• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Probably leaving

Status
Not open for further replies.

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Hi all,

When I joined over 10 years ago this place had a big community vibe, something really enjoyable compared to the growing sites like Reddit or remaining forums who were rife with hostility, trolling, and toxicity. Today I honestly think even reddit is better. I sadly see nothing to be gained here any more, in some case I'm one of the few that even seems to have changed at all in a decade. I'm sick of the free reign atheists get to troll, harass, and abuse theists on forums like this, and engaging in the toxicity makes me become toxic at well. It's a shame because at first it really felt like coming home when I came back, I guess you don't always realize how abusive home was until you return. If you're wondering why it's so dead around here, this is why.

Probably keep lurking in the LHP DIR but otherwise I need to try and respect myself, and that is not having all effort one puts in just be **** on by trolls who won't even actually engage and assume all those who disagree are primitive minded fools. I hope one day I can return to find a forum where religion can again be discussed in a moderated, non abusive manner. I miss the forum of pluralism and positivity I once enjoyed, but those days of the internet are gone.

Feel free to hit me up at [email protected]
I feel the same way sometimes, but then I remember being on Delphi Forums before I came here and how unjust the moderators were there, which is one reason I landed here about five years ago. Sure, there are a lot fewer regularly posting members now compared to back then but there are also a lot less toxic posters from both sides of the belief divide. That makes for a better overall experience.

It used to be I wanted to win a debate but over time I have learned to be more humble and I don't even care about winning a debate anymore. I also don't care if people like my religion because I am not here to convince anyone it is true. I like to teach what I know and learn from other people, not just about their religions but also about how people interact, since psychology was my field for a long time. I am actually a lot more interested in psychology than in religion.

I have had enough with the discussions about evidence for God or Messengers of God. If I hear "that's not evidence" from one more atheist I am going to scream. This topic has been beaten to death and I cannot think of anything that has not already been said on both sides.
 

Sgt. Pepper

Well-Known Member
I also like disagreements as long as the disagreement does not engender bad feelings between those who disagree....
I cannot tolerate that anymore so I have been bowing out. Although sometimes I wait too long before I bow out, better late than never. ;)

Sometimes I'll leave a thread and never return, and other times I'll take a break from it and then go back. Maybe I'm just a glutton for punishment. :(
 

osgart

Nothing my eye, Something for sure
I also like disagreements as long as the disagreement does not engender bad feelings between those who disagree....
I cannot tolerate that anymore so I have been bowing out. Although sometimes I wait too long before I bow out, better late than never. ;)
Everyone has the officially correct response, or the absolute truth. There's no other possibilities.

I see the same people on different sides of this or that endlessly getting at each other.

I do wonder sometimes if RF was founded by secular people wishing to endlessly debate religious people.

I personally don't care about if people proselytize or not. I also have no problem when religion is criticized. It's also very understandable that people are not going to mesh well because of their worldviews and moral differences.

I prefer discussion over debate yet people keep setting up general religious debates.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
But it is clear from your posts that you are a believer. I'm not sure what you mean by 'believer' as if it isn't actually a believer.
You seeing whatever you want to see isn't my problem. It's yours. Your inability to tell the difference between theism and religion isn't something I can correct. And apparently isn't something you're willing to correct either.
Again. I'm not sure why you put belief into quotes. It is clear that you have many religious beliefs and attitudes. Your prejudicial attitude against science is one example.
Please name my religious beliefs if they are so clear to you. This should be fun. And the reason I put 'belief' in quotes ed because like theism and religion, you also can't seem to tell the difference between belief and faith, or faith and religion. It's all the same windmill-dragon, to you.
You like your murkiness, but look how definitive this statement is. You want it both ways.
It's only murky because you refuse to understand the difference between the terms. Agan, this is not something I can correct for you. You have to be willing to do it yourself.
You are playing both sides here, going against creationist types, but then also critical thinkers who point out the improbable nature of religious alternatives to what science reveals about nature.
I am on the side of honesty and logic.
And here is your full assault on critical thinkers and the educated in science.
Real critical thinkers don't call themselves critical thinkers. And scientism is NOT an educated understanding of science.
Your referrence to God believers isn't genuine because you still advocate for the root supernatural essence of the universe, and in human experience.
I advocate for the mystery. Which is what it is. Your pretending that it has to be "natural" is just silly gibberish.
Unless you have changed in recent weeks your posts reveal quite a bit of religious beliefs and assumptions
Please, let's see them!
Your ongoing prejudice against science and reason is still there, and that is likely due to exposure to religion.
I have nothing at all against science. I just don't pretend or proclaim that it's more than it is.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
Not every discussion is a debate. Not every statement of belief is a challenge to your own. Religion is not the evil boogeyman that so many atheist want so badly to believe it to be. And that desire reeks of bigotry, and prejudice, and the intention to puff up the ego at the expense of someone else. And that's why I call it out. Not because I'm religious or that I support any religion. I just don't like bogotry pretending to be superior, or 'scientific', or "critical thought" when it's so clearly not any of it.
 

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
That's not evidence.
I'm working on that first cup of coffee, and I saw the thread title, and your name, and my first thought was 'Thank God' followed closely by 'Thank goodness' so I covered both the theistic, and the atheistic version. Carry on.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I'm working on that first cup of coffee, and I saw the thread title, and your name, and my first thought was 'Thank God' followed closely by 'Thank goodness' so I covered both the theistic, and the atheistic version. Carry on.
She said she'd scream if she heard that phrase again.
I'm conducting a test.
Next I have a maze for her.
 

Little Dragon

Well-Known Member
Religion is not the evil boogeyman that so many atheist want so badly to believe it to be.
A judgement. Subjectively derived, not empirically.

So many atheists take no issue with religions at all. When do you see atheists attacking aspects of and or doctrines within Buddhism or Luciferianism or Shintoism, or Taoism, or Hinduism and practically all other religions, that are not of Abrahamic tradition? Not very often, I will wager. I don't see it on RT or elsewhere much.

The real crux of the antagonism between secularists and the devout is down to the principles and narratives of particular religions, not found in others. Those particular religions being Christianity and Islam. The two largest (in terms of demographics) religions on Earth.
The darker side of the principles of those religions such as patriarchy, misogyny, homophobia, sexual repression, transphobia, anti abortion and scientific denialism and other things are in direct opposition to what modern liberalism and the concept of personal autonomy stands for.

Not saying these things do not appear in other religious traditions, however all of those things appear in christianity and islam and most interaction we agnostics and atheists have is with members of either of those two broad classes of religion.

I think the right religion could be a powerful force for good, potentially. A religion does not have to have Gods, or holy books or self appointed prophets. Who knows what will arise in the future?
 

F1fan

Veteran Member
You seeing whatever you want to see isn't my problem. It's yours. Your inability to tell the difference between theism and religion isn't something I can correct. And apparently isn't something you're willing to correct either.
Right into gaslighting mode. 1. I'm not the only one pointing out inconsistencies in your posts. 2. If others are not understanding what you truly mean then you are having a problem being comprehensible. 3. You are sympathetic to religious ideas and also prejudiced against science in a very religious way. 4. Much of your philosophy is being confused and uncertain (as you make definitive statements, ironically) so how can we take you seriously?
Please name my religious beliefs if they are so clear to you. This should be fun. And the reason I put 'belief' in quotes ed because like theism and religion, you also can't seem to tell the difference between belief and faith, or faith and religion. It's all the same windmill-dragon, to you.
That's part of your ongoing oddity, you love being vague and confused. It is your underlying attitude that guide what you write. You refer to science as scientism, and those who accept science as if part of a cult. You state this emphatically, but never explain why you think this. This is the same contempt as creationists. And you have sympathy for religious ideas while not explaining why, only that there's mystery. More vagueness.
It's only murky because you refuse to understand the difference between the terms. Agan, this is not something I can correct for you. You have to be willing to do it yourself.
More blaming others for your vagueness. Why not admit your thinking is murky and others can't be expected to fill in the gaps?
I am on the side of honesty and logic.
Only in regards to politics and social issues. Where it comes to religion and science, you are like another person.
Real critical thinkers don't call themselves critical thinkers. And scientism is NOT an educated understanding of science.
See, more of your negative attitude against critical thinkers and those who accept science. And not a single word why you think this way. No explanation. Why can't you just accept what a critical thinker is, and what science is?
I advocate for the mystery. Which is what it is. Your pretending that it has to be "natural" is just silly gibberish.
Advocate? What mystery? Thus far the little you describe is your own doing. And again you fail to explain what is mysterious, and why you think it should be obvious to anyone.
Please, let's see them!
Your nonsense about advocating for mystery. What purpose is there to do that? What you have said in the past is that this "mystery" is God. You seem to be reeling that in, but stil "advocate for mystery" whatever that means. And before you gaslight, look back and see if you wrote anything to explain what you mean. Nothing. Are other posters supposed to fill in the gaps?
I have nothing at all against science. I just don't pretend or proclaim that it's more than it is.
Then why do you keep denigrating science by calling it scientism? What is your beef with what science describes about how things are? No one else does this (except creationists). What makes you special and uniquely accurate in what you believe?
 

Quagmire

Imaginary talking monkey
Staff member
Premium Member
I feel your pain, @1137, and I truly wish there was something that we could do about gaslighting and other forms of passive aggressive trolling (like what happened to you in this thread almost immediately).

The problem is, even though misrepresenting someone's position is a rule 3 violation, we don't generally take action on those unless it's done repeatedly (which may be why the serial gas lighters tend to post in multiparograph posts: that way they can get it out all at once without having to worry about getting dinged for it).

About the only thing you can do is ignore those people.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
A judgement. Subjectively derived, not empirically.

So many atheists take no issue with religions ... that are not of Abrahamic tradition? Not very often, I will wager. I don't see it on RT or elsewhere much.
Mostly because they are even more ignorant of other religions than they are of "Abrahamic" religion.
The real crux of the antagonism between secularists and the devout is down to the principles and narratives of particular religions, not found in others.
Which really has nothing to do with the existence or non-existence of God. And therefor doesn't in any way rationalize or justify atheism. So far all you're describing is a peculiar brand of anti-western cultural religious bias. I agree with many of the complaints I see posted here about how some people negatively interpret their religious texts and tools. But that certainly doesn't pertain to or condemn religion as a whole, or even Abrahamic religion as a whole. Nor the billons of people that adhere to them. And it doesn't really even address theism as a philosophical proposition.
The darker side of the principles of those religions such as patriarchy, misogyny, homophobia, sexual repression, transphobia, anti abortion and scientific denialism and other things are in direct opposition to what modern liberalism and the concept of personal autonomy stands for.
Patriarchy, misogyny, homophobia, sexual repression, willful ignorance and denial are prominent aspects of EVERY human society on Earth. It's who we are and how we have always thought and behaved. Religions perpetuate it, politics perpetuates it, commerce perpetuates it, nature perpetuates it, science perpetuates it, our cultures embody it and it takes great effort for people to rise above it, and change. And the one place I know of where people are actually talking about it as a moral issue is in the churches. Sure, some churches are perpetuating our worst thoughts and behaviors, but MANY of them are not. Many of them are promoting tolerance and forgiveness and kindness and love for our fellow humans regardless of their 'differences'. And millions upon millions of people are taking that message to heart as they go out an interact with the rest of the world.

But you can't see or acknowledge any of that, because your bias has blinded you to the reality of it. All you can see are the abuses and misdeeds of people in the name of religion.
Not saying these things do not appear in other religious traditions, however all of those things appear in christianity and islam and most interaction we agnostics and atheists have is with members of either of those two broad classes of religion.
If you looked for the good, you would see the good. But you don't. You look only for that bad, and then you run around endlessly touting it as the whole of Islam, the whole of Christianity, the whole of religion, and the whole of theism. This is the behavior of the "new atheists" referred to at the top of the thread. Biased, irrational, dishonest, ignorant, and completely blind to their own onerous presence.
I think the right religion could be a powerful force for good, potentially. A religion does not have to have Gods, or holy books or self appointed prophets. Who knows what will arise in the future?
It doesn't matter that religions have gods. It matters how they use them.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
I prefer discussion over debate yet people keep setting up general religious debates.
I also prefer a discussion. I do not want to debate because I am not trying to convince anyone I am right. That is so arrogant.
I believe what I believe but it has nothing to do with ME being right. What I believe is either true or false and it is up to everyone to determine that for themselves.

I post my threads in General Religious Debates since it has more traffic and then atheists think I want to debate with them, but I don't.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
That's not evidence.
That has been said hundreds of times. It really gets old after a while.
By definition, what I have IS evidence.

Evidence: the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid: https://www.google.com/search

Evidence is anything that you see, experience, read, or are told that causes you to believe that something is true or has really happened.
Objective evidence definition and meaning | Collins English Dictionary

It is just not the KIND of evidence that atheists want.
But God does not CARE what atheists want. God provides the evidence that He chooses to provide.
 

It Aint Necessarily So

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I'm sick of the free reign atheists get to troll, harass, and abuse theists on forums like this, and engaging in the toxicity makes me become toxic at well.
That's all you, amigo. You have emotional reactions to dissent. Look at the demeanor of the people you object to. They don't call your words toxic, even those I quoted above. Why? Because they don't take them personally.

It's an all-too-common phenomenon on these threads. So many of you frame these discussions as attacks. Another posted called the reaction to his posting swarming to attack. But it's only coming from all of you, who I suspect simply aren't accustomed to academic culture, where discussion is encouraged and not generally taken personally or leading to emotional reaction. You've entered the marketplace of ideas here, which includes rigorous thinkers who enjoy dialectic, but you came unprepared for how that works, and now, your feelings are hurt.
here is an atheist coming in presuming a theist cannot handle any form of disagreement
Many of you can't. Look at your reaction here. What have you read that causes you to respond like this? You've been asked to provide examples of what you call toxic posting from critical thinkers, but where are these examples? They're in your imagination, which understands dispassionate discourse as attack.
I gave an example, and I won't be harassed by you further.
Your case here is extremely weak. And look at what you call harassment. This is from @Evangelicalhumanist, who is as polite and compassionate as anybody can be: "I did not "presume," anything. I asked you to give us an example or two of what you call "toxicity." I'm unsure why you seem unwilling to do that. Surely you know that nobody is going to respond well to generalized, very unspecific criticism. I'm sure you wouldn't yourself"

Like I said, your reaction is all you and entirely inappropriate.
I've never once denied theists can be hostile etc, not one time. This forum has a terrible trait of thinking everything is one sided when there's problems on both sides
You like to depict yourself as balanced, but you've never criticized what you call hostility from a theist, never called it toxic, and to my knowledge, never melted down like this after reading one's post. *Staff Edit* Your hatred for atheists is palpable, irrational, and you're far from alone, even on this short thread.

And you no doubt find this post toxic. If so, why? Because you have been criticized and disagreed with? Welcome to the world of dialectic. If you disagree with anything you read, you're expected to explain why it's wrong in your opinion. If you think I wrote something that is wrong here, you are expected to identify the words and rebut (falsify) them if you can. If you can't, your opinions are rejected. Instead, you want to complain about the mistreatment you say you receive without making a case for that opinion. So, your opinions and complaint are rejected.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
You like to depict yourself as balanced, but you've never criticized what you call hostility from a theist, never called it toxic, and to my knowledge, never melted down like this after reading one's post. You're just another atheophobic bigot. Your hatred for atheists is palpable, irrational, and you're far from alone, even on this short thread.
Just for the record, I do not hate atheists, quite the contrary. Before I came to this forum about five years ago I posted on Delphi forums, and all my best friends were atheists and agnostics. There was a group of them who knew each other in person and they all lived in the Midwest, some close to one another. I had hoped to be able to make a trip to see them someday, but life happened. They were all cat lovers and close to my age, so we had that in common. I miss my friends.

As far as the atheist viewpoint is concerned I have learned a lot from atheists and many of their points are well taken, especially their views of God and Christianity. I have learned more about the Bible from atheists than I have learned from Christians and I share many atheist views of the Bible. Lastly, I have come to understand why atheists do not see any evidence for God, even though I still disagree, since I believe there is evidence for God.

To be honest, Baha'is tend to rub me the wrong way more than atheists! That was not always the case, but that is the value of conversing with people, listening and learning about them. Sadly, many Baha'is have a biased view bout atheists since they are single-focused on one thing -- they don't believe in God. So what? Not everyone views the world - or the evidence for God - the same way.
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
Evidence: the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid: https://www.google.com/search

Evidence is anything that you see, experience, read, or are told that causes you to believe that something is true or has really happened.
You can, I'm sure, see the difference between these two definitions -- the definition is in the two outcomes: the first validates a belief or proposition as true or valid for all, not just for the believer. It establishes, as can sometimes happen, a belief as true. Thus, the early believers in the Copernican view of our solar system -- that the planets orbit the sun and that some planets have moons that orbit them -- had, in spite of Papal authority denying that belief -- through evidence eventually universally accepted, their belief validated.

The second definition is, as I think you can see, unique to the individual. It even uses the word "you" when it says "anything...that causes you to believe." This difference means that the evidence in question is not universally accepted. Quite often, in fact, it's not accepted by very many people at all. This would include some of the odder cults the world has produced. This kind of belief would not be accepted in a court of law, for example, to establish the guilt of an accused.
 

Little Dragon

Well-Known Member
If you looked for the good, you would see the good. But you don't. You look only for that bad, and then you run around endlessly touting it as the whole of Islam, the whole of Christianity, the whole of religion, and the whole of theism. This is the behavior of the "new atheists" referred to at the top of the thread. Biased, irrational, dishonest, ignorant, and completely blind to their own onerous presence.
You are welcome to your personal judgement, you are welcome to try and smear me. Others have tried and failed, as you will too. Your obnoxious and whiny responses, only serve to make me laugh.
But you can't see or acknowledge any of that, because your bias has blinded you to the reality of it. All you can see are the abuses and misdeeds of people in the name of religion.
I am talking about the negative sides of those faiths that whether you deny it or not (noone cares) do exist and manifest, the negative things that are promoted and excused in their name or the name of their Gods. I did not at any point, say, that those religions are all bad, just problematic when it comes to personal liberty and the freedom to express one self and make personal choices. Especially with regard to the advent of modern fundamentalist christian nationalism and Islamic extremism.

Keep up your generalization and infantile mindlessness, it only makes you look thick and ridiculous.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top