Freethought & Rationalism Archive

TomboyMom · 07-21-2003, 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JGL53
Christ founds a church that exist for 2000 years. The officials of that church command the mutilation, torture, and murder of millions of people in that time, yet christ does not intercede, either to prevent it, or to tell them to stop it. In modern times the church harbors hundreds of child-molesting priests, and does nothing about it, merely moving them from parish to parish. FINALLY, the secular authorites, not christ or faith in christ, are forcing them to reform.

I think all this has an obvious 'bearing on the truth', and on who is ignorant here and who is not. Christ, and the rest of the trinity, obviously 1.do not exist, or, 2. existing, are sadistic scum no more worthy of worship than Hitler, Stalin, or Pol Pot.

What other conclusion can a rational, sane, person come to, if said person has any pretense whatsoever to being seriously concerned with morality, ethics, and common human decency?

Excellent post. :notworthy

Rene

TomboyMom · 07-21-2003, 01:02 PM

Quote:

For the fideist, faith is its own justification and needs no proof or evidence to back it up.

What is fideism? Thanks.

Rene

Citrusponge · 07-21-2003, 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by TomboyMom
What is fideism? Thanks.

Rene

The oposite of infidelism..?

Dictionary.com says:
fi�de�ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (fd-z-m, fd-)
n.
Reliance on faith alone rather than scientific reasoning or philosophy in questions of religion.

emotional · 07-21-2003, 02:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by TomboyMom
What is fideism? Thanks.

There are three main principles of establishing beliefs: evidentialism (the way of evidence, logic and reason), experientalism (the way of experiencing a reality) and fideism (the way of faith alone). The evidentialist believes in God because there is evidence for God making His existence reasonable to hold; the experientalist believes in God because he has had an experience (mystical vision) of God; the fideist believes in God because of his decision to believe in God. I have examined the evidential case for God (and the afterlife) and found it awfully weak, and I have never had a mystical vision of God, therefore my belief is a result of a conscious decision to believe. The fideistic decision is a decision to walk by faith alone.

JGL53 · 07-21-2003, 05:41 PM

So our choices are:

1. ignorance, i.e, belief that god's existence is proven by logically flawed arguments like first cause, design, fine-tuned, moral, etc.

2. hallucination, i.e., seeing, hearing, conversing with, etc. a magical being, or having a 'mystical feeling' of some imagined magical presence.

3. belief that something is existent or truth simply and unapologetically because you wish or want it to be true, like a child who wishes so very much for a pony for christmas, he convinces himself he will get the pony, if only he follows santa's rules and wishes very, very hard - a sort of create your own reality phenomenon.

Wow - atheism is looking more and more like a brilliant diamond in a mountain of putrid buzzard manure.

Howard · 07-21-2003, 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by emotional
I have never had a mystical vision of God, therefore my belief is a result of a conscious decision to believe.

Why? If you don't mind my asking.

SignOfTheCross · 07-21-2003, 08:50 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JGL53
The latest figures I am aware of show that only about 20 per cent, if not less, of the world's present population is identified as RCC. Or, are you including in your 33 per cent all protestant christians, many of whom believe the pope is the Antichrist?

Yes, I include those whom believe the Pope is the anti-Christ. How does this support your arguement (if any)?

Quote:

Christ founds a church that exist for 2000 years. The officials of that church command the mutilation, torture, and murder of millions of people in that time, yet christ does not intercede, either to prevent it, or to tell them to stop it. In modern times the church harbors hundreds of child-molesting priests, and does nothing about it, merely moving them from parish to parish. FINALLY, the secular authorites, not christ or faith in christ, are forcing them to reform.

Not quite, very ignorant, blown totally out of proportion, not worth debating.

Quote:

I think all this has an obvious 'bearing on the truth', and on who is ignorant here and who is not. Christ, and the rest of the trinity, obviously 1.do not exist, or, 2. existing, are sadistic scum no more worthy of worship than Hitler, Stalin, or Pol Pot.

Are you a Church historian, until you are you have no right to make such claims, therefore we can safely conclude you are ignorant. As for your second point, blind prejudice does not equate to truth.

Quote:

What other conclusion can a rational, sane, person come to, if said person has any pretense whatsoever to being seriously concerned with morality, ethics, and common human decency?

I can be that person. How do you know you're being sane and rational in this matter? [deleted insult]

Peace,
SOTC

SignOfTheCross · 07-21-2003, 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JGL53
So our choices are:

1. ignorance, i.e, belief that god's existence is proven by logically flawed arguments like first cause, design, fine-tuned, moral, etc.

2. hallucination, i.e., seeing, hearing, conversing with, etc. a magical being, or having a 'mystical feeling' of some imagined magical presence.

3. belief that something is existent or truth simply and unapologetically because you wish or want it to be true, like a child who wishes so very much for a pony for christmas, he convinces himself he will get the pony, if only he follows santa's rules and wishes very, very hard - a sort of create your own reality phenomenon.

Wow - atheism is looking more and more like a brilliant diamond in a mountain of putrid buzzard manure.

Uh, not when you define theism that way. An evolutionary characteristic we have is to choose what we want to believe then learn to defend it, and we use irrational methods (such as you did above) to give ourselves a sense of "euphoria" and well-being to justify what we believe. The brain does not like doubting, so usually, such attitudes arise after one has lost confidence in his/her position, and wishes to regain it back. Evangelical Christians and ignorant atheists are known for this.

Peace,
SOTC

SignOfTheCross · 07-21-2003, 09:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JGL53
The perjorative use of the word 'deny' by religionists is obviously an attempt to shift their burden of proof on to atheists. The implication always is that there is consensus and obvious proof of their, the theist position, but the heterodox atheists are 'denying the obvious' - so therefore, "What evidence, facts, proof, does the ATHEIST have to prove atheism is true, huh?" is generally their next burden-of-proof-shifting follow-up question.

Homey don't play that.

No, I don't use the word 'deny' in that sense. This does not escape the fact atheism is a denial God or gods exist.

Peace,
SOTC

SignOfTheCross · 07-21-2003, 09:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Autonemesis
News flash: atheists are not christians. Therefore what "Christianity concerns itself with" is quite beside the point.

It seems that the removal of the word "denial" from the definition of atheism is to remove themselves from guilt should, speaking hypothetically, the Christian God exist. I may be wrong on this matter, other factors may have determined the change, of which have been addressed in this post.

Quote:

"Remove yourself from guilt"? Guilt for what? You assume the atheist is secretly fearful of damnation. That's quite absurd, since the atheist believes in no damner.

You assume I assume what you said I assume, of which I do not assume.

Peace,
SOTC

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-21-2003, 05:41 PM	#25
JGL53 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Outer Mongolia Posts: 4,091	So our choices are: 1. ignorance, i.e, belief that god's existence is proven by logically flawed arguments like first cause, design, fine-tuned, moral, etc. 2. hallucination, i.e., seeing, hearing, conversing with, etc. a magical being, or having a 'mystical feeling' of some imagined magical presence. 3. belief that something is existent or truth simply and unapologetically because you wish or want it to be true, like a child who wishes so very much for a pony for christmas, he convinces himself he will get the pony, if only he follows santa's rules and wishes very, very hard - a sort of create your own reality phenomenon. Wow - atheism is looking more and more like a brilliant diamond in a mountain of putrid buzzard manure.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.