Which side is more narrow minded? (ghosts, God, Christians, believers)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
My beliefs are very much in between. I see both extremes as being narrow-minded, intolerant and rude. I can handle a wide variety of religious beliefs as well as a total lack of belief in God. What I can't deal with are the extremists who give both Christianity and atheism a bad name.
I dont know. Being I am an atheist if real evidence presented itself that were to prove God, I would consider it, on the other hand ,evidence has been presented that seems to disprove many things in the bible, yet the believers just push it aside without even thinking.
It has been already explained to you that most atheists are in fact former theists and have personally studied and experienced religion, but I guess you don't want to hear that.
Sorry. I had not realized that you know each and every atheits personally and had discussed their background with them. (roll eyes)
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur
Are you telling me that you have actually read that book and still think it has merit and truth?
Yes. I've read it cover to cover once. Read the NT a number of times.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur
It was reading the bible with an open mind that lead me to atheism, as it has for many others
I feel sorry for you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur
You say in your opening post that you consider it narrow minded of atheists to dismiss thousands of years of faith and beliefs. How about the believers who must dismiss billions of years of solid evidence in order to have that faith and belief?
Did you read the entire OP? Do you have reading comprehension difficulties? It's not just that I am calling you and your ilk narrow minded. I am calling both extremes narrow minded.
But I understand your frustration. Generally, you are the one who trots out the "narrow minded" card. It must be painfull and embarassing for you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur
In my opinion anyone who ignores evidence and accepts the impossible in order to believe in some kind of god and nirvana is not living in the real world, but has enclosed his mind into a very narrow box.
So I take it you are solidly in the second camp, among those who know beyond certainty that the universe simply happened in a big bang without any guiding force or creator, and that mankind evolved to its present state through a series of random mutations.. Hence, you are unqualified to participate further in this discussion.
[quote=monkey cabal;11214307]Sorry. I had not realized that you know each and every atheits personally and had discussed their background with them. (roll eyes)
Yes. I've read it cover to cover once. Read the NT a number of times.
I feel sorry for you.
Did you read the entire OP? Do you have reading comprehension difficulties? It's not just that I am calling you and your ilk narrow minded. I am calling both extremes narrow minded.
But I understand your frustration. Generally, you are the one who trots out the "narrow minded" card. It must be painfull and embarassing for you.
Quote:
So I take it you are solidly in the second camp, among those who know beyond certainty that the universe simply happened in a big bang without any guiding force or creator, and that mankind evolved to its present state through a series of random mutations.. Hence, you are unqualified to participate further in this discussion.
You assume too much..I have no idea how the universe was formed, but there is much evidence to support evolution....I suppose you think you know how everything came about do you?
So do you really want peoples opinions, or did you just post the OP as an excuse to fling insults at those who's opinions you disagree with?
Well you have certainly proved which camp you reside in...The very definition of faith implies narrow mindedness. "Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence". Generally a person who is broad minded would admit the things he/she doesn't know, but remain open to all possibilities.
So do you really want peoples opinions, or did you just post the OP as an excuse to fling insults at those who's opinions you disagree with?
Yes. Which side do you think is more narrow minded?
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur
Well you have certainly proved which camp you reside in...The very definition of faith implies narrow mindedness. "Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence".
Like I said above, I am in neither extreme camp. But I understand how painful and embarassing it must be for you to realize that you belong to a sect that some consider narrow minded. All this time, when you were calling others narrow minded with their heads stuck in the sand, you thought you were open minded. In fact, you exhibit the same closed-minded tendencies. Only at the other extreme point of view.
Now, which side do you think is MORE narrow minded? Please keep on point with your future posts.
monkey man, As others have noted there are a great many atheists who went through a period of believing before they became atheists. I have also read the entire Bible and I found nothing in that book that would convince me that the universe had a creator. It was reading the Bible that led me down the path towards atheism. I see nothing extremist about my position at all, in fact I think it's very reasonable. I simply am someone who is persuaded by evidence and because there is no evidence whatsoever for a creator it's not like I'm ignoring anything or hiding from the truth. I would be totally open to real hard evidence that God is real so I am certainly not narrow minded at all.
You assume too much..I have no idea how the universe was formed, but there is much evidence to support evolution....I suppose you think you know how everything came about do you?
I believe in evolution. I also believe in creationism--that God created all. I don't think creationism mutually excludes evolution.
But this thread is not about creationism vs. evolution. There are hundreds of other threads that discuss this point of contention.
This thread is about which extreme is more narrow minded.
monkey man, As others have noted there are a great many atheists who went through a period of believing before they became atheists. I have also read the entire Bible and I found nothing in that book that would convince me that the universe had a creator. It was reading the Bible that led me down the path towards atheism. I see nothing extremist about my position at all, in fact I think it's very reasonable.
Fair enough. I would not consider you to be in either extreme.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MontanaGuy
I simply am someone who is persuaded by evidence and because there is no evidence whatsoever for a creator it's not like I'm ignoring anything or hiding from the truth. I would be totally open to real hard evidence that God is real so I am certainly not narrow minded at all.
I just don't think theories of, say, the Big Bang are any more plausible than beliefs that God is the creator. Did the Big Bang just happen, or did something cause it?
Pshaawww. Both sides are narrow minded. I am simply asking which side is more narrow minded.
And what conclusion have I predefined? I am calling out both sides--or at least both extremes.
Okay, I will dissect your words for you so you can see how they are fallacious.
Quote:
I am not talking about the mythical skeptic
Predefined conclusion, that skeptics are "mythical".
Quote:
who, with an open mind, sought out the truth and found none.
Predefined conclusion, that through skepticism, truth cannot be found.
Quote:
I am speaking of the narrow minded majority.
Predefined conclusion, that the majority is narrow-minded. Unsupported fact, that the skeptics listed above, having "not personally studied, experienced or experimented in religion" equals the majority.
Quote:
Those who are narrow minded in the sense that they have not personally studied, experienced or experimented in religion seeking the truth.
Predefined conclusion, that truth can only be found by studying religion.
Quote:
And the thing is, it does not take a particle collider to investigate. Just a bible and an open mind.
Open derision of scientific tools; unmerited dismissal of an idea, aka, narrow-mindedness.
Quote:
So, between the two groups I have defined, who is more narrow minded?
The question as presented is loaded with bias towards a predetermined conclusion, not an objective opening to seek truth.
In addition, in subsequent posts you allude to the idea that skeptics accuse believers of narrow-mindedness, once again displaying your predefined conclusion.
All of which points to this entire thread being a clumsy troll to try and trap skeptics into making a hypocritical statement for your own self-edification.
Jesus must be proud.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Your are preachin to the choir.
