re: Baylor University Survey On Religion: 'Almost No Atheists Voted For Trump'

quote:

---

Correct. I said as much earlier after commenting on your reliance on using false premises and strawman arguments. There really is no actual discussion to be had with you, and I've had many very constructive discussions on the subject with religious and atheist persons alike. You just aren't one of them. Dialogue with you is tiresome, redundant, and fruitless. IMO

---

If you wanted to tear apart my argument and explain why I'm using false premises (you did provide what you think are examples but I have subsequently responded) and straw men (I don't recall seeing that), I'll be happy to walk back on a logical fallacy. You just have to be direct about it it. Contrary to what you or others might think, I'm not unreasonable. My worldview dictates how I interpret evidence just like yours does for you, but I'm not immune to reason and logic.

quote:

---

There is evidence for the Christian God, just not evidence that you will accept as valid or convincing.

---

Many people don't believe in love either - until they are in love.

quote:

---

My comment was qualified with my interactions with atheists and agnostics.

---

Your comment was inadequate, because of your lack of interaction with a significant number of atheists and agnostics, and because of your knowledge of either.

Most of you can't even properly define the terms, yet you want to discuss nuances for the believes of people you assign to those terms.

It's interesting, considering the arguments you have made here, and elsewhere.

quote:

---

Go on.

---

Agreed.

My definition of "evidence" requires that it be higher level of confidence than the "evidence" required to "prove" James Bond exists.

I could do it, as I briefly did earlier, but I'm not interested in putting in that much time or effort to go through your extremely verbose posts in this thread and break down your arguments. I've made a calculated decision based on your attitude and responses that it's not worth my time or anybody else's time and it won't add anything of value to this discussion.

You've already made your low assessment of agnostics very clear along with your reasoning. You've explained that you've thought long and hard about it already (unlike those intellectually lazy and indifferent agnostics) and you have great conviction in everything you've already expressed, so there's really little chance that anyone can say much to you that you haven't already settled.

It's very clear to to me why your anecdotal experiences have resulted in people not wanting to continue discourse with you, and it has nothing to do with indifference.

quote:

---

I just noticed this thread was 14 pages. Can someone give me some cliff notes about what i should be outraged about?

---

hasn't been a whole lot of outrage. pretty decent discussion for the most part.

Stick around. There's plenty of outrage to come.

quote:

---

This is exactly what I was talking about and you are so concrete in your thinking that it doesn't get through. I am not trying to avoid the conversation at all. Hence my multiple replies. I am agnostic for logical reasons. I've discussed this with you over multiple pages but you continue to default to the position that my beliefs are based on an unwillingness to discuss my beliefs.

---

I didn't say you wanted to avoid the conversation entirely, only as it pertains to faith. You want to know for sure that there is or is not a God, and faith is irrelevant in the face of verified truth. Faith is not good enough for the agnostic and that's been my point all along; an agnostic person doesn't want to discuss a topic about faith because it holds no weight in their eyes and is thus an irrelevant talking point. Please tell me if you think I'm wrong on that point and I'll concede.

quote:

---

I mostly enjoy our exchanges but I have to agree with others that think it's useless to have a theological discussion with you. You are far too convinced of the righteousness of your convictions to have a useful discussion with.

---

I think I'm right. You think you're right. The atheist thinks they're right. If we didn't think we were right, we wouldn't believe what we believe because it would be irrational. I'm confident in my beliefs because I've had these discussions with many people over the years and have put a great deal of study into what I believe and why. If I have a false assumption about someone else's beliefs, I'm more than happy to be corrected there. Another poster said that Buddhism is an agnostic religion, which I hadn't considered previously based on my knowledge of that religion, but I can see his point even if I don't necessarily agree with it in relation to my comments; he helped me realize I needed to clarify what I meant and gave me additional nuance to consider.

quote:

---

I just love when someone categorically states there is no evidence.

---

Then you'll especially enjoy reading back over the thread and noticing I didn't do that. He made the beginnings of a claim that he could prove the existence of God.. I asked him to continue.