Theli

Even the christians has turned against David on this thread, it seems.

HelenM

I haven't exactly "turned against him", Theli

I try to ask people challenging questions.

Often that seems easier with theists

love
Helen

Theli

I was more reffering to Douglas. But you didn't excacly seem to be in agreement with David and his ideas yourself.

Are you saying we atheists don't understand challenging questions?

madmax2976

It wasn't my original understanding that Douglas was posting here in regards to David Matthews positions. Given the various debates that were starting to emerge on things like biblical prophecies and other Christian arguments, it appeared to be heading way way off course.

Might I suggest that if Douglas and others do wish to get down into the details of those debates, that they do so in another thread. If its just a cursory treatment of them, then I suppose thats okay.

Douglas' view of David as an "apostate", while a bit whimsical, is pertinent I suppose. I have to agree it is very, very odd for a C of C member. Why David continues to associate himself with such a fundamentalist group, given the beliefs he has, is beyond me.

Theli

There was some barking and flaming going on between David and Douglas, as David stated that everyone should start ignoring Douglas.
Douglas was not pleased.

About David's faith, I also found it abit "weak". I stated an argument with the conclution that his god did not exist, wich was based on his own words, and he agreed.

Then he went on with saying that this argument adds to god's mystery. And that atheists are hiding.

madmax2976

Yes, the greatest mystery of God is that he doesn't exist. David agree's.

I never thought I'd see a version of Christianity so liberal it was virtually synonomous with atheism.

Gives support for the old adage that inside every theist is an atheist just dying to get out.

[ July 02, 2002: Message edited by: madmax2976 ]</p>

Ted Hoffman

MadMax,
Why David continues to associate himself with such a fundamentalist group, given the beliefs he has, is beyond me.
I find Davids a bit of a fundamentalist. His sectarian approach to examining his faith and reality in general has that closed-mind framework of fundamentalists. Look at the way he responded to you MadMax: "You dont have to understand". What kind of response is that? Of a liberal? This is passive fundamentalism. The fact that he is tackling questions from atheists here doesnt prove he is not fundamentalist: the snotty manner in which he is responding to those questions is what we use to judge that; his total lack of disregard to reality and reason, lack of any urge to provide a factual basis of his beliefs and callous approach regarding human life and suffering. His uncharitable manner (no one is obligated to explain their beliefs) closes any avenues for meaningful discussion by rendering the discussion barren and his pontificating responses are meant to cut-off any shoots of curiosity that are attempting to penetrate into his belief system for example, when asked to describe God, he says : "God is that being whose existence is not dependent upon your knowledge, belief or acceptance.". The question was not about what Gods existence is dependent upon, it was about Gods characteristics. So the answer was meant to intimidate the questioner and demean the importance of the beliefs the questioner holds. At the same time, its a prevarication and a change of subject.
This evasive approach is consistent as one examines Davids responses. When a question is asked, he either answers with a question (as he did with Bill), prevaricates by changing the subject, or answers with a pontificating response that makes the discussion barren in that direction.

Besides that, I find Davids' theology so unsupported and groundless that it doesn't even exist (I believe this was in an effort to appear open-minded and accomodating and to avoid taking a position because the only positions available are untenable). He is willing to concede anything: like he says no one will Go to hell, God does not exist, Its Ok if God kills innocent people, its Ok is earthquakes kill humans, its ok to lead a self-centered carefree life and so on.

On examining his position on religious issues, I have come to the conclusion that he has this euphoric view of his faith and everything else is brushed off casually. he said his beliefs are based on faith not fact (I even wonder why we are bothering him). He doesn't bother to support his beliefs because he doesnt think it matters to support them. In his world, faith reigns supreme over reason, science, logic, history or anything else that could be used to arrive at a conclusion regarding reality.

It reminds me of someone who is so drunk that when you tell him he is standing on a mine, he brushes you off telling you not to worry. If effect, its like he can't see his beliefs. He lacks any objective standard of examining his beliefs and he is not willing to accept any.

Most of us use reason (logic) and science(empiricism) and philosophy where empiricism fails short when examining our beliefs.

David has concluded reason is too limited (he forgets that it is limited to facts) to be used when examining ones beliefs, as such he has no intention of applying it. Since God is not part of reality, he doesn't see the point of examining God as we would a real entity.

He has been so preoccupied with making God elusive to any "tests" that he has made God nothing: infinite, immaterial, unchanging, imperceptible, incomprehensible, and outside reality (inexistent).
Of course anything outside reality is imagination or fantasy.
He has admitted that God does not exist in reality.
Thus he has pushed himself to the atheists corner.
He is thus, an atheist by definition.

Let me end this with a quote from Jean Paul Satre:

To believe is to know you believe; to know you believe is not to believe.

And to David, no matter how strong our beliefs are, that in itself does not guarantee us the truthfulness of those beliefs.

If we can not identify what constitutes truth (lacking any "objective" standard for determining truths from falsehoods), there is no point seeking that truth.

And Oh, a quote from Madmax himself:
I never thought I'd see a version of Christianity so liberal it was virtually synonomous with atheism

When you have your back to the fire, and you are backing away from fire, you end up in the same fire.

Thats what has happened to David.

Welcome to Atheism David. Its not as bad a "place" as you may think.

HelenM

No, more that you already asked yourself them

So I would just be recovering old ground...

love
Helen

madmax2976

Couldn't have said it better myself Intensity.

It just sucks that it takes 11 pages of posts to figure out where someone is really coming from.


But I guess thats par for the course so to speak.

HelenM

Maybe you don't know much about liberalism...

As people get more liberal in their Christianity one of the first things to go is the exclusivity of 'we have the only truth'.

Once the heaven/hell, good/evil, spirit-filled/slave-to-sin dichotomy is gone then there's not much to separate Christians from anyone else.

And if good atheists have the same shot at heaven as good Christians and good anythingelse's then you don't need to try to 'convert' them to your own beliefs so you can quit aggressive evangelizing. You can live and let live. You can stop worrying about whether "Feed the hungry" gives out tracts at the same time or not.

etc etc

And really, the significant 'barriers' and the things that would annoy atheists about you - are gone.

I think smart, thoughtful conservative Christians understand this pretty well. That's why they think liberal Christians have given the shop away; have essentially sold out; are "not true Christians" enough to be on the wrong side of the fence - in terms of beliefs and proclamations (if any) at least. Maybe they will still somehow get to heaven due to being more conservative at one time and having since had their true faith 'corrupted'. But basically they are now 'enemies of the gospel' just like the atheists, because they've stopped trying to rescue the [other] hellbound inhabitants of earth.

Anyway...that's liberal Christianity and that's why conservatives don't like it one bit.

love
Helen

p.s. hi IntenSity

[ July 02, 2002: Message edited by: HelenSL ]</p>