• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Respecting Christians

Legend said:
There's a separate conversation for the omniscience issue, guys. A lot of points about the respect issue have been abandoned and the current discussion is completely unrelated to the OP.
Click to expand...
Agreed, but just felt it needed to be pointed out that there's always some wiggle room for those who wish to wiggle. It never satisfied me, which is why I'm an atheist, but there are those who cannot abide atheism who will avail themselves of any number of dodges to explain what cannot readily be done. Included among them I think, are some that allow a non-atheist to be relatively respectful to atheists, either by allowing that his beliefs are personal, his own, pehaps not even entirely willing, and the old standby that nothing is determined until the final bell - today's atheist still has a chance, the rules may change, etc. The option to damn another on a one-to-one basis is not always necessary for a person to hold to his faith while respecting others'.
 
tsig said:
You either lack basic knowledge of the subject or you're using questions to dodge making a reasoned response,
Click to expand...

Nope, false choice. I understand the subject fine and I have no reason to dodge anything.

My own personal religious beliefs are somewhat agnostic. I don't have any vested interest in making you or anyone else share my opinions. I happen to disagree with the premise that omniscience precluded free will, I think Calvinism as a whole is nothing more than an interesting thought-experiment, but I don't see any reason to take it seriously (except, of course, historically it was taken very seriously). With that in mind, I'm happy to discuss this disagreement with you, but only so far as it's fun. If you, on the other hand, want to make it personal and be insulting, then with all due respect (none) F-U, go away, don't waste my time and I won't waste yours.

tsig said:
if you don't know what omniscience is you really shouldn't be taking part in this discussion.

The answers to your questions are only a google away.
Click to expand...

:oldroll:

See if you can respond with less condescension, or not at all.
 
Rasmus said:
According ot the premise of the entire discussion that led to the claim

"free will is not compatible with omniscience."

You can have one, but not the other, at the same time.
Click to expand...

I'm moving my response over here, because it's the thread with the correct topic.
 
AvalonXQ said:
The Bible indicates that God chooses to limit His own knowledge, at least in some contexts. Particularly, Jesus didn't know everything while He was human.
Click to expand...

How do you know the state of knowledge in the mind of Jesus?

Hubris anyone?
 
Last edited:
Mycroft said:
Nope, false choice. I understand the subject fine and I have no reason to dodge anything.

My own personal religious beliefs are somewhat agnostic. I don't have any vested interest in making you or anyone else share my opinions. I happen to disagree with the premise that omniscience precluded free will, I think Calvinism as a whole is nothing more than an interesting thought-experiment, but I don't see any reason to take it seriously (except, of course, historically it was taken very seriously). With that in mind, I'm happy to discuss this disagreement with you, but only so far as it's fun. If you, on the other hand, want to make it personal and be insulting, then with all due respect (none) F-U, go away, don't waste my time and I won't waste yours.

:oldroll:

See if you can respond with less condescension, or not at all.
Click to expand...

If you understood the subject then why did you ask the questions if not to dodge which you have done again.


Obviously one of us wants to make it personal.
 
Guys seriously? Can we please move this to the thread already started about this topic?

Back on topic one thing I've learned is that it is for all practical purposes impossible for an outspoken atheist to not be seen as rude. Our very existence offends some people.

1. I have literally been told point blank that simply saying "There is no God" is rude.
2. Many Christians have been in power, been kowtowed to, been the main social and political influence in many places for so long that being expected to play on the same field as everyone else feels like being oppressed. They've been the default for so long the don't remember what it's like the be in an open forum of intellectual ideas and every opposite idea feels like an attack.
3. Many Christians want their position to hold a place of special pleading where standards of evidence are different for them. They simply don't think their opinions about how the universe works need to be backed up with evidence or even logic simply because they say so.
 
JoeBentley said:
Back on topic one thing I've learned is that it is for all practical purposes impossible for an outspoken atheist to not be seen as rude. Our very existence offends some people.
Click to expand...

This isn't specific to atheism; generally an outspoken opponent of a widely held opinion will be seen as rude.

When I was attending university in California, my very presence offended some of the people there. Any time I shared my views, I was by definition being [insert negative social behavior here] -- because my views brought into question what everyone else understood was the "right" thing to think. Especially vexing on a university campus, IMO.

And, interestingly enough, the OP position is using pretty much this same attitude -- being offended by what he assumes we must be thinking about him, rather than by anything we say or do to him.

ETA: Fortunately, not everyone is this way. For every 20 people, only about 15 would be this way, 4 would reasonably want to engage or at least associate, and 1 would quietly or secretly agree.
 
Last edited:
Legend said:
He wanted to quickly move on from the discussion, so I asked him to think about what I'd said. "I can't," he said.
Click to expand...
When I lose respect for a Christian, a moment like this is what often does it for me. I don't really mind the hellfire - it's not like it's real, after all - but deliberate disengagement rustles my jimmies. I try to take pains to ensure I understand the other's view in arguments I engage in. It's just the polite thing to do. So when they demonstrate that they are unwilling to do the same in return, usually far into the conversation, well, I do not like that one bit. I can't respect someone who's interested in discussion only while it's going their way, and retreats into ignorance at the first sign of having to reexamine their beliefs.

This isn't a property unique to Christians, of course, but in that religion it's explicitly encapsulated as "faith," so it comes up a lot.
 
Beelzebuddy said:
When I lose respect for a Christian, a moment like this is what often does it for me. I don't really mind the hellfire - it's not like it's real, after all - but deliberate disengagement rustles my jimmies.
Click to expand...

I used to have a perspective like that, but it's changed a lot over the years.

My viewpoint used to be to always stand there, to engage until every last word had been said, to never give up or go away until we'd either come to blows or reached a complete impasse with nothing else possible to say. I argued hard.

... and I never came away feeling good about it. It never painted anyone involved in the discussion in a good light; the last two-thirds of the discussion always and only seemed to make things worse. I realized that I got to the point where my point was understood as well enough as it was going to, and I had a good grasp of her position, too, and now it was just a matter of picking at armor or trying to scrabble for the moral high ground.

So I started nodding more, and smiling and shaking hands, and shrugging and disengaging once I'd had a chance to restate the other person's position, and gotten a reference to additional reading if possible. Three-hour debates turned into good, intense, half-hour discussions that ended in friendships rather than prying off bloody hooks sunk into each other. And the ones that didn't, I expended significantly less pain and energy beating my head against the wall than I had before.

The most important lesson I learned from this was also the most difficult to learn --always be ready to walk away.

Disengage from the uncivil quickly. Never insist on a response when you can allow a point of value. Never be afraid to let statements stand where they are. Gauge the environment of a conversation, and don't let yourself get drawn in where the attitudes are not conducive to learning. And when you're tired, shake hands and move on.

It's amazing how much more positive interactions are most places with these rules. I'd highly recommend them. Of course, on the internet, some people will always be entitled to your responses. Remember that they're not, that your time is your own, and when things get hostile, let them continue without you.
 
Last edited:
I don't respect Christians. I find many to be small minded bigots. Ditto many other groups. I find it dangerous to generalize about any group: however in my experience Christians have certainly proven themselves to be unworthy of respect on many occasions, but still "all X are Z" is something I reserve for mathematics.

I'm incredibly dubious about "respect" generally. What do we mean by "respecting" someone? ("Respect" is something very gangsta, very "your elders know better", very difficult for me to grasp as a concept)

I have an immense fondness for a few posters here: but I probably disagree vehemently with them on certain issues. I "respect" their informed opinions, meaning I find them well reasoned and intelligent, even if I disagree with their conclusions - but I can not say I blanket "respect" them.

All humans are inherently valuable as far as I'm concerned, regardless of gender, race, creed, politics or whatever. But if you are a wrong headed vile little scum bucket, I'll say so. My "respect" for humans does not extend to not critiquing their position, and I expect others to tear in to my beliefs, but hopefully do so in a witty, intelligent and friendly manner. If you want to respect my arguments on some matter, I'll be pleased - but I won't mistake it for respect for the bloke typing these words: because I'm not worthy of this respect thing, if it is some kind of unconditional positive regard. I'm as much a scuzzbucket, just as wrong headed and just as annoying as the next person.

Some Christians may aspire to be saints, but all are sinners by their own creeds. I happen to be one, but I'm not sure I'm overly fond of my fellow believers a lot of the time :D

cj x
 
tsig said:
If you understood the subject then why did you ask the questions if not to dodge which you have done again.


Obviously one of us wants to make it personal.
Click to expand...

Because often in discussing an issue it's helpful to define your terms. I don't ask the question because I don't know the answer, I ask to see if the answer you have is the same as the answer I have.

tsig said:
God deliberately blinding himself to certain facts shouldn't be a surprise since gods reflect their believers.
Click to expand...

Zing!

You got him there! I bet he felt the sting.
 
Last edited:
AvalonXQ said:
I used to have a perspective like that, but it's changed a lot over the years.

My viewpoint used to be to always stand there, to engage until every last word had been said, to never give up or go away until we'd either come to blows or reached a complete impasse with nothing else possible to say. I argued hard.
Click to expand...
That's not the perspective I'm describing at all. It has nothing to do with how much of a stubborn jackass you choose to be, and everything to do with how important understanding the other party is. Getting what you think is a good grasp of their thought process is not where the conversation should end. It's where it should start.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom