hoghead1 wrote:
My goal is to try and fill in the missing information so that they have a better perspective.
What makes you think that your perspective is correct to the point where you are in a position to provide "missing information" to others?
For example, you say the following:
hoghead1 wrote:
If they still want to disagree, they can, but at least they are better informed and hopefully more compassionate toward one another. God gave me the talent and the educational opportunities. It's my responsibility to use them and offer them to others. If they aren't interested in what I have to say and want to dump on me, well, that's their problem. At least, I'm honoring my calling, and, after all, in the end, I have to answer to God, not them.
But how do you know that there even exists any God to "answer" to?
That is already a faith-based belief that cannot be demonstrated by any compelling objective evidence.
Also, what are you calling "God"? What "God" do you think you need to answer to? The God described by the Hebrew Bible? Do you hold that Jesus is the virgin-born Son of God?
These are all things that are claimed in ancient stories. The question most non-theists and ex-theists have is, "Why do you believe those stories?"
And that is the
foundation of the debate.
You seem to have placed yourself "
outside" the whole shebang acting as some sort of "
referrer" or mentor who has far more than just talent and education but you apparently believe that you have enough understanding and insight to be able to help everyone else be able to see more clearly, both theists and non-theists alike.
From my perspective I would suggest that it's you who is missing they KEY understanding here in terms of these social disagreements between theists themselves, and between theists and non-theists.
I keep repeating, my core position is very clear. I hold that the Bible cannot be true
as written (and this applies to every version of it I have ever scene or heard of). In fact, I hold that for a Bible to be non-self-contradictory it would need to be radically different from the standard stories that are told in the Bible.
That's my 'perspective' on the Bible.
Now let's look at the various perspectives of "theists".
You mentioned in your post #18 three perspectives:
1. There is church-type Christianity, where the church is the ultimate authority, your conscience.
That's fine and dandy, my focus in this case would be on the church leaders why they think the Bible can stand as a rational basis for their church. I may not even be interested in speaking with their "flock" since the followers of this church have apparently give over all serious theological study to the church clergy. So there would be no point in even trying to debate with the sheep of a church like this. Only the clergy would be in a position to actually debate.
2. There is sect-type Christianity, were the Bible is the ultimate authority.
Those are the people who would then need to debate why they think the Bible is dependable and not self-contradictory.
3. There is mystical-type Christianity, where the individual's own experiences are ultimate authority.
And there isn't much point in debating those people concerning what the Bible might have to say is there? They may as well claim to believe in fairies.
~~~~~~~
I think what you need to also realize is
WHY most non-theists even bother to debate with theists.
Their MAIN question is that theists claim there is a God that we must OBEY or answer to in some way. Clearly you already believe that you will need to answer to some God since you've already stated that this is the ONLY entity you truly need to answer to.
So many theists are trying to put legislation in place that reflects their beliefs of what this God expect them to do. This including teaching the Bible and Creationism in schools, demanding that marriage be between just one man and one woman, no polygamy permitted, and no same-sex marriages permitted either. Abortion at any stage is "murder" because God had created that life, etc. You can't use stem cells for research or medical cures because its an abomination to God. Euthanasia should be considered murder because only God can take a life, etc.
Oh yeah, and let's not forget, "If you don't believe in OUR GOD then there's clearly something wrong with you, you are rejecting God in some way and therefore cannot be considered to be a moral decent person.
So the non-theists have a very simple question for the theists, "How do you know that any of this is true?" All these claims come from the Hebrew Bible which is filled with self-contradictions and obvious human ignorance. Where is there any evidence that there is any "God" behind this dogma?
That's the question the non-theists are asking.
So how you are you going "fill in missing information" for these non-theists so that they can have a "better perspective"?
The only information the non-theists are interested in is HOW you know that the Bible is TRUE. Unless you can provide that "
missing information" then you have nothing to offer the non-theists at all.
Also, given the three categories of theists that you have provided I don't see what "missing information" you could provide them either.
The sheep who leave it all up to their church clergy are just blind followers and they aren't interested in any "
missing information". They'll just tell you to take that up with their clergy.
The sects that demand the Bible is the ultimate source of truth, can't even agree with each other because they all claim that the Bible is saying something different based on the "specific interpretations" their sect pushes onto the Bible. So they aren't going to listen to anything you have to say, as far as they are concerned you are the one who is "
missing information".
And the people who believe they have had personal spiritual experiences don't need any "
missing information" that you might have to offer because they already have all they need, "
A Personal Spiritual Experience".
So who could you help with your imagined "
missing information"?
You seem to be taking the position of the sects who claim that only their views are correct. They too believe that they are the ones in possession of "
missing information" that if others could finally see it they would simply open their eyes and "
Get it".