MPTrooper wrote:Then obviously I would see no reason to continue any kind of discussion with you and ignore you and whatever points you where going to make.
Thatâ€™s fair enough - your prerogative. But remember weâ€™re still talking hypothetically here as I donâ€™t believe I actually have been dismissive of your faith as of yet even though you accused me of arrogance for doing so.
Barti Ddu wrote:â€˜I believe generally [emphasis added], that religion has some detrimental effect on all individuals who have faith...
I did not say religion necessarily has a negative influence on every single practitioner. I didnâ€™t say you were such an instance thereby insulting your religion - so it was you who jumped to conclusions and threw that first â€˜punchâ€™. But I see no gain in reciprocating.
MPTrooper wrote:You can't equate religious faith to scientific pursuits. Science can be proven or disproven quit easily. Cold hard facts can be shown as to why something is or isn't.
Now finally we seem to be finding some common ground! Funnily enough, thatâ€™s exactly where I was intending to go next with my argument too. God or any other â€˜supernatural-type-word-which-mean-something-to-someâ€™ isnâ€™t a concept in the normal sense of an entity which can be objectively discussed or disputed.
MPTrooper wrote:Just because I have faith in my God doesn't mean I can't debate.
Here Iâ€™m not as convinced. Iâ€™d have a go at arguing that itâ€™s not technically possible to â€˜debateâ€™ about God. Of course you can disagree with someone and exchange vague ideas and the like for eternity if you like but unless thereâ€™s a common ground of actual concepts, reasonâ€™s an optional extra so I canâ€™t see how the discussion could actually lead to anything constructive.
MPTrooper wrote:You can't equate religious faith to scientific pursuits.
Iâ€™m back with you here though. In effect, what you appear to be saying is that debate and criticism using the traditional logic/reason/proof etc. level playing field that applies to science/knowledge doesnâ€™t apply to faith. So anyone who disagrees with you about your faith and would like to discuss it needs to:
a. not say anything against it otherwise youâ€™ll take it as personal offence;
b. agree to leave the level playing field and hold the discussion somewhere in an unshaped, foggy, â€˜placeâ€™ where words can mean whatever you want them to and where itâ€™s a free-for-all where non-sequiturs and anti-concepts are to be considered as valid as anything real.
Thatâ€™s not somewhere Iâ€™d chose to go as you could (notice I didn't say 'would' - it's not an accusation) always win there. And this is the reason, I believe religion has managed to survive the advance of knowledge in every other field. Itâ€™s got its own rule book which, historically, anyone who wants to play, has to abide by.
So there we have it. Both in agreement thereâ€™s nothing to gain by us both discussing faith
Fortunately we managed to cover a substantial amount before getting to this dead end so thanks for that.
It does leave a bit of a problem for me as to what hope have I of convincing anyone to leave their faith behind and join the rest of us. Iâ€™ll have to have a think about that one. Maybe a parody could help!
MPTrooper wrote: Hell Earth Rise is as hard core an atheist I have ever meet and I still look forward to debating with him...
Yes, I appear to be holding him in higher esteem with virtually every post of his too, though of course not agreeing on everything
. I take my hat off to him for going there with you as I canâ€™t see how it could ever get anywhere with you and me.