you want religion section back read this

shun the atheists...thats all...by shunning all atheist content they will go away...

it's now about belly buttons...i mean please i for the love of God ignore them

we all know dinosaurs exist, the fools tried to quote me as saying they don't exist.

shun the atheist..please...

 

Then perhaps you should use better grammer to more effecticely convey your arguements, eh?

No reason to get all butt hurt over your inability to write.

 

So how old is the earth, and how old does the Bible say the earth is? (This should be fun.)

In all fairness, the belly-button issue is a minor one, but does show how illogical religious people who think he had a belly button are. It also just gets them to do something they often don't do: THINK about the logistics of their fairy tale. They don't WANT to think about it, they just want to "believe". Thinking is darn hard.

 

Wait...did you think the religion forum was for the religious only? LOL!

 

That must be why you have such difficulty answering questions that I sometimes pose to you.... you find it difficult (darn hard) to think.

 

Again, my logic trumps your superstitious belief system, so I'll answer the question for you: I'm sure you're a decent person, but like most Christians, you illogically fear a talking dead guy, so you can't admit (since he's "watching you"!) that the book about him is wrong (it says the earth is 6000 to 10,000 years old) so you won't answer the question because you might burn in some made up "hell", or something....I personally don't understand fully why religious people are so reality-averse, but I'm trying to learn.

Don't you see, it's that fear that keeps you from dealing in this thing we modern Secular Humanists call "reality".

"Jesus" never refuted that the earth was that age, by the way. So my 12 year old niece is smarter than Jesus....some all-knowing "god" this "Jesus" is!

 

Your logic? Wow... the truth finally spoken... you are now admitting that you are a worshiper of 'self'. An ego maniac. Nuff said about you... and you admitted it when you claim 'logic' as your own. . . "my logic". BTW... your ego ridden logic just trumped yourself.

 

When the critic says there's no God he's basing this on his own insight, and unless he has insight into 100% of all knowledge he can never be sure he's right.

 

Your 'logic' seems to be based on presumption. You presume that I have some fear or fears. You are dead wrong. Therefore, your logic has once again trumped yourself.

 

Ok, let's try this: can you say that Jesus was probably not divine (you can't if the fear grips you), because he accepted slavery in the bible? After all, no intelligent moral teacher would accept slavery, and Jesus is claimed to be a moral person.

 

Where in the Bible does it say that Jesus accepted slavery. I don't want you private rendition of what the scripture says, I want to see just exactly where Jesus said " I accept slavery". Put up or shut up.

 

You are correct. AND if your "god" won't prove himself, they you will never have "100% knowledge" that your absentee invisible super friend is real, now will you? You'll always WONDER if he's just as real as the Lochness Monster, won't you, since there is just as much proof (or lack thereof) for the existence of Nessie as for the existence of the rape-approving (see the other thread) "god" of yours.

 

You don't have to say those exact words to approve it. First, let me ask: if he did, would you say that he was immoral, or do you believe that accepting slavery is moral?

 

My logic trumps your violent, gay-hating, dead, magical invisible friend (Jesus) any day.

 

We will leave the religion section when religious people stop going into science threads and claiming evolution is wrong because it's not in the Bible, Koran, etc.

 

I was actually thinking more along the lines of an atheist sub-forum. But whatever....I'll ignore myself.

 

Makes sense same for the god must exist crowed

 

Your ego mania proves nothing, but since you want to make such a positive claim, then show the proof of that claim. No proof, then you are the loser. Go home and cry to mommy now.

 

What do you mean by wanting the religion section back? As per the sticky thread at the top (http://www.politicalforum.com/relig...general-warning-about-religion-section.html);

 

That's the problem with so many religious people though. They believe that it's their right to not have their beliefs challenged even as they challenge the beliefs, etc of others.

 

There is a case to be made for taking back the religion section from the god exists/ doesn’t exist people to a what role should religion have in law and government and society focus

but since I’m hear to argue with the god must exist half of the former I would not want that

 

I'm thinking ignoring atheists altogether will be counter productive. Then again, I'm not completely sure what you mean by "shun".

Every post, atheistic, theistic or otherwise, should be measured on their own merits. Most of all, I think we'd benefit from being less off topic. Like this thread for instance. Almost right away in this thread, people then started arguing for or against the existence of a god, which really isn't what the thread is about. They could just as easily have thrown out the argument against the existence of a god and just argued that argued that if a post, atheistic other otherwise, is off topic, that should be ignored. After all, all off topic is wrong, not everything in atheistic posts is wrong, so why should the line be based on thought crime?

 

same of course would be true of the believers of any belief, even your own

some may believe they know the word of God, but truth be told, a God never told anyone that... men that lived a long time ago just said it was Gods word and some believed them, look at Scientology and you see how a religion is born

.

 

Firstly, it's nice to know that you're only interested in discussion with those of opposing viewpoints. Helps me understand your character.
Secondly, I doubt atheists will go away just because you throw your dummy out the pram, but by all means go ahead and try it.

Like you did? I mean, you didnt post in that thread did you? Oh wait.

Well... technically you DID say that. I know you were being sarcastic but that doesn't always come through via text.

 

Some of the atheist are hard headed and militant. They may be hoping to reach peoples rational side by attacking them with sarcasm. It doesn't work.

On the other hand many of the christians are also hard headed and militant, and they often seem to be hoping to reach peoples spiritual side by making rational arguments which are ultimately based on flawed logic. It doesn't work because spirituality in the end rest on faith, not logic.

The other problem with the christians is that they seem to assume that when there is some positive attribute of religion everyone who opposes religion also opposes that positive attribute. It can be seen as insulting when a christian assumes that all non christians are hedonistic, immoral and uncharitable.

What may be missing from most of these discussions is the reality of individualistic interpretation. In other words there are no absolute christians or absolute atheist, only individuals who respond to a need for spirituality in different ways.

I tend to agree with you that the hardcore atheist tend to be more personal in their attacks, and once they get started can really take over a thread, but you might do better to avoid logic or science arguments and try to focus on the positive side of your faith without drawing absolute conclusions about the person you are debating with.