LP <whirl_pool@nospam.hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<dg3dhvsp8j07aptoeng57dc2gdclp1rsh5@4ax.com>...
On Wed, 11 Jun 2003 16:49:04 +0200, Nokia <nokiamail@hotpop.com>
wrote:
On 11 Jun 2003 03:42:26 -0700,
(Roshard
Davis) wrote:
Greetings everyone. I got into an argument with a christian about 2
days about why I do not believe anything of his religion. I gave him
some usual good points that get most christians stump like the bible
being full of contradictions, no evidence of Jesus or god ever
existing, burden of proof, historical inaccuracies (sp?) etc.
After we were through arguing with each other, he dismisses the
argument by saying that I am only 23 years old (I told everyone that
on the discussion group that I was in when introducing myself to them
because that is how old I am), and then implying that I'm too young to
be making such decisions about religion and atheism and that I haven't
yet explore the "Mysteries of life" whatever that means. I told
that person assuming that he is much older than me like late 40's or
early 50's or he wouldn't be making that comment about me that he is
too old to be basing his life on fairy tales like the bible. Also, I
told him that just because he is older than me doesn't mean that he
know ever damn thing or know any better than I do. The question
that I wanted to ask is, is there a easier way to make a comback to
this without the sarcasm and rude remarks? Even though I am 23 years
old and there are somethings that I haven't learned or experience yet,
I am an adult and I feel that people way older than me making comments
like this is an insult to me.Thanks.Visit My
Website:http://www.geocities.com/freedomwarrior5000
Just thought of this: If children are too young to understand religion
anyway, why are there religious schools? Why is the church
indoctrinating little children? Shouldn't they be left alone until
they discovered religion themselves with old age?
Children must choose their own beliefs
In an open letter to Estelle Morris, Richard Dawkins calls on the
Government to think again about funding yet more divisive faith
schools
Article in The Observer Sunday December 30, 2001
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,6903,625743,00.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When I was around your age arguing with Christians, matters of age and
experience did come up with older Bible thumpers. The thing you have
to ask yourself is why do you care? If you are content with your
perspective and beliefs, you have nothing to prove. Certainly age
does not nurture intellectual or spirituals wisdom, self-assessment
does.
I was an Atheist from the age of 16, and making a stand against an
oppressive Christian majority was important. After a few years, I saw
futility in arguing with those unwilling to endanger their belief
system. The term atheist itself implies an antagonistic approach on
life. I would no longer label myself an atheist, because my beliefs
step outside of such a struggle. I find it more productive exploring
a substitution for community, philosophy, inner strength that religion
fills for most.
What are you offering people in return for denouncing their beliefs?
That is what you are missing with "experience". Are you being an
iconoclast for unselfish reasons? Your power ride of intellectualism
is the fervor of the religious man. I'd suggest focusing your efforts
on understanding yourself and how you fit into the world, rather than
opposing it. And once you know that, you'll decide if that makes you
content or you wish to share your experience. Until then, you are
trapped in the religious dichotomy.
.
