Why are we debating?

[trillian]

I just wanted to know why people come onto these forums and I'm sure many can agree that this is a pretty important question. I would encourage EVERYBODY to reply to this and as always, please think your answers through before posting. Feel free to debate about it but I would encourage people to refrain from outright criticising others' posts as I am fully aware how out of hand this can get.

I'll start off.
I was a former atheist and now I'm a Christian. I come to these forums to spread the Good News and to let people to know what I know about Jesus Christ and the truly spectacular implications this has on their lives.


trillian

[trillian]

That makes sense to me Mack.
This Forum is intersting as it covers many topics.
I enjoy it because we can share books and ideas as well as hone our thoughts.
It does seem an odd place to proselytize.

I agree that the Forum is extremely interesting - perhaps it is an odd place to proselytize but then the converse is also true - those who are trying to seek God.

I come to these forums to spread the Good News and to let people to know what I know about Jesus Christ and the truly spectacular implications this has on their lives.

It seems the "good news" has been spread. Many Atheists here know more about Jesus then the average Christian. It seems the best you could do is present what you "truly" think "the spectacular implications" this has on your life.

You are correct that the Good news has been spread - atheists already know about it - although at the same time atheists do not know enough. If atheists did know enough there would be no point to deny the existence of God since as though you will realise the concept of faith and the issue of choice is at the crux of the issue. I've debated the God issue as an atheist for long enough to know this.
Choice is relative for everyone and in the sense it is inherently "invincible" in any argument. And Faith by definition cannot be tested in any scientific or material sense. When you reach this point there is actually no point to continue to debate other than using convincing skills - which like you said, I only have the potential to express my views on these forums- which is exactly what I intend to do/am doing.

[Cathar1950]

You are correct that the Good news has been spread - atheists already know about it - although at the same time atheists do not know enough. If atheists did know enough there would be no point to deny the existence of God since as though you will realise the concept of faith and the issue of choice is at the crux of the issue. I've debated the God issue as an atheist for long enough to know this.

With out getting into what the “good news” is and how faith and choice are tied to knowledge
You make a confusing case.
I seems that you equate “good news” as knowledge that an atheist lacks. I am not clear on what you think this knowledge could be. You might be right that there is no point in denying the existence of God. I think I mentioned it in another thread. It seem much like believing woman was made from man’s side, a world wide flood and the tower of Babel.
Myth does not need to be denied because they are stories and arguing they are fact misses any ancient archaic outmoded point they might have made 3000 years ago.
If they knew the “good news” you claim they have they would have the knowledge. Yet they are atheist so they must not have the knowledge. It doesn’t seem like a choice or faith yet you say they deny the existence of God as if it was unmistakably wrong.
As if they would deny something that they knew was there was there. They have nothing to deny without the knowledge you say they lack. It seems you want them to know and not know so you can claim they are willfully ignorant It looks like a self-serving insult.
What you know of atheism seems to be limited to your own personal experience and it seems unlikely you know every atheist. You only know atheist like you.

But by all mean express you views, we are all eyes and ears.

[bernee51]

You are correct that the Good news has been spread - atheists already know about it - although at the same time atheists do not know enough.

I am an atheist. What 'enough' do I not knaow?

If atheists did know enough there would be no point to deny the existence of God since as though you will realise the concept of faith and the issue of choice is at the crux of the issue.

Are you claiming that belief in god is a choice? Mac once asked the question...do we choose to believe? Do we? Or is belief a conclusion we come to based on evidence?

And Faith by definition cannot be tested in any scientific or material sense.

Faith is subjective and as such cannot be tested as you suggest. What can and should be tested are those material/conceptual aspects on which faith is built.

That is the point of debating.

[trillian]

You are correct that the Good news has been spread - atheists already know about it - although at the same time atheists do not know enough. If atheists did know enough there would be no point to deny the existence of God since as though you will realise the concept of faith and the issue of choice is at the crux of the issue. I've debated the God issue as an atheist for long enough to know this.

With out getting into what the “good news” is and how faith and choice are tied to knowledge
You make a confusing case.
I seems that you equate “good news” as knowledge that an atheist lacks. I am not clear on what you think this knowledge could be. You might be right that there is no point in denying the existence of God. I think I mentioned it in another thread. It seem much like believing woman was made from man’s side, a world wide flood and the tower of Babel.
Myth does not need to be denied because they are stories and arguing they are fact misses any ancient archaic outmoded point they might have made 3000 years ago.
If they knew the “good news” you claim they have they would have the knowledge. Yet they are atheist so they must not have the knowledge. It doesn’t seem like a choice or faith yet you say they deny the existence of God as if it was unmistakably wrong.
As if they would deny something that they knew was there was there. They have nothing to deny without the knowledge you say they lack. It seems you want them to know and not know so you can claim they are willfully ignorant It looks like a self-serving insult.
What you know of atheism seems to be limited to your own personal experience and it seems unlikely you know every atheist. You only know atheist like you.

But by all mean express you views, we are all eyes and ears.

Firstly, the only reason that I said atheist knows about good news was based off your previous assertion that "It seems the "good news" has been spread. Many Atheists here know more about Jesus then the average Christian". For your benefit I let this go unscathed regardless of what basis you made this assertion off and I went on with what I was really getting at. The "average" Christian knows what faith and free will is - something that is fundamental to the Good News - which apparently atheists - as you claim - know about. Hence, the knowledge I'm referring to are the concepts of free will and faith and you don't need to be Christian to understand these concepts.

You start off the reply "With out getting into what the “good news” is and how faith and choice are tied to knowledge" - which is inherently important to what we are talking about and hence, I'm at odds with how we can progress.

To accuse me of saying "to deny the existence of God as if it was unmistakably wrong" enters recursive relationship with your perception of the Good News/God which includes your perception of faith and free will. It is not wilful ignorance but a matter of choice. You also seem to make the assumption that people cannot deny something which is even of evidential existence.

[Zzyzx]

Faith is subjective and as such cannot be tested as you suggest. What can and should be tested are those material/conceptual aspects on which faith is built.

Another aspect of faith that can be tested is its positive and negative effect upon humans. Many claim that the only effects are "good". Others see negative effects that derive from religious belief (including religious killings and wars).

I know of no definitive studies comparing the positive and negative effects of various religions. It certainly would be an interesting field of study and might make a good dissertation topic (if something similar has not yet been done).

Does anyone know of such studies?

The topic is worthy of a separate thread.

[Confused]

I just wanted to know why people come onto these forums and I'm sure many can agree that this is a pretty important question. I would encourage EVERYBODY to reply to this and as always, please think your answers through before posting. Feel free to debate about it but I would encourage people to refrain from outright criticising others' posts as I am fully aware how out of hand this can get.

I'll start off.
I was a former atheist and now I'm a Christian. I come to these forums to spread the Good News and to let people to know what I know about Jesus Christ and the truly spectacular implications this has on their lives.


trillian

Simply put, to gain new information and new insights.