XnForums

I saw the half-completed debate and it got me thinking. If any Christians are interested, I'm up for a debate. Shoot me a PM and let me know.

Doc is the only Christian we have left. We're just keeping him in case of.....hmmm, I don't know why we're keeping him.

Believe me......you don't want to debate him. It's like being nibbled to death by polite butterflies. Totally fatal, but boring.

Anyhow, if you're a smart Atheist maybe you could answer the question about "The Bacchae" that was posed in the "Christians/Jews" thread.

That's probably the most exciting and useful thing you could do here.

Thanks.

Pax!

Whaddaya got in mind, ydoaPs? I'm not a Master Debater like Ham is, and I'm not sure I could even do a justifiable debate. But if you have some bonafide questions or concerns you'd like addessed, then I'd be happy to take a stab at it, although it often seems pointless to debate something which is based in faith, belief, and imagination...

However, we could discuss the implications and ramifications of the following question:

Such a debate would revolve around the concept of God being an idea which can give one strength and purpose. As such, God then becomes an experiential reality, especially when the person in question becomes spiritually, mentally, and/or physically stronger as a result of living by that belief, and/or by expressing faith and trust in that belief.

And Logos, are you sure you meant "Totally fatal, but boring" and not "Totally boring, but fatal"?

Doc, that's an excellent question. If there's no debate, please start a thread and share your views about this topic. I won't be bored at all.

No, Doc......you've never been totally boring.

(Maybe that's why we keep you around.)

I dunno if I have any views on that topic yet, Mickey. The question came into being as I typed it up, and so I have no preconceived viewpoints to share at this time.

I would suppose then, that the concept would take shape, evolve, and bear fruit as the discussion took place and moved along, just as life itself takes shape, evolves, and bears fruit over time.

So in a manner of speaking, any offered viewpoints or opinions would be the result of an adaptive process whereby the concept would either become more viable as it is investigated, or die off and fade away in the absence of recognition, understanding, and/or support, with the real point being whether or not we have what it takes to keep something alive which has proven or may prove beneficial, or to see it die.

Seems to me that (God) debates are often aligned with this latter concept, in that one side tries to support the concept while the other endeavors to undermine and eradicate it.

So in a sense, debates are merely 'battles' whereby one side hopes to develop authority over the other, whereas discussions lend more towards the concepts of reconciliation, harmony, and peace, thus creating the potential for everyone to live a more abundant life, as opposed to the idea where one must die so the other can live.

Of course there is the idea where one can sacrifice himself or herself so the other can enjoy a more abundant life, but that is a rare from of love which very few can or are willing to express.

doc

I was thinking about a simple "Does one or more deity exist?" debate; not really for the answer as much as for the thinking behind it. I like dissecting beliefs about the universe such that I can come closer to understanding it myself. It must be because I'm one of those naughty naughty skeptical scientists guys.

I used to like dissection and taking things apart when I was younger, but now I'm more into trying to put things together. I suppose that's because it's easy to tear things apart as we attempt to learn something, but it's much more challenging when we try put something together or to create something that has never existed before.

As to your question of one or more deities, do you think it's possible to use light as an analogy, meaning if we consider the rainbow effect, then we see how many different colors (deities) can actually originate from a single (deific) source.

Taking a huge step futher, perhaps the energy contained within each and every atom was also derived from a single source, (such as the Big Bang), while the many expessions of life (as the myriad of various life forms) may also have had a single originating source, although it is here where the idea that a single or focal force of life exists as a stand alone phenomenon, a phenomenon whose main attribute is that of a conscious will. And it is also here where we leave the world of empirical knowledge and enter into the world of possibilities, potentials, and philosophical idealisms.

Perhaps to get acquainted with the differences between these two schools of thought, (i.e. those of the matierial/physical world versus those of the 'spiritual'), you might want to read up on the differences between the philosophy of "Vitalism" versus that of "Mechanism", as these contain the basic components which arise during debates as to whether or not deities or gods even exist.

Although I lean more towards the 'Vitalistic' notions, I don't imagine it's an either/or situation, as both schools of thought contain some very valid arguments, as well as having some useful and practical logic that can be beneficial to life on earth in one way or another.

doc

The storm cloud of butterflies circles like a huge, multicolored whirlwind.....closer and closer......

Ain't the "Butterfly Effect" a wondrous thing?

You're funny!

I'm sort-of a Buddhist/Christian/Mystic, that's different than a Christian/Buddhist/Mystic mind you.
But I don't like to debate.

I am a newbie...yes, a christian..
I don't even know if anyone is interested in discussing this, but here goes..

If there is no beginner, how did the universe begin?

Hey, CS, welcome aboard...and good question!