1. Just because you don’t believe a certain way, doesn’t mean you can throw it out as a possibility. If you don’t keep your mind open to the fact that you might possibly be wrong then there really is no point in you expecting others to do any differently.
2. The Catholic church and the Protestant church, while both flying under the banner of christianity are two completely different groups. Both would concider the other to be a cult, and both have there own beliefs, traditions, rules, history, leaders, ect. These groups have been fighting, sometimes in a very litteral sense (Irish Catholics vs. Irish Protestants) since the begining if Christianty.
3. When you debate religion, don’t lump all religions into one. Just because Muslims fail in one area, doesn’t mean all religions fail in that same way. Conversely, don’t lump all groups of non-religious people together. There are extremist groups from both sides, focusing on these extremist groups is counter-productive to the arguement and will inevitably turn it into a flaming war.
4. Facts are great to use for your arguement, backing up your facts with reliable sources is even better. Assuming the other side has no facts and relies completely on either the scientific method, or the bible is foolish, there are sources on both sides, giving proof on both sides. And always remember, scientists will never ALL agree on anything, and using words such as ALL or NEVER are both limiting and make you appear very close-minded. Don’t throw out evidence just because you don’t want to accept an idea, that is childish.
5. Using faith or some kinda of other stubborn defiance against the other opinions shouldn’t be allowed. Such as saying I have faith this is true thus anything else is wrong is not allowed in debates. Or stating I have apsolute faith the Big Bang Theory is correct cuase its scientific thus nothing else is right shouldn’t be allowed. If you are going to debate religion you have to be willing to take out that aspect of your beliefs, as faith in something measn nothing in a debate. (Thank you Zucas)
If you guys can think of any more, post them here and I’ll add to the list.
--- Dogbert said the deepest thing ever.
“It is all a part of the big illusion we perpetuate upon ourselves and which is in turn perpetuated upon us. When we believe we engage the illusion, when we stop believing we shatter the illusion and ourselves in the process because we are part of it."
I very much agree derdev. Or at least even if someone no longer wishes to consider a particular religion as a “possibility” for them, they should respect others' rights to follow that path.
I especially like point #3. I’ve noticed in these religious debates that “religion” gets spoken of as if it’s a single entity, or as if every religion that exists is the same.
Also to keep in mind, even within a particular religion not everyone will agree or have the exact same beliefs. This needs to be acknowledged and respected.
As to your point about Protestants and Catholics...that actually may be too generalized. Not all Protestants and Catholics view each other as belonging to “cults”.
1. Yea I’ve been telling people to have an open mind for new ideas and thoughts for quite awhile. Of course when that is stated its blasphemy ya know. Most arguements I’ve had against that is god isn’t open to new ideas. Yea right. I like #1.
2.Yes they are very different but still under the same grouping. Kinda like how you order species of animals by family and whatnot. Different but similar still in numerous aspects.
3. I agree but you can lump religion generally together as they are technically still all under teh same grouping, follow similar trends, and have things that are commong across the board. There are numerous teams in the NFL but they are all football teams that share general qualities. So I think this is good in theory but there are exceptions to this rule where it could be used. Same with the non religious part as well.
4. Totally agree with that one.
But I’d like to add another one:
5. Using faith or some kinda of other stubborn defiance against the other opinions shouldn’t be allowed. Such as saying I have faith this is true thus anything else is wrong is not allowed in debates. Or stating I have apsolute faith the Big Bang Theory is correct cuase its scientific thus nothing else is right shouldn’t be allowed. If you are going to debate religion you have to be willing to take out that aspect of your beliefs, as faith in something measn nothing in a debate.
--- It’s not about money. It’s about sending a message. Everything burns.
I know but faith doesn’t allow for open debate. If you wish to be open minded then faith can not be involved. You can’t hear someone else’s arguemetn if you are saying to yourself I have faith that what I believe is correct and everything else is wrong. It ties in directly with rule #1.
--- It’s not about money. It’s about sending a message. Everything burns.
I have to agree with Zucas. And no faith isn’t a theists entire arguement. It is a SMALL PART of a theists arguement. If you can’t make an arguement without using faith, you don’t deserve to be here.
#6 even though some one may not hold the same beliefs as you, they are still people with feelings and any personal or deep psychological flaming of they’er beliefs will not be tolerated.
--- Dogbert said the deepest thing ever.
“It is all a part of the big illusion we perpetuate upon ourselves and which is in turn perpetuated upon us. When we believe we engage the illusion, when we stop believing we shatter the illusion and ourselves in the process because we are part of it."
#6 even though some one may not hold the same beliefs as you, you should not aggressively or continually put them down or dispel their opinion because of it. All beliefs, however seemingly ridicules or unorthodox shall not be held in lower regard with any other unless they are so truly absurd as to be false in the eyes of the user who professes them as truth.
What that means is don’t oppress anyone’s views unless they’re views are just a way of them screwing with you.
8# this forum is for debate, not advertisement, and as such no topic shall be made advertising any view over any other.
That that one says is that there shouldn’t be any topics like “came see the good news about Jesus!" or “Atheism, the way we all feel deep inside” that try to convert people.
--- Dogbert said the deepest thing ever.
“It is all a part of the big illusion we perpetuate upon ourselves and which is in turn perpetuated upon us. When we believe we engage the illusion, when we stop believing we shatter the illusion and ourselves in the process because we are part of it."
Zucas wrote:
I know but faith doesn’t allow for open debate. If you wish to be open minded then faith can not be involved. You can’t hear someone else’s arguemetn if you are saying to yourself I have faith that what I believe is correct and everything else is wrong. It ties in directly with rule #1.
Not what I mean.
Theists DO need to have facts. But saying that you can’t be open minded and still have faith is bullshit.
Besides, I misunderstood what the rule said. I was simply disagreeing with the statement that faith = closeminded.
#6 even though some one may not hold the same beliefs as you, you should not aggressively or continually put them down or dispel their opinion because of it. All beliefs, however seemingly ridicules or unorthodox shall not be held in lower regard with any other unless they are so truly absurd as to be false in the eyes of the user who professes them as truth.
What that means is don’t oppress anyone’s views unless they’re views are just a way of them screwing with you.
8# this forum is for debate, not advertisement, and as such no topic shall be made advertising any view over any other.
That that one says is that there shouldn’t be any topics like “came see the good news about Jesus!" or “Atheism, the way we all feel deep inside” that try to convert people.
if you are so afraid of being converted you must not have much faith now...lol
well seeing as how i dident have much to begin with... oh wait i know what you... you made an asumption about me with out actualy knowing me! oh ok, that makes it have a lot more sence.
--- Dogbert said the deepest thing ever.
“It is all a part of the big illusion we perpetuate upon ourselves and which is in turn perpetuated upon us. When we believe we engage the illusion, when we stop believing we shatter the illusion and ourselves in the process because we are part of it."
Weasel 16 wrote:
well seeing as how i dident have much to begin with... oh wait i know what you... you made an asumption about me with out actualy knowing me! oh ok, that makes it have a lot more sence.
nope i made assumption that you didn’t have much faith and you just said you never had much faith so therefore i was right
yep
Weasel 16 wrote:
well seeing as how i dident have much to begin with... oh wait i know what you... you made an asumption about me with out actualy knowing me! oh ok, that makes it have a lot more sence.
nope i made assumption that you didn’t have much faith and you just said you never had much faith so therefore i was right
yep
thats not the part I was contesting, you made an asumption that I had faith to begin with.
--- Dogbert said the deepest thing ever.
“It is all a part of the big illusion we perpetuate upon ourselves and which is in turn perpetuated upon us. When we believe we engage the illusion, when we stop believing we shatter the illusion and ourselves in the process because we are part of it."
Weasel 16 wrote:
well seeing as how i dident have much to begin with... oh wait i know what you... you made an asumption about me with out actualy knowing me! oh ok, that makes it have a lot more sence.
nope i made assumption that you didn’t have much faith and you just said you never had much faith so therefore i was right
yep
thats not the part I was contesting, you made an asumption that I had faith to begin with.
i knew you did because i read threads in the past where you mentioned you were a
theist
Weasel 16 wrote:
well seeing as how i dident have much to begin with... oh wait i know what you... you made an asumption about me with out actualy knowing me! oh ok, that makes it have a lot more sence.
nope i made assumption that you didn’t have much faith and you just said you never had much faith so therefore i was right
yep
thats not the part I was contesting, you made an asumption that I had faith to begin with.
i knew you did because i read threads in the past where you mentioned you were a
theist
ummmm... where did I post that and what do you mean by thest?
--- Dogbert said the deepest thing ever.
“It is all a part of the big illusion we perpetuate upon ourselves and which is in turn perpetuated upon us. When we believe we engage the illusion, when we stop believing we shatter the illusion and ourselves in the process because we are part of it."
»
Religion
» Let us set up some ground rules (if I might be so bold)
First 
