upallnite

Online, it is hard to tell a Poe from a Fundamentalist. Even if someone is a moderate Christian it would be hard to know if they are being truthful.

What is a litmus test for knowing who is a "real" Christian?

Please forgive me for commiting the "No True Scotsman" fallacy.

Some Christians say freewill is Gods way of testing us to see if we will do as he says.

Could I just flip the script on them and say freewill is Gods way of testing us to see if we will follow the evidence He created in nature?

This section is RELIGION and Spirituality.

My religion is Secular Humanism. I admit I am not prone to being spiritual. I also admit to being an Atheist. Even though atheism is not a religion Secular Humanism is. Other atheistic religions could be(but not limited to) Buddism, Naturalist, Scientologists, ect...

What grounds do people have for saying all Atheists do not belong in this section?

Or can they allow other theories? If so, what theories would could be accepted by an Atheist? And still be an Atheist of course.

Atheist please leave this to the Non-Atheists(double negative intended).

This question is in referance to.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/?qid=20060828235...

It would not be fair if the other Atheists answer this one. So please sit back and see it any of the theists know the answer.

As a sub question: If your answer is yes give an example of a religion you think an atheist could join.

If god can change the outcome of one event to make things better then he could do it again and again. If he did this everytime then evil would not exist.

Since we can all agree that evil exists, then we must conclude that either God does not answer prayers or he wants evil to exist.

What would be better, an evil God or a weak God?

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AiaaJ...

By the answers given to this story it appears that most people are proud of being portrayed this way.

Yet, when I read it all I saw was a Marine being portrayed as a neanderthal that could not controll his temper for 15 minutes. As a Marine I was offended. As an Atheist I was appaled.

Again, Is this how most other Marines think they should be portrayed?

We have found an abundance of transitional fossils. What this sort of questioning is implying is that we find every transitional fossil. I will gladly admit such a thing is impossible. It would be like digging up everyone of your ancestors to prove you are a descendent of a Frenchmen. I will give two examples of missing links. One is homo ergaster found to have lived 1.9 million years ago. Fossils and information can be seen here (http://www.mnh.si.edu/anthro/humanorigin... ). Another missing link is referred to as the Darwin Fish. Simply put this fossil shows the link between fish and tetrapods. The New York Times had an article about it found here (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/06/scienc... ).

Just another thing that needed to be cleared up.

When I was a section leader I had Jews, Mormans, Christians, Atheists all doing their jobs together like brothers. When I became the Plt Sgt I promoted my Christian layperson to my old position. He began removing everyone that was not Christian from his section. This put people in leadership positions that were not ready for the responsibility. I confronted him about it. He told me, "I don't belive they will have my back like my Christian brothers." I asked him about all the times he relied on me and even how I had saved his life. He answered with, "But your diffrent." He never gave a good reason why I am diffrent. I have put his section back how I think it should be.

What justification could he have for segrigating his section?

If he had a good argument I would let him run his section however he saw fit. Otherwise I see it as him setting himself up for failure.

We have found an abundance of transitional fossils. What this sort of questioning is implying is that we find every transitional fossil. I will gladly admit such a thing is impossible. It would be like digging up everyone of your ancestors to prove you are a descendent of a Frenchmen. I will give two examples of missing links. One is homo ergaster found to have lived 1.9 million years ago. Fossils and information can be seen here (http://www.mnh.si.edu/anthro/humanorigins/ha/erg.h... ). Another missing link is referred to as the Darwin Fish. Simply put this fossil shows the link between fish and tetrapods. The New York Times had an article about it found here (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/06/science/06fossil... ).

Just another thing that needed to be cleared up.

The separation of evolution into micro and macro first came from Iurii Filipchenko in 1927. This is an artificial distinction that stands no reason. You would not separate a small amount of water in a cup and a large amount of water in a cup, then say that there is no evidence that applying several small cups of water would become a large cup of water.

That is why in 1937 Theodosius Dobzhansky stated that the two should be considered the same. A similar term used today is speciation. How could we separate micro and macro evolution? They both happen for the same reasons and in the same manor. There is no magic line that separates the two. Macroevolution is simply a lot of microevolution happening until the species has changed. Speciation has been documented as happening in nature and laboratories.

( http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.htm... )

Just wanted to cleare this up also. Thanks everyone.

These seem to be an attempt to limit my inteligence with another persons ignorance.

As an example of this type of logical fallicy would one of these be a good example for a theist?

We couldn't posibly know is the same as saying we could not posibly belive.

OR

We are not ment to know is the same as saying we are not ment to belive.

Please note that no religion is implied in this qusestion. It is merely a request of what you think would be a good way to explain this type of logical fallicy to a theist.

you know nothing. And you wonder why non-theists think you are ignorant.

I can't seem to grasp the concept of not being brain-washed is equal to not knowing anything.

Can someone please explain the logic used to come to such a conclusion?

Science vs. Religion

Evolution vs Creationism or Intilgent Design

Does God Exist

Did Jesus Exist

In God We Trust on American Currency

Under God in the pledge

I would also be willing to take on a debate of your choosing if I am given time to prepare.

The debate would have to be via e-mail. It is not about changing minds, rather the exchange of information is what is gained.

I have debated several theists from this site and I am ready for another challange.

The debate will be simi-formal. We will agree on the subject and rules before we start. If you would like we can also decide on a moderator to make sure neither of us break the rules.

Any takers ready for a civil debate with a non-theist?

Or is it that we are only answering the easy questions tonight?

Referance:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AiCvw...

Theologians

John Bowden (once manager of the Student Christian Movement Press) said in 1993, "[There] are virtually no new substantial and intellectually attractive statements of traditional Christian belief which counter successfully the now well-established criticisms of it."

Richard Holloway(British former churchman) wrote in 2000, “God no longer seems to provide the kind of cohesion we need, because the systems that claimed divine authorization made some claims that we have subsequently repudiated for good reason."

If you refuse a religion/deity/view for a reason, then why don't you apply that same reasoning to your religion/diety/view.

I see religious people amongst eachother everynow and then and have to wonder why don't they ask theirself the same questions they were asking the person of the other religion?

Almost Atheist= Denies the existence of all gods except one.

Ignorant Atheist= Never considered the existence of any god/s but denies their existence.

Weak Atheist= Denies the existence of any god due to lack of evidence.

Strong Atheist= Denies the existence of any god due to confirmed empirical evidence.

I am a Strong Atheist. But, I prefer to call myself a Freethinker or Secular Humanist.

It is the funniest thing I have read in weeks!!!

Philosophy is like being in a dark room and looking for a black cat.

Metaphysics is like being in a dark room and looking for a black cat that isn't there.

Theology is like being in a dark room and looking for a black cat that isn't there and shouting “I found it!”