Atheist Delusion

Originally posted by divegeester
I also see him saying that he cannot be open (minded) to something that is implausible to him, i.e. which he does not believe. But - he expects you to be open-minded about things which are to you implausible. So hypocrisy to start with.

Hypocrisy, maybe. I think I am just being trolled, actually. "Hypocrisy" is just the gimmick, that's all. It's the same old same old from him. 😉

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
I have spoken a number of times of an eternal universe. Can you explain why this is any more unlikely than an eternal creator? (If God himself is uncreated, why couldn't the same be true for the universe?)

Sure, eternal time would wear down everything. An eternal God doesn't wear down.

We date the universe because we believe it has a beginning, you want to suggest that all
of those dating methods are in error? The fact that people disagree on what the age is,
still shows that none believe it is eternal regardless of what date we apply to it.

Originally posted by FMF
Hypocrisy, maybe. I think I am just being trolled, actually. "Hypocrisy" is just the gimmick, that's all. It's the same old same old from him. 😉

I have yet to see FMJ enter a discussion with an atheist and not attempt to troll. Actually I rather suspect that the whole thread was an exercise in trolling. Do you think josephw really think all atheists are mentally ill?

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
I rather suspect that the whole thread was an exercise in trolling. Do you think josephw really think all atheists are mentally ill?

JS357 called it - as he often does - midway down page 3. As for what josephw really thinks, not sure, but as a propagator of ideas, he so often seems content with simply channelling Dasa (a term/observation I picked up from JS357).

Originally posted by FMF
I am open minded because I am willing to entertain even ideas that I find implausible. You are not, by your own admission.

In other words you are open to all possibilities but you cannot commit to any of them?

Originally posted by divegeester
In any argument - the lack of a explanation which is plausible to you is not a green-light to declare as truth, an explanation which is equally implausible to someone else

So if you are convinced that Christianity is true, do you have no right to declare it's truth to someone who is not convinced of its truth?

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
In other words you are open to all possibilities but you cannot commit to any of them?

Why should I "commit" to any one of them when I simply do not know the answer, especially when I have no reason to believe there are any consequences of me committing or not committing?

Originally posted by divegeester
On the other hand...I wouldn't say you were blinded by sin but you very well may be mentally disturbed.

Once again radiating the love of Christ as only you know how. 😉

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
So if you are convinced that Christianity is true, do you have no right to declare it's truth to someone who is not convinced of its truth?

I think the intellectual/interpersonal problem that people like you and josephw have is framing beliefs that are different from yours as being the result of dishonesty on the part of people who hold them. It's just a gimmick.

Originally posted by FMF
Why should I "commit" to any one of them when I simply do not know the answer, especially when I have no reason to believe there are any consequences of me committing or not committing?

Obviously claiming ignorance is the easy way out, that way you don't have to commit to anything.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
Once again radiating the love of Christ as only you know how. 😉

This is one of your 3 or 4 go-to trolling punchlines, I've noticed.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
Obviously claiming ignorance is the easy way out, that way you don't have to commit to anything.

I think me admitting I do not know on this matter is a product of my honesty while 'claiming certainty' in order to "commit" would be a dishonest thing for me to do.

Originally posted by divegeester
So you are admitting that you are closed-minded and he is open-minded?

It's a matter of perspective. You may view it as "open-mindedness" whereas I may view it as a lack of conviction to stand for what you believe.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
So if you are convinced that Christianity is true, do you have no right to declare it's truth to someone who is not convinced of its truth?

Of course, with humility and recognising that the other person's POV is equally valid to them. Evidentially you are completely lacking in this, if you like, intellectual empathy.

Originally posted by Fetchmyjunk
It's a matter of perspective. You may view it as "open-mindedness" whereas I may view it as a lack of conviction to stand for what you believe.

I have enough conviction to "stand" here for what I believe which is that nobody knows the answers to the questions we are discussing. Your "conviction" does not change this.