[GrimRedBones]

Hi, I'm a new member to this forum and I was scanning the threads the other day and couldn't help noticing what was going on in the atheist heavy cross debate. At first the debate seemed pretty reasonable until a certain member who happened to have very different personal views from the a majority entered at which things seemed to rapidly spiral out of control.

Personally I lean towards the atheist side of things and agree wholeheartedly with the point that many members were attracted to. That being, the obvious lack of evidence for a creator. I mean if I was going to wholeheartedly embrace a God and recognize him as my creator, sure I'd want to see some real tangible evidence for his existence. This poster was obviously well versed in the arguments that a lot of Christians try to use when making claims about the necessity of belief. But whats interesting is that he/she seemed really to be talking about morality as the basis for why atheism doesn't work. Also isn't it interesting that when a person who has strong convictions comes up against those who don't it immediately brings out the worst in people. I mean do we really have to denigrate this person to justify our own point of view? Ok the thread was closed quite appropriately at the end, and just a casual glance showed that it was definitely all over by that point. The original point was that atheists have a burden in having to justify their beliefs but in this case it seemed quite the opposite. It was our good pilgrim who was under constant attack. I guess if you're going to argue with someone of radically different culture and ideas, why waste time trying to bite into the details that cause the most disagreement. I would think that trying to look into the argument and see how the reasoning works is the more productive way.

Anyway Atheist vs Christian threads generally lead to heated arguments.