3 Reasons Why Theism is Wrong.

[quote]Charlie Horse wrote:

[quote]TheDozer97 wrote:

[quote]Charlie Horse wrote:

[quote]TheDozer97 wrote:

[quote]Charlie Horse wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
By your standards you don’t have proof of anything and never will.
[/quote]

The scientific proof available merely chips away at what is unknown but never will reveal every thing. Their will always be room for doubt, for belief in god. I’ve accepted this.
I am okay with always wondering and never knowing for sure.
If I am right and there is no soul then I won’t know it. I’ll just stop existing, I would only know if I was wrong. I’m okay with this too.[/quote]
what if you are wrong?[/quote]

Wrong about what?
Which part?[/quote]
My mistake, looking over it again I missed the “I would only know if I was wrong. I’m okay with this too.” Though I do have a couple questions:

I am just wondering why you are ok with it. Out of curiousity, why do you choose “science over relgion” (I quoted it because they are not always in conflict depending upon the specific perspective) when you admit that there will be doubt with either?

Have you heard of tentative belief?[/quote]

Because science has answers that they can explain to me and can be verified. I have a lot of curiosity about life and science and not being sure means there are always new things to learn about.

Religion asks me to just believe, as a skeptical person I find this impossible to do. Years ago I just accepted my skepticism, and accepting this meant being comfortable with things being left unexplained. I have always found believing to be stressful, because I could never really believe. I found with atheism I could abandon this belief thing.

Tentative belief? No never heard of it, but tentative means without confidence or uncertain.
[/quote]

Problem is that even in saying that God doesn’t exist and there isn’t , you are making a claim based on nothing but faith - a faith in nothing, I guess you could say.

I proposed tentative belief because it sounded like something you would be interested in. Robert McKim proposed the idea of tentative belief. Basically, he says that, because God is hidden and this presents some doubt on his existence/characteristics, it is one’s epistemic responsibility to hold a religious belief tentatively.

He defines this in terms of 2 principles: an E-principle and T-Principle. The E-principle is that one will examine one’s own belief and the T-principle being holding one’s own belief with a grain of salt.

What I am trying to say is that atheism is not an escape from belief - it is just belief in something else. I figured you might find the concept of tentative belief interesting and perhaps appealing.

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:<<< what you are saying is that here are three things for which we do not have an explanation, therefore, there must be a God. >>>[/quote]For the record I’m saying that by starting with the incomprehensible triune God first it simply follows that there be a multitude of things for which I myself do not have an explanation. I don’t blindly discover mind bending mystery in the reality I live in. I fully expect it and utilize it as an opportunity to marvel at the limitless infinite intellect that IS almighty God for whom no mystery is possible.
[/quote]

And this is why I have a problem with religions. You start with the belief/assumption that there exists a God. This, at least for me, raised way more questions than answers. The most important question was the problem of evil: if there is a God who actually loves us and watches over us, then why does he let bad things happen to what seem to be otherwise good people?

[/quote]

Because this isn’t all there is. Because we cannot nor do we NEED to understand every atomic detail of every atomic what and why of existence. Because without any shitty stuff, no one, anywhere, in any way, could or would appreciate good, or sacrifice, or fellowship, or real love, or anything other than a short, cold, robotic existence characterized by chemical reactions and response to stimuli. [/quote]

Can you explain why i’m far from experiencing this life as robotic and cold? Can you explain why i experience love, friendship and beauty regardless of my atheism?
[/quote]

Boy are my statements ever getting twisted into pretzels by the atheists today.

You are certainly not experiencing life in this manner. You can thank God for that :)[/quote]

Correct me if I am wrong, but it seemed you were trying to explain the problem of evil and that it was interpreted as being a benefit of beleif…

[quote]TheDozer97 wrote:

[quote]Charlie Horse wrote:

[quote]TheDozer97 wrote:

[quote]Charlie Horse wrote:

[quote]TheDozer97 wrote:

[quote]Charlie Horse wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
By your standards you don’t have proof of anything and never will.
[/quote]

The scientific proof available merely chips away at what is unknown but never will reveal every thing. Their will always be room for doubt, for belief in god. I’ve accepted this.
I am okay with always wondering and never knowing for sure.
If I am right and there is no soul then I won’t know it. I’ll just stop existing, I would only know if I was wrong. I’m okay with this too.[/quote]
what if you are wrong?[/quote]

Wrong about what?
Which part?[/quote]
My mistake, looking over it again I missed the “I would only know if I was wrong. I’m okay with this too.” Though I do have a couple questions:

I am just wondering why you are ok with it. Out of curiousity, why do you choose “science over relgion” (I quoted it because they are not always in conflict depending upon the specific perspective) when you admit that there will be doubt with either?

Have you heard of tentative belief?[/quote]

Because science has answers that they can explain to me and can be verified. I have a lot of curiosity about life and science and not being sure means there are always new things to learn about.

Religion asks me to just believe, as a skeptical person I find this impossible to do. Years ago I just accepted my skepticism, and accepting this meant being comfortable with things being left unexplained. I have always found believing to be stressful, because I could never really believe. I found with atheism I could abandon this belief thing.

Tentative belief? No never heard of it, but tentative means without confidence or uncertain.
[/quote]

Problem is that even in saying that God doesn’t exist and there isn’t , you are making a claim based on nothing but faith - a faith in nothing, I guess you could say.

I proposed tentative belief because it sounded like something you would be interested in. Robert McKim proposed the idea of tentative belief. Basically, he says that, because God is hidden and this presents some doubt on his existence/characteristics, it is one’s epistemic responsibility to hold a religious belief tentatively.

He defines this in terms of 2 principles: an E-principle and T-Principle. The E-principle is that one will examine one’s own belief and the T-principle being holding one’s own belief with a grain of salt.

What I am trying to say is that atheism is not an escape from belief - it is just belief in something else. I figured you might find the concept of tentative belief interesting and perhaps appealing.[/quote]

This is the atheist definition I was going with; most inclusively, atheism is simply the absence of belief that any deities exist(Wikipedia). Emphasis on absence of belief.
I will not believe, I will only know.

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

Didn’t say fall in love, we were talking about love. You serious, you can’t control if you get irritated?
[/quote]

Explain how emotions, including love, that are chemically induced by the brain have anything to do with god?

The arousal of most emotions, beit positive or negative, happens involuntarily. There is a trigger [an outside occurence] and a respons [release of chemicals].

A simple example is the release of adrenaline and cortisol in a fight or flight situation. Perhaps only a highly trained individual is able to control these processes, but i can’t. I can only control how i mentally react to the physical changes, and in this day and age, even that is something most people can’t do.

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

Can you explain why i’m far from experiencing this life as robotic and cold? Can you explain why i experience love, friendship and beauty regardless of my atheism?
[/quote]

Boy are my statements ever getting twisted into pretzels by the atheists today.

You are certainly not experiencing life in this manner. You can thank God for that :)[/quote]

Why? Because he’s responsible for my existence, and without him i wouldn’t even be able to experience life?

[quote]Cortes wrote:

So then, you agree with Sloth. I didn’t have any control over the fact that I believe in God, and you don’t have any control over your not-belief in God, and my hopes and desires and loves and everything else are just the result of a big fat cosmic accident.

Did I miss anything?[/quote]

Your beliefs induce a state of wellbeing that you find favourable. That is the upside of religious beliefs. I’ve never denied that and said that, as far as religion goes, this is a positive aspect of it.

The subsequent insistence that these beliefs are absolute truth and the consequences resulting from that pigheaded certainty are not so positive, imo.

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:

So then, you agree with Sloth. I didn’t have any control over the fact that I believe in God, and you don’t have any control over your not-belief in God, and my hopes and desires and loves and everything else are just the result of a big fat cosmic accident.

Did I miss anything?[/quote]

Your beliefs induce a state of wellbeing that you find favourable. That is the upside of religious beliefs. I’ve never denied that and said that, as far as religion goes, this is a positive aspect of it.

The subsequent insistence that these beliefs are absolute truth and the consequences resulting from that pigheaded certainty are not so positive, imo.[/quote]

If all we are all collections of juices and chemicals reacting and responding to environmental stimuli, then I cannot be held accountable for my silly, primitive, pigheaded beliefs. Nor are you an enlightened super-genius, it’s just the luck of the environmento-genetic draw in that you happened to inherit the genes and environment that would be conducive to your discovering this. Lucky you. Only, not really lucky, because my genes and chemicals dictate that I won’t accept this, and will continue pigheadedly believing what it is I happen to be programmed to believe.

I suppose I might find it all quite liberating if I were capable of believing this, though, as I could take comfort in the fact that I never had to honestly take responsibility for any of my actions,and that I could explain away any behavior, good or bad, or ultimately justify any action, as you and I have discussed before.

Do you believe this?

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

Can you explain why i’m far from experiencing this life as robotic and cold? Can you explain why i experience love, friendship and beauty regardless of my atheism?
[/quote]

Boy are my statements ever getting twisted into pretzels by the atheists today.

You are certainly not experiencing life in this manner. You can thank God for that :)[/quote]

Why? Because he’s responsible for my existence, and without him i wouldn’t even be able to experience life?[/quote]

My original point was that, regardless, living in a “perfect” world, without ever having known or experienced any kind of hardship whatsoever, nor had the opportunity to choose one way or another, would be a result in a cold, robotic existence. We were discussing the problem of evil, and it is my contention that one of the reasons evil exists, in part, is that it is a necessary fire in which to forge our souls before they move on. Also, evil, as it stands, seems a whole lot worse when you doggedly refuse to see the Christian side of the argument.I would feel the same way you and Mike do about the things God “allows,” if I didn’t thing there was a God to begin with.

Again, there is a very strong, almost, it would seem, conscious effort on the part of many of the atheists on this board to refuse to look at things from the Christian viewpoint, while still adamantly demanding that our God conform to their worldview. And when he doesn’t, that is taken as evidence of his non-existence.

It is a straw man argument.

[quote]TheDozer97 wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:<<< what you are saying is that here are three things for which we do not have an explanation, therefore, there must be a God. >>>[/quote]For the record I’m saying that by starting with the incomprehensible triune God first it simply follows that there be a multitude of things for which I myself do not have an explanation. I don’t blindly discover mind bending mystery in the reality I live in. I fully expect it and utilize it as an opportunity to marvel at the limitless infinite intellect that IS almighty God for whom no mystery is possible.
[/quote]

And this is why I have a problem with religions. You start with the belief/assumption that there exists a God. This, at least for me, raised way more questions than answers. The most important question was the problem of evil: if there is a God who actually loves us and watches over us, then why does he let bad things happen to what seem to be otherwise good people?

[/quote]

Because this isn’t all there is. Because we cannot nor do we NEED to understand every atomic detail of every atomic what and why of existence. Because without any shitty stuff, no one, anywhere, in any way, could or would appreciate good, or sacrifice, or fellowship, or real love, or anything other than a short, cold, robotic existence characterized by chemical reactions and response to stimuli. [/quote]

Can you explain why i’m far from experiencing this life as robotic and cold? Can you explain why i experience love, friendship and beauty regardless of my atheism?
[/quote]

Boy are my statements ever getting twisted into pretzels by the atheists today.

You are certainly not experiencing life in this manner. You can thank God for that :)[/quote]

Correct me if I am wrong, but it seemed you were trying to explain the problem of evil and that it was interpreted as being a benefit of beleif…[/quote]

You are right about my comments referring to Mike’s raising the problem of evil as evidence (to him) of the non-existence of God. I’m not really sure what you mean in the second half of your sentence, but I attempted to explain my point just now. Let me know if that cleared it up for you and, if not, I’ll try and explain myself better.

[quote]Cortes wrote:

If all we are all collections of juices and chemicals reacting and responding to environmental stimuli, then I cannot be held accountable for my silly, primitive, pigheaded beliefs. Nor are you an enlightened super-genius, it’s just the luck of the environmento-genetic draw in that you happened to inherit the genes and environment that would be conducive to your discovering this. Lucky you. Only, not really lucky, because my genes and chemicals dictate that I won’t accept this, and will continue pigheadedly believing what it is I happen to be programmed to believe.

I suppose I might find it all quite liberating if I were capable of believing this, though, as I could take comfort in the fact that I never had to honestly take responsibility for any of my actions,and that I could explain away any behavior, good or bad, or ultimately justify any action, as you and I have discussed before.

Do you believe this? [/quote]

I’m not blaming you for your beliefs, but i can blame someone for acting on those beliefs.

Genes aren’t the only factor that influences your behaviour ofcourse; nurture also has a lot to do with this. But to answer your question:

Yes, i do believe that we are governed by nothing more than genetic [instinctual] and cultural [upbringing/education] programming. This doesn’t automatically lead to the conclusion that all actions are neutral, it simply means to we decide for ourselves what is right and what is wrong.

Personally, my opinions on natural psychedelics and other drugs are in conflict with my countries laws. I do not feel bound by those laws to act in concordance with those laws.

The idea that moral behaviour requires a divine imperative is nonsense, but i readily agree with you that there are scores of people who’d behave destructively without them.

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

Can you explain why i’m far from experiencing this life as robotic and cold? Can you explain why i experience love, friendship and beauty regardless of my atheism?
[/quote]

Boy are my statements ever getting twisted into pretzels by the atheists today.

You are certainly not experiencing life in this manner. You can thank God for that :)[/quote]

Why? Because he’s responsible for my existence, and without him i wouldn’t even be able to experience life?[/quote]

My original point was that, regardless, living in a “perfect” world, without ever having known or experienced any kind of hardship whatsoever, nor had the opportunity to choose one way or another, would be a result in a cold, robotic existence. We were discussing the problem of evil, and it is my contention that one of the reasons evil exists, in part, is that it is a necessary fire in which to forge our souls before they move on. Also, evil, as it stands, seems a whole lot worse when you doggedly refuse to see the Christian side of the argument.I would feel the same way you and Mike do about the things God “allows,” if I didn’t thing there was a God to begin with.

Again, there is a very strong, almost, it would seem, conscious effort on the part of many of the atheists on this board to refuse to look at things from the Christian viewpoint, while still adamantly demanding that our God conform to their worldview. And when he doesn’t, that is taken as evidence of his non-existence.

It is a straw man argument.
[/quote]

So… were Adam and Eve mere robots?

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

Can you explain why i’m far from experiencing this life as robotic and cold? Can you explain why i experience love, friendship and beauty regardless of my atheism?
[/quote]

Boy are my statements ever getting twisted into pretzels by the atheists today.

You are certainly not experiencing life in this manner. You can thank God for that :)[/quote]

Why? Because he’s responsible for my existence, and without him i wouldn’t even be able to experience life?[/quote]

My original point was that, regardless, living in a “perfect” world, without ever having known or experienced any kind of hardship whatsoever, nor had the opportunity to choose one way or another, would be a result in a cold, robotic existence. We were discussing the problem of evil, and it is my contention that one of the reasons evil exists, in part, is that it is a necessary fire in which to forge our souls before they move on. Also, evil, as it stands, seems a whole lot worse when you doggedly refuse to see the Christian side of the argument.I would feel the same way you and Mike do about the things God “allows,” if I didn’t thing there was a God to begin with.

Again, there is a very strong, almost, it would seem, conscious effort on the part of many of the atheists on this board to refuse to look at things from the Christian viewpoint, while still adamantly demanding that our God conform to their worldview. And when he doesn’t, that is taken as evidence of his non-existence.

It is a straw man argument.
[/quote]

So… were Adam and Eve mere robots?
[/quote]

Free will.

Though your question is good as regards knowledge of good and evil and the ability to appreciate what they had. I’ll have to think about it and do a bit of research.

Also, I think you are aware of this but in case you aren’t, I am Catholic and do not subscribe to the young earth creationist world view. I feel compelled to keep explaining but maybe I’m just overcomplicating things as it is so l will just shut up for now.

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:

If all we are all collections of juices and chemicals reacting and responding to environmental stimuli, then I cannot be held accountable for my silly, primitive, pigheaded beliefs. Nor are you an enlightened super-genius, it’s just the luck of the environmento-genetic draw in that you happened to inherit the genes and environment that would be conducive to your discovering this. Lucky you. Only, not really lucky, because my genes and chemicals dictate that I won’t accept this, and will continue pigheadedly believing what it is I happen to be programmed to believe.

I suppose I might find it all quite liberating if I were capable of believing this, though, as I could take comfort in the fact that I never had to honestly take responsibility for any of my actions,and that I could explain away any behavior, good or bad, or ultimately justify any action, as you and I have discussed before.

Do you believe this? [/quote]

I’m not blaming you for your beliefs, but i can blame someone for acting on those beliefs.

Genes aren’t the only factor that influences your behaviour ofcourse; nurture also has a lot to do with this. But to answer your question:

Yes, i do believe that we are governed by nothing more than genetic [instinctual] and cultural [upbringing/education] programming. This doesn’t automatically lead to the conclusion that all actions are neutral, it simply means to we decide for ourselves what is right and what is wrong.

Personally, my opinions on natural psychedelics and other drugs are in conflict with my countries laws. I do not feel bound by those laws to act in concordance with those laws.

The idea that moral behaviour requires a divine imperative is nonsense, but i readily agree with you that there are scores of people who’d behave destructively without them.

[/quote]

You and I both know where we diverge on this one, and I don’t think there’s any point in doing all that over again.

I still don’t see where, ultimately, you can hope to derive moral authority, though, outside of cultural agreement and general icky feelings. And we also both know where judgments based solely upon those can finally end up.

[quote]Charlie Horse wrote:

[quote]TheDozer97 wrote:

[quote]Charlie Horse wrote:

[quote]TheDozer97 wrote:

[quote]Charlie Horse wrote:

[quote]TheDozer97 wrote:

[quote]Charlie Horse wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
By your standards you don’t have proof of anything and never will.
[/quote]

The scientific proof available merely chips away at what is unknown but never will reveal every thing. Their will always be room for doubt, for belief in god. I’ve accepted this.
I am okay with always wondering and never knowing for sure.
If I am right and there is no soul then I won’t know it. I’ll just stop existing, I would only know if I was wrong. I’m okay with this too.[/quote]
what if you are wrong?[/quote]

Wrong about what?
Which part?[/quote]
My mistake, looking over it again I missed the “I would only know if I was wrong. I’m okay with this too.” Though I do have a couple questions:

I am just wondering why you are ok with it. Out of curiousity, why do you choose “science over relgion” (I quoted it because they are not always in conflict depending upon the specific perspective) when you admit that there will be doubt with either?

Have you heard of tentative belief?[/quote]

Because science has answers that they can explain to me and can be verified. I have a lot of curiosity about life and science and not being sure means there are always new things to learn about.

Religion asks me to just believe, as a skeptical person I find this impossible to do. Years ago I just accepted my skepticism, and accepting this meant being comfortable with things being left unexplained. I have always found believing to be stressful, because I could never really believe. I found with atheism I could abandon this belief thing.

Tentative belief? No never heard of it, but tentative means without confidence or uncertain.
[/quote]

Problem is that even in saying that God doesn’t exist and there isn’t , you are making a claim based on nothing but faith - a faith in nothing, I guess you could say.

I proposed tentative belief because it sounded like something you would be interested in. Robert McKim proposed the idea of tentative belief. Basically, he says that, because God is hidden and this presents some doubt on his existence/characteristics, it is one’s epistemic responsibility to hold a religious belief tentatively.

He defines this in terms of 2 principles: an E-principle and T-Principle. The E-principle is that one will examine one’s own belief and the T-principle being holding one’s own belief with a grain of salt.

What I am trying to say is that atheism is not an escape from belief - it is just belief in something else. I figured you might find the concept of tentative belief interesting and perhaps appealing.[/quote]

This is the atheist definition I was going with; most inclusively, atheism is simply the absence of belief that any deities exist(Wikipedia). Emphasis on absence of belief.
I will not believe, I will only know.
[/quote]

I see. I was using this definition: Atheism and Agnosticism (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) Of course, there is a problem with what one really knows anyway and what constitutes proof for something. If you take anything that you hold true, you can usually trace it back to something that you must take for granted. This is basically the origins for Descartes idea of “I think, therefore I am” (not that I am agreeing with him, he was just searching for something concrete).

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]TheDozer97 wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:<<< what you are saying is that here are three things for which we do not have an explanation, therefore, there must be a God. >>>[/quote]For the record I’m saying that by starting with the incomprehensible triune God first it simply follows that there be a multitude of things for which I myself do not have an explanation. I don’t blindly discover mind bending mystery in the reality I live in. I fully expect it and utilize it as an opportunity to marvel at the limitless infinite intellect that IS almighty God for whom no mystery is possible.
[/quote]

And this is why I have a problem with religions. You start with the belief/assumption that there exists a God. This, at least for me, raised way more questions than answers. The most important question was the problem of evil: if there is a God who actually loves us and watches over us, then why does he let bad things happen to what seem to be otherwise good people?

[/quote]

Because this isn’t all there is. Because we cannot nor do we NEED to understand every atomic detail of every atomic what and why of existence. Because without any shitty stuff, no one, anywhere, in any way, could or would appreciate good, or sacrifice, or fellowship, or real love, or anything other than a short, cold, robotic existence characterized by chemical reactions and response to stimuli. [/quote]

Can you explain why i’m far from experiencing this life as robotic and cold? Can you explain why i experience love, friendship and beauty regardless of my atheism?
[/quote]

Boy are my statements ever getting twisted into pretzels by the atheists today.

You are certainly not experiencing life in this manner. You can thank God for that :)[/quote]

Correct me if I am wrong, but it seemed you were trying to explain the problem of evil and that it was interpreted as being a benefit of beleif…[/quote]

You are right about my comments referring to Mike’s raising the problem of evil as evidence (to him) of the non-existence of God. I’m not really sure what you mean in the second half of your sentence, but I attempted to explain my point just now. Let me know if that cleared it up for you and, if not, I’ll try and explain myself better. [/quote]

I meant by the second half that in the response, “Can you explain why i experience love, friendship and beauty regardless of my atheism?” It seems you were interpreted as making a claim for a benefit of believing in God; the responder was asking why he has the benefits without the belief in God. At least that’s how I understood it.

[quote]TheDozer97 wrote:

I meant by the second half that in the response, “Can you explain why i experience love, friendship and beauty regardless of my atheism?” It seems you were interpreted as making a claim for a benefit of believing in God; the responder was asking why he has the benefits without the belief in God. At least that’s how I understood it.[/quote]

Yes, that’s correct. I was misinterpreted as stating that an atheist’s existence is cold and robotic, when that is not at all what I was saying.

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:<<< I’m not sure I would care. Why would I? But I’m interested as to where you’re going with this.[/quote]What would your opinion be of me allowing for the possibly of your wife not actually belonging to you. Suppose I put it up for a vote? A poll of “experts”? What if a large percentage of people close to you were involved and were also prepared to call you a liar? "maybe you guys have been fakin it huh? At what point along the way would you consider the whole thing idiotic and nonsensical?
[/quote]I suppose I would consider idiotic from the get go, but again I wouldn’t care so much unless you had a bad motive. For instance, if you were saying that she was really your wife, then I would have a problem - a rather big problem. However, I have a document that states we are legally married, so I have evidence to support my claim. Plus, I’m assuming she would have a say in this and she would and could support my claim. I have witnesses who were at my wedding and could confirm that we were, in fact, married. Does this mess up your example? I’m not trying to be difficult here - I’m really interested in where you’re going with this. But as you can see, my claim that my wife is in fact “my wife” is not based on a mere belief. I have evidence and witnesses to support my claim.[/quote]Excellent. And when I quote Romans 1:18-25 to you for about the tenth time:

[quote]18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.

24 Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, 25 because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.[/quote]You don’t believe this which is fine. I had no illusions of convincing you, but it does illustrate my point. Could be anything. Could be your house. You come runnin out “hey what are you people doin here? Get outta my yard”. To which we answer that were having an “objective” study of whether this is you house or not. You say “wadda ya talkin about? I built this house. I’ve lived here for 20 years. My neighbors all know me. This is all my stuff in here, here’s the deed. My name’s on the mailbox, that’s my car”. Yeah well we don’t see any of that. We’ve been examining our own evidence our way and the way we see it this isn’t your house. (all analogies, especially about God are imperfect)

Regardless of what you believe, that is God’s view of you. His signature and deed of ownership are displayed with blinding brightness in and through absolutely every last fact of existence and especially you yourself as created in His image. You are tripping over Him everywhere and especially in your mirror. He is NOT hiding. YOU ARE. You will probably laugh this off and roll your eyes at my religious stupor, but like I keep sayin. It ain’t just for you. God knows who else may be reading. If it does help you at least understand the biblical position then all the better.

Dead men worship themselves by pretending to be qualified to “objectively” scrutinize reality in such a way as to determine the probability or no of the existence an infinite triune creator God. We’ll decide and God WILL bow. He is in reality the first fact from whom ALL other facts derive their factuality. That’s what makes Him God see? To me this is the most basic concept there is. Everything makes ultimate sense in the light of His glory and nothing makes sense without it.
[/quote]

OK here I have to say something. I too like Mike have struck an uneasy but at least tenable truce with uncertainty, and am open to at least reasonable argument both ways, but here is where I get a little irked.

When you are using the scriptures to ‘reason’ with someone on what you believe, you believe that their ability to understand and follow an argument to fruition is sufficient that they can or should be able to discern the point from scripture, and ‘believe unto the LORD’. However once they do the same with secular literature, they suddenly are TOO simple and unenlightened to POSSIBLY be able to ‘find there own way’.

You can’t have it Both ways. Either Man is capable of discernment to the point of understanding or he isn’t. If you say he isn’t when in fact all he has done is found ‘other’ answers besides those found in scripture, then how can you think him capable of discerning any answers ‘within’ scripture?

This is one of the things that drove me away from Judeo/Christian faith. And if you are going to argue that in the case of scripture, the Spirit ‘helps’ in the understanding, then we are back to the argument that my Father made. I find this argument very dubious.

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]ephrem wrote:

The idea that moral behaviour requires a divine imperative is nonsense, but i readily agree with you that there are scores of people who’d behave destructively without them.

[/quote]

You and I both know where we diverge on this one, and I don’t think there’s any point in doing all that over again.

I still don’t see where, ultimately, you can hope to derive moral authority, though, outside of cultural agreement and general icky feelings. And we also both know where judgments based solely upon those can finally end up. [/quote]

Why do i need moral authority?

Even you act on an individual basis with regards to morality, regardless of the fact that it’s supposedly divinely inspired. The Catholic Church has acted, in it’s past, contrary to God’s law.

You would not act in any way like the Church did. You would not condone actions that hurt an innocent being, would you? You would not rationalise behaviour that had a direct negative impact on another person or persons, would you?

How you live your life according to how you perceive god’s law is not influenced by the actions of others, even if those other people are people of authority within the same religion. You’d condemn childmolestation by priests even if it was just a isolated incident.

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]TheDozer97 wrote:

I meant by the second half that in the response, “Can you explain why i experience love, friendship and beauty regardless of my atheism?” It seems you were interpreted as making a claim for a benefit of believing in God; the responder was asking why he has the benefits without the belief in God. At least that’s how I understood it.[/quote]

Yes, that’s correct. I was misinterpreted as stating that an atheist’s existence is cold and robotic, when that is not at all what I was saying.
[/quote]

You are correct, i did misread what you wrote, but guess what: i don’t even disagree with you.

We appreciate what we have more in light of adversity than when we coast through life without a worry.

[quote]TheDozer97 wrote:
Of course, there is a problem with what one really knows anyway and what constitutes proof for something. If you take anything that you hold true, you can usually trace it back to something that you must take for granted. This is basically the origins for Descartes idea of “I think, therefore I am” (not that I am agreeing with him, he was just searching for something concrete).[/quote]

It kind of sounds like you are saying all humans (believers and non-believers) are in the dark about everything. That we are all full of shit. That would include you and I. :slight_smile: