Religion, Faith & Theology

reply to post by sk0rpi0n


The scientific method is the best path to truth we have.

Any time there is disagreement you need to find a good pathway to the truth. Unless you assume everyone is going to agree on what you hear from god and what god wants, you are bound to end up with a discussion where evidence and proof is needed.... EVEN WITHIN YOUR OWN CIRCLE.

If you dont care if what you believe is true or untrue then you really shouldnt even be in a discussion.

reply to post by Wertdagf

If you dont care if what you believe is true or untrue then you really shouldnt even be in a discussion.

Well, I firmly believe in the basic idea of God, which is why I post in the Religion section.

Its the non-believers dismissing the basic idea of God, with little more than one line posts.... who who shouldn't be participating in that section.

Not because I feel that way, but because of certain rules laid down in an announcement thread.

ALL MEMBERS READ - Moving Past Religion 101 and Staying on Topic

Venturing into this forum and participating in these discussions implies that you are interested in these topics.

We can't begin to truly discuss these topics if we're constantly arguing about if God is real or not.

Imagine discussing algebra while someone keeps interjecting that they still don’t believe in addition. The very reason that classes such as these have prerequisites is so new ground can be covered in the subject.

To sum things up. Let's stay on topic and allow discussions to take place without constant interference.

reply to post by sk0rpi0n


The problem with such a statement is that the majority of belief rely on faith. SO ANY disagreement within that circle of people automaticly self-destructs because they are all depending on faith and personal experience.

Once ATS's audience becomes wider in its religious beliefs the problem will become even more aparant as muslims, buddists, and hidus all discuss their individual beliefs that they hold on faith and personal experience.

So what are we gonna do? Have christian only threads? Have muslim only threads? Should atheist ask christians to stay out of science and technology? Should somone commenting on a thread about biology automaticly have to accept evolution?

Drawing lines in the sand like this and creating bubbles for people to sit in protected is the death knell of honest discussion. That announcement thread is embarassing for ATS as a whole.

But i promise ill stay out of this section of the boards from now on.. special pleading is now allowed.

reply to post by Wertdagf

Drawing lines in the sand like this and creating bubbles for people to sit in protected is the death knell of honest discussion. That announcement thread is embarassing for ATS as a whole.

I'm not drawing lines in the sand.
All I'm saying is that its counter productive to question the idea of God in a religious thread that is discussing religious concepts, such as the nature of God.... which is obviously directed towards other religious folks who already accept the existence of God.

The announcement thread is not embarrassing. It attempts to facilitate discussion of the threads subject as framed by the OP... as opposed to going over basic premises instead of the subject matter of the thread.

reply to post by Wertdagf


Also Richard Dawkins also seems to feel the same way, as far as interference in his field of interest is concerned. Heres an excerpt from a book to illustrate what I'm trying to say.

Imagine that you are a teacher of Roman history and the Latin language, anxious to impart your enthusiasm for the ancient world ...

That€™s a big undertaking and it takes time, concentration, dedication. Yet you find your precious time continually preyed upon, and your class'€™s attention distracted, by a baying pack of ignoramuses (as a Latin scholar you would know better than to say ignorami) who, with strong political and especially financial support, scurry about tirelessly attempting to persuade your unfortunate pupils that the Romans never existed. There never was a Roman Empire. The entire world came into existence only just beyond living memory...

Instead of devoting your full attention to the noble vocation of classical scholar and teacher, you are forced to divert your time and energy to a rearguard defence of the proposition that the Romans existed at all: a defence against an exhibition of ignorant prejudice that would make you weep if you weren'€™t too busy fighting it.

reply to post by sk0rpi0n


OK...a question.

I am Spiritual but I am not Religious. Still I believe that every person has a right to their own beliefs and I would never dream of forcing my beliefs upon another.

However...since this subject is labeled...Religion, Faith and Theology...that implies a very wide sector of Beliefs and the word Faith is not exclusive to belief in a GOD and even it's use in conjuction with Religion and Theology do not limit it's applied meaning or use in a persons Faith in what they believe.

Having said that I would suggest that your opening statement would apply to a greater extent if the topic was specific to exactly what it is you wish to talk about.

I would never interject on a Topic that had a title that was...What do you believe is the meaning of John 3:25?...in a manner where I was not debating the topic but attempting to argue against the existence of GOD.

But because your Topic is so sweeping in it's nature...I went to it under an idea that did not apply as far as what you desire.

You mentioned the UFO Topics and how you would'nt go there and argue about the existence of Aliens...still such debate is healthy for such or any topics as this debate allows for the topic to STAY HONEST.

If you have to go so far as make a statement at the beginning of your topic on how you want people to post and debate and outline what they can or cannot do...and I know the reason for this is to not have disruptions by those who's only goal is to disrupt people they don't agree with...still to do this is an injustice to your own Topic and the reson for this is...YOU WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO GET HONEST OPINIONS AND DEBATE when people feel they are being watched and controlled as far as what they can or cannot say.

I would rather have to listen to the occasional pain in the ass then to taint the topics replies with a sense that what people are talking about is not what they truly believe.

Split Infinity

Whenever I begin a thread I am aware that the number of readers who take me seriously are in the minority
and that it will inevitably attract trolls and detractors with their silly one-liners but it comes with the territory and anyone who is really interested is not going to be put off by something so childish. Its like when you are sitting on the veranda in the evening and a mozzi bites you interrupting your meditations you just slap it away and get back to it. One the other side I am guilty myself of the occasional impulsive reply that I instantly regret.

reply to post by SplitInfinity

You mentioned the UFO Topics and how you would'nt go there and argue about the existence of Aliens...still such debate is healthy for such or any topics as this debate allows for the topic to STAY HONEST.

I also said its one thing question the evidence or theorizing on as to what it actually was.

But to just walk into a brand new UFO thread and simply dismiss the entire UFO phenomena as nonsense is not only rude, but derails the thread into an argument that there IS something to the UFO phenomena.

Is that healthy debate?

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
Can you imagine a non-believer in UFO's going over to the UFO section and making posts in threads dismissing outright the UFO phenomena as a hoax and the people who believe as "delusional"?

There are persons that do this.

There are also persons that come into the UFO forum and post one liners that they believe, or that skeptics are stupid, or woe is us ... what is the point of posting a UFO video or picture if 'experts' just keep coming in and debunking them. My favorite is the person that comes into UFO threads and says ... This is actually a reptoid ship from Sirius B .... with no further explanation.

The same goes for all the one liner drive by opinions about how Atheists have no morality, how gay people don't deserve any rights, conservatives are insane, leftists and feminists are communists, the gun debate is designed to take our attention away from X or Y ... etc etc ... [insert agenda here stuff]

The issue isn't atheists trolling religion, it's people just not bothering to read a thread and then leaving whatever stub-like opinion they have lying around like garbage in the middle of it. (Same posters over and over usually)

I came to the conclusion a long time ago that ATS is ATS. A theology / signal processing / politics / sociology / astronomy / whatever your poison is forum is where a lot of the crazy in depth linear discussions go. ATS you're going to be challenged (and sometimes trolled) and the best thing you can do is just ignore it when they put no effort in. If they don't, why should you?

I have actually read some of your threads, and you ignore those elements quite well. Keep it up.

Sometimes I think ATS should just remove the 'recent posts' button so people actually have to actively go to a forum to post in it. Might stop the drunkards wandering into the wrong bar.

reply to post by sk0rpi0n


As I said it is healthy to have people replying to a topic that they do not believe or have some facts to present against it as this keeps false topics from constantly being posted.

I also stated that in order to preserve the integrity of a debate and ensure that the replies given by people are their honest beliefs...it is better to have to deal with a few pains in the ass...then to have to destroy ones own topic by getting replies from people that are not their true beliefs as they feel watched and monitored.

I understand what you desire but in doing what you did...you destroyed any possibility of being certain that peoples replies were honest and what they really believe.

Hopefully you are not the type of person to desire this.

Split Infinity

reply to post by Pinke


You have touched on a point. Most people would have no issue if a person was to reply to a UFO thread in a challege of disbelief and requesting the Topics writter to prove it.

The same thing should be but is not applied to a person who writes a topic about Religion and thus GOD and a person who replies with disbelief and asks for proof.

In both cases a topic is presented that cannot in any way be proved and carries a level of disbelief. Some here might say...well in the Religion, faith..etc..Topic we were to be discussing specific this or that as it pertains to a belief.

How is this any different from a peron who writes a topic that asks to discuss what people think about why an Alien Reptillian Race from a specific Planet prefers to abduct brunettes over blondes?

There really is no difference.

Split Infinity

reply to post by SplitInfinity

I also stated that in order to preserve the integrity of a debate and ensure that the replies given by people are their honest beliefs...it is better to have to deal with a few pains in the ass...then to have to destroy ones own topic by getting replies from people that are not their true beliefs as they feel watched and monitored.

Well, I don't think watching and monitoring would cause a non-believer to posting a false, but elaborate and well structured post... for the sake of having a say in a particular thread.

reply to post by sk0rpi0n


It is the threat of possible Watching and Monitering of a Topic that prevents the people you would want to comment and debate from doing so completely honestly. Just as in Physics...just the sheer act of OBSERVATION changes the outcome.

This is Psychology 101 and people will never act or talk naturally as they would if they were not told...even if what is said does not apply to them...that the topic is being monitored.

Also...I will give you the benefit of the doubt and hope you were not directing your reply directly at me. To do so would be...unwise.

Split Infinity

reply to post by Pinke

The issue isn't atheists trolling religion, it's people just not bothering to read a thread and then leaving whatever stub-like opinion they have lying around like garbage in the middle of it. (Same posters over and over usually)

Yes.
I am talking about one-liners dismissing the basic premise of God on threads that are about a very specific subject.

It would be like walking into a thread about, say a politicians statements on a certain issue, like say gun rights.... and saying "all politics is nonsense". Such a post addresses nothing mentioned in the OP... not the issue at hand, not the politicians statement or even the politician himself.