intro

[claytojar]

I guess I mean I feel that these intro threads of theists are too long, too detailed and whatnot. Either invite them into the actual forums, or ban them straight away.

Oh and hi claymore!

Hi Bibliofagus, it has gotten to long, but as long as people ask questions of me I try to answer.

[claytojar]

Still say you are not dodging?
How about this, I'll tell you my idea when you give me a straight answer, seriously

Whatever man I gave you the only answer I have and actually asked for your input, so if you are not going to do anything but say I'm dodging I'm done with this, sorry.

[claytojar]

I'm from a different country and I would say you enjoy fewer freedoms then the country I currently live in and those where my relatives live. If you consider freedom as not being ruled tyrannical dictator then you've never really experienced freedom.

I have experienced freedom for many years and I've met people from other counties and missionaries back from other countries and they say the freedom in America should never be taken lightly. I do not believe that freedom is lawlessness, there has to be some kind of order.

[claytojar]

So Clay, by that standard we ought to be able to keep a kid up all night praying for a miraculous cure for amputees, and when it doesn't happen by the next morning it should proof that Jesus is not what you claim he is.

There is no comparison to what I said and what you just stated, prayer works differently than that and I'm sure we've been through the amputees over at AF.org, seems to me we chewed this bone enough.

[claytojar]

I know I've not answered all post, need to go right now have some furniture to work on, will try and get back this evening and I rarely post after Friday night until Monday.

[Sargon The Grape]

I suspect claytojar is going to be this season's Old Seer.

[PopeyesPappy]

There is no comparison to what I said and what you just stated, prayer works differently than that and I'm sure we've been through the amputees over at AF.org, seems to me we chewed this bone enough.

There are comparisons. You just don't want to see them.

[stromboli]

OK, so let's review. You, a theist, came on an atheist forum to discuss religion. From the outset you admit that you can't prove your belief because it is based on faith. Then you insist that it is true nonetheless. You do not answer any posts that show specifically that there are problems/issues with your religion, and at least once insist there is evidence of some sort. 

OK. So.... you want to raise your children in a belief system that requires them to accept it on faith with no real evidence to support it, as opposed to raising them to be skeptical and choosing for themselves by studying/learning or whatever.

And you insist that prayer works. OK, I'm going to provide links that say prayer doesn't work. Will you respond to that? Or is that "scriptural" and therefore not to be discussed?

This is skepticism. In for a penny, in for a pound. Either prayer works or it doesn't. As a Christian I heard any number of second hand, unproven accounts of incredible healing that had been done in 3rd world countries by missionaries. No evidence, no first hand accounts, no pictures. But believe it, it happened. And like Pappy said- if you can have prayers answered, why can't amputees be healed?

Why are there not faith healing clinics on every corner, in every doctor's office and hospital? Because it doesn't work. Oral Roberts, #1 faith healer of our generation, claimed to have "touched a million lives." When he retired, what did he do with his money? He built a hospital. So much in believing your own story.

Here are the links. I'm guessing not to get a response.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2009/05/15/study-concludes-intercessory-prayer-doesnt-work-christians-twist-the-results/
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/31/health/31pray.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/27/health/27iht-snpray.html?pagewanted=all

Note that the studies are SCIENTIFIC double blind studies, where in the person being prayed for was unaware of it. In cases where prayer theoretically works, it is because of the belief of the patient, and was aware they were being prayed for- a highly subjective state- was a factor. Indicating that the subconscious/subjective belief had more to do with it than any actual result of prayer.

Your turn.

[Poison Tree]

Whatever man I gave you the only answer I have and actually asked for your input, so if you are not going to do anything but say I'm dodging I'm done with this, sorry.

Shall we look back at our "conversation"?
In reply to Nam you said that early teens is too young for his brother and sister to decide they were atheists. So I asked how that applied to deciding one was a christian. You said it didn't because being an atheist was deviating and that you heard anywhere from five to ninety was fine for becoming a Christian--which you said without presenting any objection, at that time, to the idea that five was an acceptable age to make that decision. When I questioned the double standard you said that you did think five was too young and you have objected to some youth making that decision but that parents should encourage their children of unspecified age to become Christians. So I asked at what age you draw the line and you answered that that only god knows.

Saying that five and whatever age the child was you said you objected to is too young to become a Christian and that early teens is too young to become an atheist necessitates that you have an opinion on what age is too young and what age isn't. If you didn't (and only god does) then you couldn't have voiced opinions on five, whatever and early teens being too young. Get it?

So, what standard do you compare five, whatever and early teens against to reach the conclusion "too young"?

In the interest of good faith I'll ask a leading question hinting at my input: In order for the decision to have meaning wouldn't both options need to be acceptable answers from the child?

[stromboli]

Sorry, Poison. apparently he won't be back until Monday.

See, this is how it works with our boy Clay. He decides what is to be discussed, ignores what posts he doesn't want to address, infers he has evidence but provides none, disagrees with our arguments but does not back it up with any type of contrary information, and then decides we are to wait for his convenience.

Apparently he is now deciding how we operate this forum. In my world I would call that one arrogant fuck.

[Nam]

Sorry, Poison. apparently he won't be back until Monday.

See, this is how it works with our boy Clay. He decides what is to be discussed, ignores what posts he doesn't want to address, infers he has evidence but provides none, disagrees with our arguments but does not back it up with any type of contrary information, and then decides we are to wait for his convenience.

In my world I would describe this man as one arrogant fuck.

He's a Protestant Christian, and the one Trueâ,,¢ Christian. What do you expect? One's who aren't like him are few and far between, at least that join websites of this accord.

-Nam

[stromboli]

He's a Protestant Christian, and the one Trueâ,,¢ Christian. What do you expect? One's who aren't like him are few and far between, at least that join websites of this accord.

-Nam

lol. I'm thinking "dyed in the wool sheeple." 

[AllPurposeAtheist]

Have you heard the infallible word of the tooth fairy? Lose a tooth as a child, get money. Cold, hard cash!  Pray to your god to put money under your pillow for teeth and see what happens.

[DunkleSeele]

Sorry, Poison. apparently he won't be back until Monday.

See, this is how it works with our boy Clay. He decides what is to be discussed, ignores what posts he doesn't want to address, infers he has evidence but provides none, disagrees with our arguments but does not back it up with any type of contrary information, and then decides we are to wait for his convenience.

Apparently he is now deciding how we operate this forum. In my world I would call that one arrogant fuck.

As I said before his arrogance and condescension were already evident on AF.org, where he posted as "Godschild" (LOL). The only thing that played in his favour over there is that they are much more tolerant of trolls than what we are here.

[stromboli]

As I said before his arrogance and condescension were already evident on AF.org, where he posted as "Godschild" (LOL). The only thing that played in his favour over there is that they are much more tolerant of trolls than what we are here.

Like I said, theists come on here with the attitude of moral superiority and are talking down to us. All the more irritating when they won't actually defend their beliefs but adopt the attitude they are right by default and simply ignore posters that provide evidence to the contrary.