The Hypocrisy surrounding Christianity and Atheism

a reply to: CirqueDeTruth

The OP IMHO started this thread and several others to troll those who agree with the theory of evolution. He also has been the first to throw out ad hominin attacks at people in this and other threads. SO one has to to ask, what level of civility does one give somone who insults you.

I'm a pagan, I don't follow the rede, the three fold law, or similar (I am not wiccan, or eclectic) . I do follow the idea of *ghosti (being a good guest, and host depending on roll) and enech and clu. If someone attacks me (the OP has not) I will retaliate in kind. Its my moral high ground. Morals and ethics are created in ones society, and are not absolute. Thus many creationists and hard line atheists feel morally obliged to act in the way that you have described.

Perhaps that last bit shows you why people are doing this?

a reply to: Noinden

I'm pagan too, but I don't see how that pertains to what is being discussed here.

As to the OP's motivations as to why he created the thread. I'd dare to suspect, the atheism vs. creationism debate has him conflicted. Instead of pouncing on him for daring to create threads that illustrate that fact, I'll read his opening post and civilly respond. I shall assume that the debate in question, he's brought forth... is an important discussion he wishes to have. Rather than assume he's trolling and attacking atheists personally. The post wasn't personal toward anyone, and that his state of mind personally offends anyone, is a reflection on them - NOT the OP. Maybe something in the discussion will give him food for thought that will result in growth. A change in the way he perceives Atheists and Atheism.

However I don't see growth, forthcoming from a thread, where the majority of posters are set against him - simply because he's a Christian Creationist who is wrestling with the idea of Atheism. Let the OP work it out, with thoughtful debate that challenges his own preset bias. That's how we all over come our own hypocrisies, break down walls, and create a common ground where change can flourish.

I also tend to champion the underdog in any fight. It's in my nature.

CdT

a reply to: WakeUpBeer

No I haven't read the other thread. It has no baring on this new one. Live and learn, and begin again. The feeling I get, is this poster is trying to be run off and shut up through bully tactics.

Has he acted or continued to act the same in this thread as he did the other? Or perhaps did he takes his lumps, learn his lesson, and now is trying again in a new thread?

We wouldn't know, would we? Because within the first 5 posts of this NEW thread, he was pounced on because of the previous thread....and an obvious derailing and shut down of discussion was underway.

No chance for him to auto-correct, or learn from the past experience, because everyone else is dragging it in from the previous thread.

CdT

a reply to: CirqueDeTruth

Its perenant in that neither of us are Christians. It should be a debate about belief and non belief. However its become an us vs them Christian (and a very specific form of Christianity at that) vs Scientists (who are being used as a proxy for atheists). I'm also a Scientist by Training (PhD Chemistry, postgrad training in Genomics) and profession (Pharmaceuticals). Atheism is not actually unique to science, and there are IDers who are non theistic (though they substitute "God" and "Deity" for "Advanced Alien civilizations").

The OP has been on an anti evolution rampage this last little while. If you look at threads I've replied in, there are about three or four on evolution and related subjects. TWO are from the OP. They all follow the same pattern, with the OP claiming to "bow out" due to "the thread being ruined". Ruined seems to equate to his (I am guessing gender and I may be wrong) evidence being disproved. As one of the people doing this, I'm not an Atheist picking on creationism.

I see zero "wrestling" with the idea. What I see is an attempt to "defend the faith". I'm a cynic (in the non classical Greek and Roman sense) so I'd love to be proven wrong. But there is a a great deal of closed minded ignorance from that poster.

I'd also like to point out the opening post was a pointed and unfriendly attack on atheism. That is not a good gambit for "debate" or "open discourse". It got my back up, and I am not an atheist.

a reply to: CirqueDeTruth

To be fair, that thread DOES have a bearing on this one (if its the one I think it is), it grew from this one.

a reply to: Noinden

There is a lot of defending going on in this thread. The OP has issues with atheism. I would to, in the reception he's received in trying to illustrate why he has problems with atheism and it's campaign against creationism. Something he obviously believes in. Creationism.

Goddess forbid anyone's feelings get slightly due to differing ideologies. It's okay to throw the Christian Creationist under the bus, because he's deluded and wrong, and evolution and those that adhere to it are right. Right?

No it's not. Because the tactics do nothing but further create angst and separation for the OP who obviously would like to discuss these topics. Hence, the continued creation of multiple threads. Mayhap the next thread he creates on this topic, he will receive a more fair and civil discussion from all parties involved, and not feel so overwhelmed and ousted by the membership here, that he sticks around, sticks to his guns, and gets out his or her views on the matter.

CdT

a reply to: CirqueDeTruth

I have no issues with the OP's belief and opinion to the validity of the theory of evolution. What I do have an issue with is the misconstruing of verifiable facts, and that a video garnered from some where in youtube, is credible evidence. I could post the latest Epic Rap Battles of History and show that Romeo and Juliet have met and argued with Bonnie and Clyde. Or I could use critical thinking and know that "just because it is online/had been written" it does not pass the test for sensibility.

You and I are going to have to agree too disagree over that other thread. It was hived off from this one (and the videos posted were posted here too) and thus is irrevocably lined to this thread in my mindscape. I've not brought up the other recent thread from the OP over Apple being the tool of Satan/the illuminati. As that is clearly not part of this debate. But a thought started here, to try and be supporting evidence for the opening argument, then moved else where. IS part of the argument.

You are also predisposing that the OP is open to the otherside of the argument here. I as a skeptic (look a pagan scientist skeptic, we exist) actually am open to a well reasoned argument. But thus far the argument has been "look at this video, and no original thoughts of my own, thats the proof".

a reply to: CirqueDeTruth

The OP, in the thread previous to this one (The Biggest Lie) stated that evolution was false, and that he had no interest in understanding the subject. He made it evident that his opinion was it was all crap and any scientific evidence in support of evolution was fraudulent. For those reasons he did not need to discuss or debate it. He then proceeded to bring Satanic deception into the mix. Somebody accused him of having a lack of integrity which he denied and asked to be shown how that could be the case. I explained to him why I personally thought he had a lack of integrity on the issue. He then abandoned that thread and made this one at some point after.

My personal issue with the OP isn't the fact that he is a Christian and a creationist. My issue with the OP is that he claims to have an open mind and a discussion, and asks readers for the same. But instead of practicing what he preaches he does the exact opposite. He refuses to even look at material that doesn't already agree with him and starts proselytizing instead. These are the reasons (at least some) his threads drift and get abandoned.

I'm not defending those posters who throw out their one liners scoffing him for his beliefs. And perhaps I shouldn't have let my own frustration encourage me to be so aggressive in this thread. It's just painful when you know these threads aren't about having an open discussion, unless you already agree with him.

IMHO.

Despite all this I do not think the OP is a complete moron. I agree with you that he may be struggling with his faith. Or perhaps is just very passionate about it and desperate to share the good news. And warn people of damnation. I just wish the zeal wouldn't blind him from trying to understand some of the things he makes various claims about (e.g. evolution having zero scientific grounding).

a reply to: WakeUpBeer and Noinden

That's fair enough. It's just frustrating to read the opening post of a thread, watch the video, and then commence to read the replies only to find there is a campaign against this poster underway. It just seems like ATS is becoming such an unforgiving place, that makes it impossible to enjoy reading another persons point of view. Even if I don't agree with it. Or think it's whack a doodle. Sometimes, those are the most entertaining threads to read. Suspend disbelief, and get in the mind of another point of view.

It's a shame to learn he's not interested in the debate he's so obviously at odds with. Why ask the questions if your not interested in the discourse over them?

CdT

a reply to: CirqueDeTruth

Sometimes I can be too harsh with the way I talk, even if it is not my intention.

However in this thread I should have acted better. It was my intention to be antagonistic and it wasn't done in any constructive way.

To the OP: I apologize for the brash way I responded to you in this thread. Whatever my opinions may be in regards to you or your beliefs it was not right for me to just jump on you in the manner that I did. It certainly isn't conducive to a constructive thread.

originally posted by: woodwardjnr
a reply to: TechUnique
So you have more faith in science than God when it comes to curing physical ailments. A man of science is more effective than an all loving all powerful God.

God made the man of science who cares about other men.

You wouldn't be here if it wasn't for god. What you just said literally makes no sense.

originally posted by: WakeUpBeer
a reply to: CirqueDeTruth

Sometimes I can be too harsh with the way I talk, even if it is not my intention.

However in this thread I should have acted better. It was my intention to be antagonistic and it wasn't done in any constructive way.

To the OP: I apologize for the brash way I responded to you in this thread. Whatever my opinions may be in regards to you or your beliefs it was not right for me to just jump on you in the manner that I did. It certainly isn't conducive to a constructive thread.

Not being funny but you've already done it now. Fortunately I'm not fussed just think about how you deal with people in the future. It says something big when all the people attacking me for my faith are showing massive signs of self doubt.

If an impartial and agnostic psychologist was to sift through my last few threads I'm sure he would have a lot more to say about some of you guys than me.

originally posted by: CirqueDeTruth
a reply to: Noinden

I'm pagan too, but I don't see how that pertains to what is being discussed here.

As to the OP's motivations as to why he created the thread. I'd dare to suspect, the atheism vs. creationism debate has him conflicted. Instead of pouncing on him for daring to create threads that illustrate that fact, I'll read his opening post and civilly respond. I shall assume that the debate in question, he's brought forth... is an important discussion he wishes to have. Rather than assume he's trolling and attacking atheists personally. The post wasn't personal toward anyone, and that his state of mind personally offends anyone, is a reflection on them - NOT the OP. Maybe something in the discussion will give him food for thought that will result in growth. A change in the way he perceives Atheists and Atheism.

However I don't see growth, forthcoming from a thread, where the majority of posters are set against him - simply because he's a Christian Creationist who is wrestling with the idea of Atheism. Let the OP work it out, with thoughtful debate that challenges his own preset bias. That's how we all over come our own hypocrisies, break down walls, and create a common ground where change can flourish.

I also tend to champion the underdog in any fight. It's in my nature.

CdT

Look, I appreciate that you're trying to be nice.

Save it.

a reply to: CirqueDeTruth

he's not a troll, because he believes in creation.

he's a troll, because he starts threads with inflammatory, and/or provocative, and/or sensational, and/or hyperbolic, and/or dishonest titles....he then proceeds to present as his "proof" his own OPINION, followed by a bunch of rubbish youtube videos....then when the first disagreements come in, he calls them all sheep and brainwashed...

and then when people pick apart the videos, and demonstrate how they're either wrong, logically faulty, straight up lies, or all three, he either continues telling people they're brainwashed, or he cops out, says the videos weren't his, and abandons the thread, only to start another one, on the same goddamn subject, in another section of the forum....

he's not interested in having an actual conversation, or debate....so yeah, that's why he's a troll...

a reply to: TechUnique

I just want to clarify some things real quick.

1. I never attacked you because of your faith. I respect your right to believe whatever the hell you want. Believe it or not I used to be a Christian myself. Most of my family are Christians. Your impression is that I have an issue with you because you're religious. That is absolutely not the case. I have "attacked" you for reasons which have already been brought up to you by me and various others ad nauseam. It's not my fault you take criticism so personally.

2. I'm not self doubting anything. I'm not sure where you got that impression.

3. As for the psychological comment don't even go there. I'm sure a psychologist would eat your last few threads up but lets not suggest turning their findings into a competition. I'm sure they'd have a lot to say but.. Yeah, just don't.

Any atheists please go to this thread and answer the questions posed. No videos, just a couple of questions from me. Once you've answered them and given me an adequate answer, feel free to continue bashing me.

If you can't answer those questions, I will ASSUME that you are incapable therefore you cannot tell me ANYTHING about the origins of mankind.

If that doesn't tickle your fancy and make you want to prove me wrong I don't know what will. Give the questions a chance and answer them properly please.

a reply to: TechUnique

In other words, if atheists or agnostics are unable to provide a solid airtight answer then you are automatically right. some broken logic you have there...

a reply to: TechUnique

Tsk tsk - bad form TechUnique. Your proving what everyone in this thread was trying to warn me of.

You failed to address my original post in your thread that answers the questions, from my perspective, that you posed. I was hoping for a response to it. I'm very interested in a response to it. Instead, you get your dander up. Why?

Was it because I was able to have a friendly argument with the same posters you seem not able to have a constructive argument with? Or was it because I assumed your conflicted over atheism?

CdT

a reply to: Noinden

"Belief" does not prove anything. Belief is an act of faith. Science however is following evidence, reproducible and verifiable evidence. QED "belief" should never be applied to science. On top of this, science should never be applied to faith. They deal in different things. As a scientist and a spiritual person in a non abrahamic faith, I have no problem with either of those ideas.

I suppose there are accidental discoveries in science but for the most part a scientist believes something and then pursues that belief. That is what I understand as theoretical science. No, theoretical science is not proof anymore than theology is proof but both may have evidence or as i understand it "belief". Naturally you will have some evidence as to what you should want to investigate and I believe that one shall have the faith that he or she will find their answer. Otherwise they would be like a dog chasing its tail. Being involved in science surprises me that you have no belief or faith in what you do. There are some that simply do a repetitive action without foresight of belief or faith but that is not the case with most science.

As far as faith is concerned you should realize that everyday that you exist you live by faith. You have absolutely nothing written in stone that you will even wake up in the morning much less that your car would start or that your water would be hot for a shower. Belief is applied to all factions of life even to the afterlife. Because a person is of any particular theology does not limit faith as a doorstop. Faith is an attribute of all fazes in life whether theoretical or theological.

The poster that posted our discussion was angry (fit to be tied so to speak) and had no call to be upset over another person's opinion. My opinion of course.

a reply to: Seede

You clearly have never taken a Philosophy of science paper, or hell read about it. Science is based upon verifiable data. Something does not earn the title of "theory" in science because someone "thinks it so". Nope it gets it frok repeatable and peer reviewed information. My PhD thesis was not just a book I published in a very short print run. It got put past a pannel of academics in my area of interest.

So no,m Science is not based upon faith. Perhaps some Descartes might help you?

As for the rest, yes many aspects of life are indeed faith based. I repeatedly point out I am a spiritual being. It however does not impact my ability to work as a scientist. You really do not want to take a pharmaceutical I have "faith" is correctly made do you? Because if you do it will remove the majority of my paperwork, and my daily routine. My plant guys will love you for that However I am pretty sure you would want more than faith in the quality and potency of what we make.