atheists

[Ichabod]

All I know is an atheist and Christian are black and white. An atheist by definition is one who claims God does not exist while a Christian says God does exist and his name is Jesus Christ. Their is no such thing as a Christian-atheist, they are polar opposites. So I don't understand why you are attempting to blur the two, if that is what you are attempting.

There are some who claim to be agnostic theists and some who claim to be agnostic atheists.
Agnosticism deals with knowledge while theism deals with belief. The two are not mutually
exclusive. Furthermore, if you actually claim to know God exists then what's the point of faith?
You don't need faith anymore when you know something is true.

 

[2Thewaters]

Athiests believe in God or they wouldn't be so angry.

 

[Ichabod]

Yes, Cycel, I took enough geology to know this, and lived in an area of igneous and metamorphic rocks for many years. In fact, I owned a silver mine which was a vein off a limestone replacement ore body with a huge lead zinc mine. And I never saw a fossil in those rocks. But strangely, that is what I was taught in college, along with carbon dating. As far as carbon dating, well, there is a lot of variation in the results with that.

Not everything that dies fossilizes and it's actually a very rare occurrence.
The sediment has to be just right in order for fossilization to occur. Also,
people actually have to dig and find these things which isn't easy to do.

As far as carbon dating goes it's not the only game in town. Scientists use
other methods to determine the age of fossils and rocks. They crosscheck
the results and that's how they come up with an approximate age. It's not
just one test it's many that agree with each other.

 

[Ichabod]

Athiests believe in God or they wouldn't be so angry.

Your sentence doesn't make sense. The Westboro Baptist Church
believes in God too and they are quite angry.

 

[Ichabod]

But here's the kicker. Why would atheists such as yourself, who claim to be intellectually honest, tell us to only listen to one side of the evolution argument? That doesn't seem like intellectual honesty.

What's the other side of the evolution argument? As far as I know in science
there is no doubt that evolution micro and macro has occurred. If you have
evidence against evolution please post it.

 

[Ichabod]

Avlon was banned? He always seemed so reasonable. I am almost afraid to ask. What was his offense?

I will very much miss his contributions.

Yes, it seems this site uses banning as a mode of censorship.

 

[Ichabod]

Several Christian scientists critiqued the book, and showed how poorly Dawkins understood even evolution.

Christians gave negative reviews to an atheist's book?



Just kidding!

 

[Kerry]

Christians gave negative reviews to an atheist's book?

View attachment 59508

Just kidding!

So you would give positive reviews to a christian book. Sorry try again.

 

[megaman125]

Yes, it seems this site uses banning as a mode of censorship.

Banning disruptive trolls isn't censorship, it's just getting rid of disruptive trolls.

 

[TheKringledOne]

So you would give positive reviews to a christian book. Sorry try again.

I have. I would also like to point out that I have seen many Christians give positive reviews of books on atheism. Just because someone doesn't agree with all of the ideas that are in the book doesn't mean that the book as a whole isn't well written and enjoyable to the person reading it.

 

[Ichabod]

Banning disruptive trolls isn't censorship, it's just getting rid of disruptive trolls.

Please point out where AvalonXQ was being a "disruptive troll".

 

[megaman125]

Please point out where AvalonXQ was being a "disruptive troll".

Go back through the topics and read his posts, I don't need to do that for you, I'm not required to do that for you, and I'm not going to do that for you. I already explained why (I think) the mods banned him. If you don't like my view, oh well for you.

 

[Ichabod]

Go back through the topics and read his posts, I don't need to do that for you, I'm not required to do that for you, and I'm not going to do that for you. I already explained why (I think) the mods banned him. If you don't like my view, oh well for you.

I did. I was wondering which posts you think are disruptive and likely from a troll.
I don't see any. Seems he was banned for having a different point of view.

 

[danschance]

Please point out where AvalonXQ was being a "disruptive troll".

7. Do not dispute the chat room moderators.The moderators are there to watch over the chat rooms, promote fellowship, and protect the chat rooms when necessary. Their job is stressful enough. Don't add to their stress by disputing their actions, especially if it involves someone else and not you. For example, if you see a moderator kick someone, and wonder why, don't worry about it. The moderator probably knows something you don't. Have some trust in the moderators, appreciate them, and respect their oversight of the chat rooms.
Also please don't be making posts in the forums about someone else's ban. It doesn't help!
And please understand that we don't have the time or energy to talk to a hundred different people (or even a dozen different people) about somebody else's ban. Leave it between that person and the moderator, please!

The mods have a hard job and I think they do a good job. Roughly 3 people get banned a day here for various reasons. At this point, if you all continue to discuss and argue about a ban, you can end up being banned for breaking the above rule. Once a person is banned, it is done. Discussing it further is counterproductive. Please change the subject.

 

[Cycel]

Discussing it further is counterproductive. Please change the subject.

I think it only comes up because Avlon was well liked. At least by some of us.

 

[Cycel]

Seems he was banned for having a different point of view.

I am sympathetic to your views, but I think it time we let this go or we will be joining him.

 

[danschance]

I think it only comes up because Avlon was well liked. At least by some of us.

I do understand that. I had a friend, a Christian even--get banned. It happens in an unexpected way and I know how that can feel. Even so, to continue to post about in a public thread, on and on, may invite the attention of the mods. So the matter should be done at this point.

Please PM a person if you want to continue that discussion in private.

 

[Cycel]

There are some who claim to be agnostic theists and some who claim to be agnostic atheists.
Agnosticism deals with knowledge while theism deals with belief. The two are not mutually
exclusive. Furthermore, if you actually claim to know God exists then what's the point of faith?
You don't need faith anymore when you know something is true.

Are you familiar with Dawkins seven point scale?

Dawkins, The God Delusion, p. 50

1. Strong theist. 100 per cent probability of God. In the words of C.G. Jung, ‘I do not believe, I know.’

2. Very high probability but short of 100 per cent. De facto theist. ‘I cannot know for certain, but I strongly believe in God and live my life on the assumption that he is there.’

3. Higher than 50 per cent but not very high. Technically agnostic but leaning towards theism. ‘I am very uncertain, but I am inclined to believe in God.’

4. Exactly 50 per cent. Completely impartial agnostic. ‘God’s existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable.’

5. Lower than 50 per cent but not very low. Technically agnostic but leaning towards atheism. ‘I don’t know whether God exists but I’m inclined to be sceptical.’

6. Very low probability, but short of zero. De facto atheist. ‘I cannot know for certain but I think God is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there.’

7. Strong atheist. ‘I know there is no God, with the same conviction as Jung “knows” there is one.’

The strong theist (#1 on the scale) may be absolutely convinced God exists, but does that really mean he rules out faith? I don't think it does; and strictly speaking the agnostic thinks there is no evidence one way or the other and simply does not commit to an opinion.

 

[Cycel]

Even so, to continue to post about in a public thread, on and on, may invite the attention of the mods. So the matter should be done at this point.

Please PM a person if you want to continue that discussion in private.

You offer good advice. I am in agreement.

 

[danschance]

There are some who claim to be agnostic theists and some who claim to be agnostic atheists.
Agnosticism deals with knowledge while theism deals with belief. The two are not mutually
exclusive. Furthermore, if you actually claim to know God exists then what's the point of faith?
You don't need faith anymore when you know something is true.

You come to God via faith. Without faith no one can please God. After you have seen a miracle, you have knowledge that God exists. When you hear God speak to you you become very confident that God is real, even though I have never seen Him.

I have witnessed several miracles and God has spoken to me several times. When God does speak to me, it is always amazing and even jaw dropping moment. God still pushes me in faith, in other ways besides His existence. God leads and I follow and that takes faith. Several times God has spoken to me about a person I am speaking with and I have to step out in faith and believe that what I have heard is from God.

So faith can be expressed in many ways other than having faith that God exists. That is where the journey with God starts, not where it ends.