Who has changed their minds about religion on this forum?

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:On this forum? No. Way back in grad school, I followed a listserv forum where atheists and theists debated and argued. The ability of the theists to answer the atheists arguments and objections with intellectual rigor as well as grace helped persuade me to embrace Christianity.


Well then you should post those arguments here because the theists here to a p*ss poor job of it.


Just as it was claimed above, that “the internet has been one of the biggest support mechanisms for those seeking to lose the burden of faith”, so it is also a resource of rational, cogent argument in defense of Christianity.


Again, please present it, because I have never, ever seen one. Present one, the best one you know.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Any normal, rational person with any critical thinking skills is atheist,

I think what some of you are objecting to is those who are anti-theist. I don’t like them either — unless they can make the case what harm does religious belief do?


Please tell me you are not seriously asking that question:

https://verdict.justia.com/2020/04/14/religions-harm-people
https://www.christiancentury.org/review/books/religion-harms (Christian site!)
https://religions.wiki/index.php/Religion_is_harmful_to_society
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_violence
https://idebate.net/this-house-believes-that-...arm-than-good~b1122/
https://www.thinkingfaith.org/articles/religi...ns-do-harm-well-good (Another theist site)

I could go on and on… and I could have just mentioned women’s rights, homophobia, child abuse scandal, 9/11, etc etc, plus the long history of harm, the crusades, the Salem with trials, the inquisition, slavery justification… you have to be in severe denial to not see this harm.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:On this forum? No. Way back in grad school, I followed a listserv forum where atheists and theists debated and argued. The ability of the theists to answer the atheists arguments and objections with intellectual rigor as well as grace helped persuade me to embrace Christianity.


What about the theists' responses led you to embrace Christianity instead of other religions? e.g.,, had you already been taught Christianity? Did the arguments also argue against religions other than Christianity?
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:On this forum? No. Way back in grad school, I followed a listserv forum where atheists and theists debated and argued. The ability of the theists to answer the atheists arguments and objections with intellectual rigor as well as grace helped persuade me to embrace Christianity.


Really? So now you believe that Jesus died for our sins and if you believeth in him you will go to heaven? Is that right.

And what exactly does “embrace” Christianity even mean?


I don’t usually respond to mockers, but yes, that’s right. By “embrace”, I mean accept as true.


Thank you for the explanation
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:On this forum? No. Way back in grad school, I followed a listserv forum where atheists and theists debated and argued. The ability of the theists to answer the atheists arguments and objections with intellectual rigor as well as grace helped persuade me to embrace Christianity.


Well then you should post those arguments here because the theists here to a p*ss poor job of it.


Just as it was claimed above, that “the internet has been one of the biggest support mechanisms for those seeking to lose the burden of faith”, so it is also a resource of rational, cogent argument in defense of Christianity.


Again, please present it, because I have never, ever seen one. Present one, the best one you know.


It sounds like you’ve plumbed these depths before (at least I hope you have) and remain unconvinced. Fair enough.

Instead of one lock down, debate-ending proof of God’s existence, I would cite the totality of arguments presented in the works of J.P. Moreland (particularly “Scaling the Secular City”), C.S. Lewis, Francis Schaeffer, Alvin Plantinga and William Lane Craig. Craig’s defense of the Kalam Cosmological Argument is not a bad place to start.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:On this forum? No. Way back in grad school, I followed a listserv forum where atheists and theists debated and argued. The ability of the theists to answer the atheists arguments and objections with intellectual rigor as well as grace helped persuade me to embrace Christianity.


Well then you should post those arguments here because the theists here to a p*ss poor job of it.


Just as it was claimed above, that “the internet has been one of the biggest support mechanisms for those seeking to lose the burden of faith”, so it is also a resource of rational, cogent argument in defense of Christianity.


Again, please present it, because I have never, ever seen one. Present one, the best one you know.


It sounds like you’ve plumbed these depths before (at least I hope you have) and remain unconvinced. Fair enough.

Instead of one lock down, debate-ending proof of God’s existence, I would cite the totality of arguments presented in the works of J.P. Moreland (particularly “Scaling the Secular City”), C.S. Lewis, Francis Schaeffer, Alvin Plantinga and William Lane Craig. Craig’s defense of the Kalam Cosmological Argument is not a bad place to start.


The Kalam is extremely weak and totally presuppositional. Most importantly, even if one accepts it, it does not point to a god and definitely not to any specific god. It can be used to prove naturalism just as poorly as theism. It’s a terribly weak argument.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:On this forum? No. Way back in grad school, I followed a listserv forum where atheists and theists debated and argued. The ability of the theists to answer the atheists arguments and objections with intellectual rigor as well as grace helped persuade me to embrace Christianity.


What about the theists' responses led you to embrace Christianity instead of other religions? e.g.,, had you already been taught Christianity? Did the arguments also argue against religions other than Christianity?


I grew up a nominal Catholic and dated an Episcopalian girl in college, so I guess you could say I was biased toward the Christian faith. That doesn’t mean I wasn’t exposed to other faiths, as I had friends from my teens and in college who were Jewish, Muslim, atheist, Hindu, etc.

The things that make Christianity unique are the Incarnation, the Resurrection of Jesus, the special revelation God communicates through the Bible and the Christian basis of morality and justice that avoids relativism and oppression.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:It's not about "changing your mind" it's about getting confidence to go against societal pressures and embrace what you know to be true, logical and rational. Knowing that there are others out there, and hearing their expressions of logic and reason is what gives many the confidence to "come out of the closet" and give up useless and damaging bronze age beliefs.

In this way, the internet has been one of the biggest support mechanisms for those seeking to lose the burden of faith.

Well said. It really is a burden.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Any normal, rational person with any critical thinking skills is atheist,

I think what some of you are objecting to is those who are anti-theist. I don’t like them either — unless they can make the case what harm does religious belief do?


Please tell me you are not seriously asking that question:

https://verdict.justia.com/2020/04/14/religions-harm-people
https://www.christiancentury.org/review/books/religion-harms (Christian site!)
https://religions.wiki/index.php/Religion_is_harmful_to_society
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_violence
https://idebate.net/this-house-believes-that-...arm-than-good~b1122/
https://www.thinkingfaith.org/articles/religi...ns-do-harm-well-good (Another theist site)

I could go on and on… and I could have just mentioned women’s rights, homophobia, child abuse scandal, 9/11, etc etc, plus the long history of harm, the crusades, the Salem with trials, the inquisition, slavery justification… you have to be in severe denial to not see this harm.


+1 million
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Any normal, rational person with any critical thinking skills is atheist,

I think what some of you are objecting to is those who are anti-theist. I don’t like them either — unless they can make the case what harm does religious belief do?


Gotta get those pre frontal cortexes going! There were actually studies done about this. Religious indoctrination damages that part of the brain and that's one of the ways it keeps itself going
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Any normal, rational person with any critical thinking skills is atheist,

I think what some of you are objecting to is those who are anti-theist. I don’t like them either — unless they can make the case what harm does religious belief do?


Religious belief has caused people to think that burning non-believers at the stake was OK. It's caused lots of other bad things, like believing your country was destined by God to rule over other countries, that all the stories in a very old book are accurate and should be followed, that a husband had the right to determine if his wife should live during a difficult birth, that prayers of a certain religion should be said in public schools, etc., etc.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Any normal, rational person with any critical thinking skills is atheist,

I think what some of you are objecting to is those who are anti-theist. I don’t like them either — unless they can make the case what harm does religious belief do?


Religious belief has caused people to think that burning non-believers at the stake was OK. It's caused lots of other bad things, like believing your country was destined by God to rule over other countries, that all the stories in a very old book are accurate and should be followed, that a husband had the right to determine if his wife should live during a difficult birth, that prayers of a certain religion should be said in public schools, etc., etc.


Not to mention breaking up thousands of families due to shunning practices over the years (I am dealing with this now and it is the most heartbreaking thing I've ever experienced in that it is so incomprehensible even though I understand the psychological reasons it happened), and the massive number of suicides of people that are gay because of shame and/or shunning from their religious family members. Just those two things alone are enough harm even without the more "public" harms.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Any normal, rational person with any critical thinking skills is atheist,

I think what some of you are objecting to is those who are anti-theist. I don’t like them either — unless they can make the case what harm does religious belief do?


Any normal, rational person with any critical thinking skills is agnostic.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Any normal, rational person with any critical thinking skills is atheist,

I think what some of you are objecting to is those who are anti-theist. I don’t like them either — unless they can make the case what harm does religious belief do?


Religious belief has caused people to think that burning non-believers at the stake was OK. It's caused lots of other bad things, like believing your country was destined by God to rule over other countries, that all the stories in a very old book are accurate and should be followed, that a husband had the right to determine if his wife should live during a difficult birth, that prayers of a certain religion should be said in public schools, etc., etc.


Not to mention breaking up thousands of families due to shunning practices over the years (I am dealing with this now and it is the most heartbreaking thing I've ever experienced in that it is so incomprehensible even though I understand the psychological reasons it happened), and the massive number of suicides of people that are gay because of shame and/or shunning from their religious family members. Just those two things alone are enough harm even without the more "public" harms.


+1. and so sorry you're going though this.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Any normal, rational person with any critical thinking skills is atheist,

I think what some of you are objecting to is those who are anti-theist. I don’t like them either — unless they can make the case what harm does religious belief do?


Any normal, rational person with any critical thinking skills is agnostic.


IF they've thought about it and don't just go along with what they were taught as small children.
post reply Forum Index » Religion
Message Quick Reply
Go to: