Atheism people (non-believers) should be invited by the believers for a peaceful dialogue

[paarsurrey]

I doubt very much I could help you understand, paarsurrey. I can turn off RF and walk away. It's not quite the same having an "in person" little chinwag o'er cups of steaming coffee. My guess is that after 10 minutes with me, you would be steaming almost as much as your coffee. To be fair, I don't think too many "true believers" could handle me in person.

Now one becomes angry!
Regards

 

[LuisDantas]

Angry? I don't think so.

 

[ArtieE]

@ Post #57
May be one is not sure of Atheism? Is it so?
Regards

What do you mean? I am simply not a theist I don't believe in the existence of gods but I'm not sure of anything. For all I know the universe could be crawling with gods. I'm just waiting for you theists to give me some good reason for me to believe that any of your gods exist. But if you theists who are the experts on gods can't agree on which gods exist you can hardly expect me to make a decision.

 

[ArtieE]

@ Post #57
May be one is not sure of Atheism? Is it so?
Regards

May be one is not sure of Atheism? Are you sure no other gods exist except for the one you believe in? Is it so?

 

[YmirGF]

Now one becomes angry!
Regards

What folks like you don't seem to understand is that we do not doubt your sincerity. We are quite sure you are utterly sincere. What we are concerned about is the intellectual dishonesty of far too many theists.

 

[LuisDantas]

What folks like you don't seem to understand is that we do not doubt your sincerity. We are quite sure you are utterly sincere. What we are concerned about is the intellectual dishonesty of far too many theists.

I fully agree.

 

[paarsurrey]

I would rather not, @ArtieE . It is unlikely that there will ever be such a decision among theists. And it would be a waste to refrain from interacting with them for such a tiny reason.

I agree with you here.
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

Atheism people (non-believers) should be invited by the believers for a peaceful dialogue

It is just a courteous and friendly invitation. If Atheism are not sure of themselves they just don't accept the invitation. In both cases no harm is likely to come to them. Right? Please
Regards

 

[LuisDantas]

You are correct, of course. I am just not too clear on what is being proposed exactly.

 

[Sapiens]

You just want a free coffee..

Tim Horton's is about the worst coffee I've ever drunk, but then I get my on the island I live on.

 

[paarsurrey]

Tim Horton's is about the worst coffee I've ever drunk, but then I get my on the island I live on.

It is very popular where I live.
I often visit there in the morning after Fajar (early in the morning about one hour before the sun-rise), then we friends do some exercise in the Gym and play games of our choice. Then we go to Tim Hortons to take coffee and bagels as breakfast. We friends like it very much.
It doesn't have to be at Tim Hortons, necessarily, the Atheists and Believers should get together for a light discussion/dialogue and befriend one another. It doesn't matter if we agree to disagree, still we have to live and co-exist peacefully, it doesn't harm one if we live as friends.
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

You are correct, of course. I am just not too clear on what is being proposed exactly.

The proposal is for informal friendly dialogue between the Atheists and the Believers, without any disrespect or derision and ridicule. If the Atheists don't like to be invited by the Believers, they could go ahead showing their own goodwill gesture, and they invite the Believers instead. And the believers should accept the invitation.
Does it help? Please
Regards

 

[LuisDantas]

You mean in person, don't you? Face to face? The latest post made it seem like that.
A good idea, but alas, not something I am likely to take part in the foreseeable future. Not with RFers at least.

 

[paarsurrey]

You mean in person, don't you? Face to face? The latest post made it seem like that.
A good idea, but alas, not something I am likely to take part in the foreseeable future. Not with RFers at least.

Yes, face to face.
I know. We live far off. But the sentiments one could share being close at heart might be living apart in the place. I thank RF for making us friends.
The idea in the OP is for everybody. One could amend it as it suits to one, but one should work on it, bit by bit we come closer.
Regards

 

[Curious George]

We, believers, should convince Atheism people with our reasonable and brilliant signs and arguments on one to one basis in and outside the Academia, over a cup of tea and or coffee, like thus:

Hello! Hello! Hello!

Peace be on you and your family.
Over a cup of hot coffee or tea in the Tim Hortons
Without the burden of “Burden of proof”
Let us compare our notes on:
“Does God exist or does not exist?”
Don’t worry; I will pay the bill of Tim Hortons.
Cordially invited to one to one discussion
Open to everybody, the Theists (the believers in God) of all denominations and the Atheists (the non-believers) of all hues and colors.
It will be a peaceful dialogue and without derision or ridicule.
Just call me, please:
I am, Skeptic of the Skeptic, a believer in God very naturally.​

I am confident we can convince them with peaceful dialogue .
Regards

If I understand correctly, some seem to be confused on what you're saying, you are suggesting that separate from RF, you think we should engage in religious discussion with people, not RFers, over tea. You are suggesting that we invite people to tea or coffee, pay the bill, and discuss religion with others of different religious beliefs.

Generally, discussing religion, sex, or politics is not something one covers when making friends and acquaintances. It is in some ways considered a breach of social etiquette.


I am usually up for discussion of whatever, but I don't know that everyone else feels this way. I think you are also more likely to feel heard in such a situation because the other party is playing nice simply because of other rules of social etiquette. If you want to make friends, make friends. If you want to discuss religion, discuss religion. But if you want both, then you are only going to make friends with those who also want both. In my experience, those are a minority of people.

 

[Willamena]

If I understand correctly, some seem to be confused on what you're saying, you are suggesting that separate from RF, you think we should engage in religious discussion with people, not RFers, over tea. You are suggesting that we invite people to tea or coffee, pay the bill, and discuss religion with others of different religious beliefs.

Generally, discussing religion, sex, or politics is not something one covers when making friends and acquaintances. It is in some ways considered a breach of social etiquette.

To be fair, when two members of RF get together, religion would be fair game, and probably most other topics.

 

[Curious George]

To be fair, when two members of RF get together, religion would be fair game, and probably most other topics.

Indeed. But I do not think the op is referring to rfers. I could have misunderstood, though.

 

[LuisDantas]

I get a sense that the OP is perhaps over-rating the degree and significance of disagreements between believers and non-believers.

Quite often that is simply not a big deal.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Generally, discussing religion, sex, or politics is not something one covers when making friends and acquaintances. It is in some ways considered a breach of social etiquette.

Except when one joins a religious or political group, or erm..........

 

[ArtieE]

I get a sense that the OP is perhaps over-rating the degree and significance of disagreements between believers and non-believers.

Quite often that is simply not a big deal.

I have never in my whole life actually had any face-to-face serious disagreements with a believer in any kind of god.