, as described in the King James Bible, could logically be called a tyrant, a maniac, and/or a murderer.
DISAGREE
16. Faith and rational thought are inherently incompatible.
DISAGREE
17. Atheists cannot be classified beyond simply "lack of belief in god(s)"
DISAGREE
18. Xians are, for the most part, irrational individuals (if you do not know what a XIAN is, please answer "UNKNOWN - XIAN").
UNKNOWN - XIAN
19. Humans are, ultimately, nothing more than a bag of mostly water- a proteinous, carbon-based mass of stimulated chemicals reacting to each other, having no objective value beyond what the individual or the society places on such masses. The bipedal anthropodic masses of organic matter called "homosapiens" have no special purpose beyond that which each bag of chemicals assigns to themselves of that which a societal group of chemical bags assign to them.
DISAGREE

xian

my pots are silver.

"2) Do you even know what debate is?"

yes.


"Claiming that arguing against small points is somehow wrong is absolutely ludicrous."

not wrong, just redherrings and dodges.


"3) Perhaps if you can't defend your assertions, you shouldn't make them."

Perhaps if you cant address my questions and instead make posts like this which have nothing to do with the discussion, you should stay out of my threads (but you cant resist a xian can you? The pleasure release of chemical stimulation in your brain every time you criticise one is too addictive)

"4) Xian making a personal attack because someone nit picks an argument. Hypocrisy at its finest."

hypocrisy is fine?


"5) Resonable dialogue, aka Xian is the only one to be crass. "

of course! I'm a xian in an atheist forum. unless i just kneel before you, and take all your little insults, and slaps, I'm a troll. Expected. A xian who stands his ground will always be a troll when he steps into the atheist lions den.

xian

Hawkingfan, i appreciate you giving me a real example (unmolested) to analyze. I believe you too, that this was administered properly.

i looked at his answers and would definately rule "NON-ATHEIST"

this does not mean he is a theist...he could be a deist. This test ONLY seeks to identify someone as

"Professing atheist" = YES or NO


I understand the test is not fullproof but by his answers, he would be an unusual "atheist" and if he indeed is one, I would like to ask him some questions.

Mageth

now, if you are going to INSIST that the origins of life has an infinite amount of explanations replacing abiogenesis, I want you to explain to me not only HOW, but cite to me 5...just 5 alternates.

So you bet I couldn't get three "(i bet you dont even get 3)" I cited four (one of which you cited), and now you ask for 5? Clever. Disingenuous, but clever.

Your axiom that you quoted was misused. I dont care what Hume says, (and he would agree with me, btw), you are making some logical errors with that "axiom". And when do atheists start asserting axioms anyway? I'll spare you and not divert into that subject.

WTF is wrong with atheists asserting axioms??? And what makes you so sure Hume would agree with you? Do you know he would, or do you have faith he would? He's dead, you know. You can take that on faith.

If you can't understand the axiom and its application, it's no sweat off my back.

i still await you to show me alterantes that replace abiogensis...heck even describe to me a SCENARIO that is logically possible...until you do, your entire argument about this particular point should be rescinded.

I already did, four if I recall, and one of them was posed by you.

I believe you misrepresented the axiom. We can eliminate an infinite amount of causes by simply constraining it to mutually exlusive logic:

The universe was created by God
The universe was not created by God

If you'll review my post, I think you'll see that I made this exact concession:

Nice try at a steal. But note that you haven't eliminated any possible hypotheses by creating two mutually exclusive categories that cover all possible hypotheses. Under each of those categories, there is an infinite number of possible hypotheses. If you can't grasp that, so be it.

all i am saying is that I believe (and I cannot prove this), that you put confidence in abiogenesis as true. I understand you are not certain of it, but this confidence means you have faith in it.

You're the Earl of Equivocation, apparently.

now, i dont like people putting words in my mouth so i can understand if this upsets you, but I truly, HONESTLY believe (though I cannot prove) that you believe in abiogenesis as the means for the origin of life in the universe. I understand you may deny this, but I will probably maintain a belief that your denial (if you deny it) is simply for public, but in reality you put confidence in the theory, believing it. and this constitutes faith.

Equivocate all you want. It doesn't upset me at all, and it doesn't make it true. The fact is that I have no faith in abiogenesis. I have confidence that it's the best explanation because it best fits the evidence. Get over it. Belief /= faith. Try not putting words in my mouth and accepting what I say on faith, perhaps.

Do you feel you have faith that I have faith in abiogenesis?

And as I said earlier, whether I or anyone else have faith in abiogenesis is irrelevant to whether abiogeneisis is the best explanation for how life came to be on earth. You should know that, and so I'm not sure what your whole point about the "faith" thing is.

Biff the unclean

I keep wondering, Xian, why you think that anyone should entertain " The universe was created by God" ?
You insist on restating the claim that the universe came about by natural events as being "by chance." Yet you ignore the fact that your claim is the universe came about by supernatural events---in other words by magic.
We know of no events that are not natural. We do know that chance exists. We don't have a single proven supernatural event that we can turn to and we know that there is no such thing as magic.
You scoff at the thought that life can come about through the combination of certain chemicals and energy. But you never go into your theory saying that life came about by a combination of magic words and magical breath blowing on a pile of dust.
The only support you have for the universe being created by a God are the thousands of year old scrawlings of a primitive society. But the universe described in these archaic writings is incorrect in every detail. They represent a complete absence of knowledge of the Earth and of Space while at the same time laughably claiming to be from the creator of both.
Why should anyone bother with such seeming silliness?

Mageth

my pots are silver.

And like I said in another thread, they call the flatware silver.

Demigawd

I have the supernatural ability to predict that xian will concentrate on this one sentence of yours, rather than the entirety of your post, and then whine about how infidels are so nasty towards him. Thus, he will feel he has responded to your points, and become all smug with himself that he has actually defended his faith.