Evidence for God from Science

Pierson5 wrote:DRDS and Reactionary contributed nothin to the discussion but hateful comments about the website and atheists in general. In the time I've been a member here, I have not once attacked a Christian for merely being a Christian, despite of conflicting views. All I'm asking is to be givin the same respect in return.

Hateful? I don't hate you, any website, or atheists in general. I don't know how you came to that conclusion, but apparently you like to play victim.

Regarding respect... It doesn't matter that you've never attacked me personally. That's not the only factor that determines how much I respect people - I would be foolish and naive if it was. The most important one for me is, how someone values other people. And that's something you shouldn't be too proud of. Do you need a reminder? From April 2012:

Pierson5 wrote:I won't dance around words here. Call it what you want. I'll agree, it's taking a life, and making it dead. We can call it murder. I think they have the right to do that. If another human is occupying their body, violating their bodily autonomy and they are saying "no," then they have that right. This goes back to my previous point about self defense.

Sorry, but I don't have much respect for people who consider unborn babies invaders who violate someone's territory. Not much at all. Now, you can say that I'm derailing the thread or trolling, but I had to get my point across. Your opinions affect the way people see you. And I'll openly admit that I'm not a fan of proponents of murder. And I didn't call you that way, you (obviously) declared yourself as such.

Still, that doesn't mean that I hate you, or that I'd want to insult you or do you any harm. I wrote my impressions from sites that claim to be objective and rational, yet are emotional, biased, and often spread hate. What's controversial about that?

bippy123 wrote:

Icthus wrote:Alright, Blippy, you win. I hadn't really heard of the distortion objections before, and to a Shroud laymen, they sounded pretty good. And yes, I'm well aware of some of the stuff on the Infidels site. At least I'm learning something in this topic, even if I have to make an ignorant fool of myself first.

Icthus, actually it is me who acted like an arrogant fool. Your truth seeking about the shroud actually made the case for authenticity of the shroud that much stronger
You have taught me alot my friend, and I hope I can apply it in my future responses .

Don't worry about it, Blippy. I can sympathize with the fact that debate can be frustrating, especially with those that aren't as informed as you are (often willfully uniformed). If you think you're capable of being arrogant, you should see some of the people I have to put up with at my university. At least you know what you're talking about, not like the scores of Christ-mythers, twenty-first century Gnostics, and Dawkins fans that have a tendency to hang around English Departments where I am. I know the feeling of having months of research carelessly handwaved by opponents who assume that all Christians are ignorant and incapable of producing good scholarship. The number of college educated people around here who think you can refute the extensive works of men like N.T. Wright, Bruce Metzger, Martin Hengel, etc by pointing to a claim from a non-expert in the field (like Dawkins or, lol, Thomas Paine) or a fringe scholar with no credibility is astounding, and it makes me want to through up my hands and give up (either that or bash them over the head with a multi-volume scholarly commentary). Of course, I never do (being timid).

I'm glad to see that you think you can learn from me, but I'd use a bit of discretion there. I strive to be polite at all times, which tends to help me get along with others, but it certainly has its drawbacks. After all, Jesus was hardly afraid to call people out or get in the debate and start swinging away with criticism because the truth needs to be told, and that can't always be done in a way that makes everyone feel good. Perhaps you could be a tad calmer at times, but if so, then I could stand to use a little of your fire myself. Balance is always good.

Anyway, it's always an interesting discussion.

Icthus wrote:

bippy123 wrote:

Icthus wrote:Alright, Blippy, you win. I hadn't really heard of the distortion objections before, and to a Shroud laymen, they sounded pretty good. And yes, I'm well aware of some of the stuff on the Infidels site. At least I'm learning something in this topic, even if I have to make an ignorant fool of myself first.

Icthus, actually it is me who acted like an arrogant fool. Your truth seeking about the shroud actually made the case for authenticity of the shroud that much stronger
You have taught me alot my friend, and I hope I can apply it in my future responses .

Don't worry about it, Blippy. I can sympathize with the fact that debate can be frustrating, especially with those that aren't as informed as you are (often willfully uniformed). If you think you're capable of being arrogant, you should see some of the people I have to put up with at my university. At least you know what you're talking about, not like the scores of Christ-mythers, twenty-first century Gnostics, and Dawkins fans that have a tendency to hang around English Departments where I am. I know the feeling of having months of research carelessly handwaved by opponents who assume that all Christians are ignorant and incapable of producing good scholarship. The number of college educated people around here who think you can refute the extensive works of men like N.T. Wright, Bruce Metzger, Martin Hengel, etc by pointing to a claim from a non-expert in the field (like Dawkins or, lol, Thomas Paine) or a fringe scholar with no credibility is astounding, and it makes me want to through up my hands and give up (either that or bash them over the head with a multi-volume scholarly commentary). Of course, I never do (being timid).

I'm glad to see that you think you can learn from me, but I'd use a bit of discretion there. I strive to be polite at all times, which tends to help me get along with others, but it certainly has its drawbacks. After all, Jesus was hardly afraid to call people out or get in the debate and start swinging away with criticism because the truth needs to be told, and that can't always be done in a way that makes everyone feel good. Perhaps you could be a tad calmer at times, but if so, then I could stand to use a little of your fire myself. Balance is always good.

Anyway, it's always an interesting discussion.

Thank you icthus for your kind words (not sure I deserve them but I really appreciate them.
Gosh, I guess when I was in college (1986 lol), I didnt see much of the new atheism in college as you are seeing now. I dont know how u can put up with it. I would have been pulling my hair out (singular hehe). Yea I could use a a bit of your calmness. I once saw someone ( semi friend I had just made online) deconverted by a bunch of bullies online and Imade a promise that I would be better informed when it comes to appologetics.

Im cool with balance I sure could use some

Yea the Christ mythers are something else, even the Jesus seminar people look sane in comparison to them lol.
Though I cant say that I met any modern day gnostics in person yet lol