emilynghiem
Constitutionalist / Universalist
Who and what are you addressing here?You can sort and stack all you want, but If you have seen no reason to believe there is a god, then you are an atheist. Go insulting atheists, or demanding our laws become Christian compliant will turn an atheist into an antitheist pretty quick. Believe what you want. If your religion gives you comfort, then good for you, bot you gota know that when you go making claims about your religion on a public forum, people will ask hard questions, and ridicule absurd answers.Hi BULLDOGAgain, you show you don't even understand what makes an atheist. Very few are on a mission to prove there is no god. I have never once said there is no god. I have only said I have never seen any reason to believe a god exists. I would personally be thrilled if credible evidence of a god were produced. Don't expect me not to laugh and ridicule those who insist their feelings are proof of god.^ Death Angel makes a fair point hereThe fact is, SOMEONE is right.Believe what you want, but if you start claiming your god is the only source of all good things, it gets kinda insulting to those that don't share your devotion
Atheists do EXACTLY the same thing, and you dont understand why WE would be insulted
It can be just as insulting and challenging when Atheists make personal remarks against Christian Theists for their beliefs
The difference is:
Christians are expected to practice forgiveness, so when that fails, they could be attacked as hypocrites or encouraged to forgive. Christians should help each other to forgive. But atheists seeking to exploit this flaw will goad and bait them to try proving them failures.
Atheists are expected to prove their positions on facts not faith.
That argument goes equally in circles since neither existence or nonexistence of God can be provem or disproven.
So when Atheists fail at this, the same thing happens: either attack them and use this flaw to personally bait and troll.
Or try to be objective and help reason with this process: if both sides are faithbased, then why not focus on what will help reach agreement on the meanings or applications to real life that we agree are mutually beneficial and serve the best purpose?
If we agree the purpose of "seeking the Kingdom of God" means universal truth, let's seek that together, Atheist or Christian, despite our different language.
If we agree the meaning and message of Christ Jesus is Restorative Justice, let's look at the difference this approach makes by seeking Justice and Peace by MUTUAL Forgiveness and Correction by inclusion, instead of Judgment and Punishment for rejection.
BULLDOG if you would respond better by approaching this through Buddhist ethics, I believe a combination of that helps to check against abuses with Constitutional and Christian principles.
BlackSand I used to be a Moderator but had to stop due to juggling two jobs. I could go back and volunteer for the Religion and Ethics threads. Which looks like a 24/7 job in itself.
I may do better by staying as a regular member, and just mediating member to member to break up bullying fights.
Do we need a separate mediation ring to do that in? Or is it okay to do that in the middle of threads whenever a push comes to shove?
Is there a way to make a timeout rule or place, if two posters start butting heads personally, they go into timeout until they agree to stick to issues, or start a separate thread to work it out one on one before they post. If so I can volunteer to co-mediate with you to walk the two posters through a timeout like stopping a fight to make sure both are okay, and agree no more punching below the belt but what is your real issue, get it resolved, then you can go back in the ring.
Would it help to have a way to call Timeouts and walk the two headbutters through some understanding that will prevent that bullying in the future? Thanks!
I understand there is a mix of approaches or "denominations" of atheism. I find common differences such as:
1. NONtheism or secularist. Some believe in the same concepts that
God/Jesus stand for, such as truth or wisdom, justice, love, greatest good or ultimate benevolence for all humanity, creation/universe. But do not personify these as anthropomorphic figures or deities. Some do or do not equate their values with the same things Christians mean. But I use NONtheist to be Neutral, where it refers to secular terms for the same universal meanings.
2. Atheists can mean NOT believing there is a God/gods or believing there are NO such things as God/gods. Some people identify as Atheist but more agnostic. Some Atheists have no issues with Christians, others do. If they are not neutral as I use Nontheist for, then Atheist implies a bias against believing the neutral/secular terms are interchangeable with the Christian terms.
3. Anti-theists are opposed to Theists and Theism. This is like the politicized version of Atheism. Nontheism is the most neutral, where some people merely process ideas information and perceptions in the brain in secular terms.
From your response you seem to be neutral when people are neutral and openminded. But swing Atheist, not quite Antitheist as others can get, when people get religiously judgmental.
I think if you were not around jerks you would be nontheist and agnostic.
How have I said anything about attacking or insulting atheists?
Whatever you are responding to is the exact opposite of my beliefs and approach.
I believe whatever is universal truth and principles or process taught in Christianity (using religious symbols) can be translated or explained in secular terms where nontheists/atheists can agree on the same principles they already believe in (like truth and justice and respecting people equally).
What part of that excludes or insults atheists?
BULLDOG