ok agian first let me start with i am not christan but i was raised christan and as such i have a strong understanding of there beleif systems
My mother was a Catholic, with a strong Christian family background, my father was an Atheist, with a devout Christian grandmother and an agnostic grandfather. My cousin, who I lived with for a time, is Hindi. Does that provide me with a strong understanding of each? Well, no. What provided me with an understanding of each was my willingness to listen, learn, and research beyond what was presented to me. So please, don't act like knowledge comes with association, it doesn't. It doesn't anymore than you can say you know women's menstruation because you went out with woman. Without making a concerted effort to study the subject, your knowledge would be superficial. And that is my argument here. You have repeatedly demonstrated a superficial understanding of many issues.
and since most chrsitans have been driven off these boards by the constant malicous attacks agiasnt them and there religion im the only one here left to defend there side of the debate
Ah, I see, so you're now claiming "most" Christians have been driven off these boards. Well it just so happens a number of the moderators are Christian, so that little claim just went down the toilet, now didn't it?
and yes BASHING christian beliefs and ideals no matter whos debating them is still christian bashing
Duh, of course bashing is bashing. What i'm saying is that I, at the least, have not been bashing Christianity. I have repeatedly said it, and will say it again, I merely argue the same point over and over and over again, which is that there is no evidence to support a belief, I live by the credo of evidence first because following notions without evidence translates to gullible, and I resist being gullible.
secondly athiest is a beleif system
I think we already discussed this, which is that 1.6% of people are atheists. Atheists believe there is no god. I hold to deduction, which is that if there is no evidence to support the existence of something, I dismiss it as invalid. It's important for you to understand that Valid and Invalid is not the same as belief, for or against.
See, what I'm trying to tell you here is --- I'm not an atheist, I'm also not an agnostic, and I'm definitely not religious. And from what I've seen, the majority of debaters you claim are atheists, are in fact secular unaffiliated or agnostic (I think we may have one atheist in the group). The problem here is, you're trying to make your debate easier by labeling everyone as atheists. Why? Because it's easier to bash extremes.
Also, I would like to point out that, based on what you just said, you're in the non-religious 16% as well, in that you're a "religious-unaffiliated."
And there we go again. Evolution is not a belief, anymore than a tree is a belief. Evolution is a fact. A tree is a fact. There's a buttload of evidence that they are both fact and theory (mostly fact). So get off your little podium of denial here. Evolution is NOT a belief... wake up, get it through that stubborn noggin'. Oh wait, if you can present a reasonable argument that a tree is a belief, then maybe I'll start agreeing with you on the whole evolution/belief nonsense.
athiests are part of a large group with some shared ideologies much in the same way all christians are lumped together in spite of drastic and often extreemly differing beleifs
And once again, atheists are not a large group. Once again, they constitute 1.6%. The notions held by atheists are not the notions held by the majority of "non-believers," as is evidenced by the report we
both previously provided.
next agian your bashing commetnnon fairy tails directly goes after chrsitans not religions in general so you show your anti chrsitan bias
Nope, it wasn't a bash, and it wasn't addressed to just Christianity. A religion is non-evidenced, just as a fairy tale is non-evidenced. The distinction between the two is not in its substance, but in the amount of people who believe in it. So, if there's a lot of people, it is a religion. If there's a small amount, it's a cult. And if it's a very small amount, or none, it's a fairy tale. Do note, if at one time there were a lot of people that believed in it, but no longer, it is then a legend.
Do note, and you really must understand this, if there is no evidence, it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It merely means there's no evidence to support its existence and, as such, nothing to verify if any, or some, of it is factual. In such a case, when there is no evidence, and you choose to believe it --- it's a belief.
But when there's supporting evidence, it's no longer a belief. And do realize, a man saying he saw Allah is hearsay. It is, for scientific purposes, inadmissable --- invalid.
lastly theres many scources of evidence you dont have to accpet it personal but the fact is its evidence for creation
Good, I'll review those links and demonstrate to you, in another thread, the fallacies presented. And no, it won't be bashing your religion, it will be a demonstration on the fallacies of the so-called proof of God. Wait for it.