[quote]battlelust wrote:
so far, everyone is agreeing with me (whether they realize it or not)! hooray!
note to fellow theists: your gods are greater than mere human “rational thought.” do jehovah, or odin, or krishna, or quetzocatl allow themselves to be confined by rational thought? you drag your gods down from olympus by trying to understand your gods as if they were humans and as if they had to be confined by rational thought. is your god all-powerful? then the scientific evidence contrary to your god’s existence is STILL CORRECT!!! gods do not need to justify their actions with proofs for your mind. do I hold irrational, unprovable beliefs that form the core of my arguments? yes! of course! so do you! that’s my whole point! [/quote]
[quote]battlelust wrote:
so far, everyone is agreeing with me (whether they realize it or not)! hooray!
note to fellow theists: your gods are greater than mere human “rational thought.” do jehovah, or odin, or krishna, or quetzocatl allow themselves to be confined by rational thought? you drag your gods down from olympus by trying to understand your gods as if they were humans and as if they had to be confined by rational thought. is your god all-powerful? then the scientific evidence contrary to your god’s existence is STILL CORRECT!!! gods do not need to justify their actions with proofs for your mind. do I hold irrational, unprovable beliefs that form the core of my arguments? yes! of course! so do you! that’s my whole point! [/quote]
I agree that God would not have to explain (His) rationality, but you are leaving out (His) ability to choose to explain.
While I agree that the finite cannot understand the infinite unless It is put in terms we understand. That does not rule out the infinite giving us the ability to understand (His) decrees.
It really depends on what type of theism you perscribe too. If you are a pantheist/diest than you would see no need to consider an after life. If you are just about any other type of theist than it would heavily way on your mind.
The general idea that all roads lead to Heaven is a stretch in all considerations. In that way one would have to ask the following, why having choices, why have right/wrong, why have morals, and why care if you are theist, or atheist? We would all go to the same place so who cares?
That would all hang though on what type of theist you are, and what would be truth.
Which would also hang upon did God choose to reveal (Himself) to us?
While the General Monotheist belief is God doesn’t have to explain anything to us because (He) is sovereign, Yet (He) chose to. The others tend to be in a state of we don’t really know, but we know (He) is there.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
I always wondered how athiests could be so sure. Especially in light of the fact that some of the greatest minds of all time were in fact believers.
Einstein was once asked if he believed in God. His answer was “absoultely.” The intereviewer pushed him further: “Do you accept the historical Jesus?” Einstein stated: “Unquestionably, no one can read the gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life.”
He would of been classified as a pantheist though. He did not believe in a Christian God, and in fact turned his back on the notion of the Bible being more than just a book of stories.
[quote]MentalMuscle wrote:
It would appear that Flew fought the monster of theism too hard and stared into it for far too long.
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.
-Friedrich Nietzsche [/quote]
Didn’t Nietzsche go insane? I would hardly want to rely on the teachings of a man who spent the last years of his life in a mental hospital. One could wonder though if He was right what monsters did He fight that overcame Him?
[quote]battlelust wrote:
you drag your gods down from olympus by trying to understand your gods as if they were humans and as if they had to be confined by rational thought. is your god all-powerful? then the scientific evidence contrary to your god’s existence is STILL CORRECT!!! gods do not need to justify their actions with proofs for your mind. do I hold irrational, unprovable beliefs that form the core of my arguments? yes! of course! so do you! that’s my whole point! [/quote]
Best post in the best open thread in “Politics and World Issues.” Perfect.
You can’t “prove” whether god does or does not exist. You can only provide empirical evidence to strengthen your position.
For example, can anyone here “prove” that Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy doesn’t exist? I didn’t think so.
I am an athiest, meaning I think there is sufficient scientific evidence to have a strong argument against the existance of a god. When you understand the science behind physics, biology, chemistry, and psychology there’s not much else left. Every “miracle” can be explained with science. The magic disappears.
[quote]Bri Hildebrandt wrote:
When you understand the science behind physics, biology, chemistry, and psychology there’s not much else left. Every “miracle” can be explained with science. The magic disappears.[/quote]
Exactly how deep is your education that you think you have mastered more knowledge than anyone else in this thread? That was the attitude that I have written about before, as if athiests believe that everyone who believes in God is a dumbass and they are our superiors.
[quote]Bri Hildebrandt wrote:
You can’t “prove” whether god does or does not exist. You can only provide empirical evidence to strengthen your position.
For example, can anyone here “prove” that Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy doesn’t exist? I didn’t think so.
I am an athiest, meaning I think there is sufficient scientific evidence to have a strong argument against the existance of a god. When you understand the science behind physics, biology, chemistry, and psychology there’s not much else left. Every “miracle” can be explained with science. The magic disappears.[/quote]
Then explain away. Those miracle things are kind of irritating anyway!
This seemed a good spot for a WSJ editorial on militant atheists in action:
Mission Creeps
December 21, 2004; Page A18
Senator Barbara Boxer, a liberal Democrat from California, finds herself on the wrong side of a group of fundamentalists. A modest piece of legislation that Ms. Boxer sponsored is under attack in court by plaintiffs who demand that the government enforce their moral views.
These are secular fundamentalists, not religious ones. At issue is the California Missions Preservation Act, which allots $10 million to restore and repair 21 historic churches in the Golden State. On December 2, two days after President Bush signed the act into law, Americans United for Separation of Church and State filed suit on behalf of Betty, Carol, John and Ronald Doe – not their real names – contending that such funding violates the separation of church and state. A description of the four Does sounds like the beginning of a joke: A Unitarian, a Jew, a Buddhist and a “freethinker” go before the bar . . .
Americans United is selective in its opposition to government funding of religious expression. The group filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the 1998 case of National Endowment for the Arts v. Finley, in which it unsuccessfully urged the Supreme Court to overturn a law imposing “decency and respect” restrictions on NEA grantees. Among the NEA-funded works that had prompted Congress to impose the regulations was Andres Serrano’s notorious photograph “Piss Christ,” which depicted a crucifix submerged in the photographer’s urine.
The lawsuit prompted a heartening display of bipartisanship, as the California Republican Party issued a press release “coming to the defense of Senator Boxer.” Maybe the country isn’t quite as bitterly divided as it seemed on November 2.
[quote]Bri Hildebrandt wrote:
You can’t “prove” whether god does or does not exist. You can only provide empirical evidence to strengthen your position.
For example, can anyone here “prove” that Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy doesn’t exist? I didn’t think so.
I am an athiest, meaning I think there is sufficient scientific evidence to have a strong argument against the existance of a god. When you understand the science behind physics, biology, chemistry, and psychology there’s not much else left. Every “miracle” can be explained with science. The magic disappears.[/quote]
Bri,
Most but not all of the miracles performed by Jesus were an example of his ability to control the laws of nature , not necessarily break the laws of nature which you refer to as physics, biology, chemistry, etc. For example, when Jesus turned water into wine, this showed his ability to speed up the process; the science behind fermentation was still there he just excelarated it. The same can be said for the drying up of the fig tree and many other miracles performed in the bible.
Holy shit I have never seen so many intelligent, yet incredibly superstitious people in one place before! Jesus controlled the laws of nature? God is too all-mighty to understand, so why even try? Give up and have faith? I suppose y’all believe in ghosts being real, and alien visitors anal probing dudes in Arkansas, and psychic powers, too. C’mon guys… honestly. This is starting to sound like the Enquirer website or something. Anybody care to tell me my horoscope for 2005?
[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
Holy shit I have never seen so many intelligent, yet incredibly superstitious people in one place before! Jesus controlled the laws of nature? God is too all-mighty to understand, so why even try? Give up and have faith? I suppose y’all believe in ghosts being real, and alien visitors anal probing dudes in Arkansas, and psychic powers, too. C’mon guys… honestly. This is starting to sound like the Enquirer website or something. Anybody care to tell me my horoscope for 2005?[/quote]
You are a scared, scared little boy. Why does one with faith in God scare you so? Does the best defense you have against consist of name calling and belitteling?
I don’t see anyone on this thread trying to convert you, yet you seem to be personally insulted that there are rational folk out there who have a different value-system than you. Why is that? Does it make you feel like a ‘big boy’ to make fun of christians, or any other faith ?
You are not only a scared little boy - you are a sad one as well.
[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
Holy shit I have never seen so many intelligent, yet incredibly superstitious people in one place before! Jesus controlled the laws of nature? God is too all-mighty to understand, so why even try? Give up and have faith? I suppose y’all believe in ghosts being real, and alien visitors anal probing dudes in Arkansas, and psychic powers, too. C’mon guys… honestly. This is starting to sound like the Enquirer website or something. Anybody care to tell me my horoscope for 2005?[/quote]
Honestly, was St.Thomas Aquinas just a dumb irrational superstitious man? Their is intellectually available material for both sides of the debate. Maybe some people don’t have the sophistication to untangle the difficult problems that belief - as well as non-belief - requires but to say that there are no great arguements for belief is just not true. I think it may stem more from your ignorance and characterizations of religion rather than knowledge of your own position.
[quote]battlelust wrote:
atheism is a belief system. its just as irrational at its core as christianity, islam, etc. many dogmatic atheists posture as if their atheism is based in fact, yet the “rational” criteria that they have established to dismiss all gods from their lives are just as arbitrary as the criteria used by theists to establish the existence of gods in their lives. [/quote]
I take exception to this. My athiesm results from the lack of any rationale reason to posit the existence in a god. There could be a god, but there is no good reason for me to believe in him.
Believers often ask athiests to prove why God doesn’t exist; to argue why one ought not believe in god – this onus is misplaced and unwarranted.
[quote]Moriarty wrote:
battlelust wrote:
atheism is a belief system. its just as irrational at its core as christianity, islam, etc. many dogmatic atheists posture as if their atheism is based in fact, yet the “rational” criteria that they have established to dismiss all gods from their lives are just as arbitrary as the criteria used by theists to establish the existence of gods in their lives.
You’re right, if using the strict definition of “atheism” that I believe you’re using. I assume you are describing a doctrine in which the non-existence of a deity is accepted without doubt. However, I’ve found that most self-described atheists I know are actually closer to what we would probably define as agnostics (In that they don’t believe that god exists, but aren’t sure about it, and accept they will never know.) and know of no other word than “atheist” to describe themselves.
You are absolutely right that both true atheism and religious belief are both irrational (although I would argue one is more irrational than the other).
Agnosticism is the only rational choice, given the available options.[/quote]
This has been discussed before, but once again…
I think agnosticism is the belief that one CANNOT know whether or not a god/God exists, not merely that one doesn’t know.
For example, I don’t know for sure, but my reason tells me there is no good reason to suppose a god exists, therefore, I don’t believe in one.
There is however, a pretty great argument against the existence of the Judeo-Christian God who believers claim is all good, all knowing, and all powerful. The argument is the problem of evil and is completely damning. It PROVES that this god cannot possess all three of these attributes simultaneously.
[quote]battlelust wrote:
so far, everyone is agreeing with me (whether they realize it or not)! hooray!
note to fellow theists: your gods are greater than mere human “rational thought.” do jehovah, or odin, or krishna, or quetzocatl allow themselves to be confined by rational thought? you drag your gods down from olympus by trying to understand your gods as if they were humans and as if they had to be confined by rational thought. is your god all-powerful? then the scientific evidence contrary to your god’s existence is STILL CORRECT!!! gods do not need to justify their actions with proofs for your mind. do I hold irrational, unprovable beliefs that form the core of my arguments? yes! of course! so do you! that’s my whole point! [/quote]
I’d have to say that I do not agree with you, so you’re wrong in your initial statement. I do not intentionally uphold irrational unprovable beliefs and use those beliefs as the basis for other arguments.
[quote]Right Side Up wrote:
… My athiesm results from the lack of any rationale reason to posit the existence in a god. There could be a god, but there is no good reason for me to believe in him.
Believers often ask athiests to prove why God doesn’t exist; to argue why one ought not believe in god – this onus is misplaced and unwarranted. [/quote]
You believe that there is no God. You believe that there is no ‘higher power’. You exhibit the same faith as those that believe there is a God. You don’t want to call it faith because that would mean that you actually believed in something not seen, or proved. In your case it is not the existence of a God, but the abscence of one.
I think Battlelust paints an accurate picture of both sides. Whether or not one chooses to admit he believes in something, or nothing, is another story.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
lothario1132 wrote:
Holy shit I have never seen so many intelligent, yet incredibly superstitious people in one place before! Jesus controlled the laws of nature? God is too all-mighty to understand, so why even try? Give up and have faith? I suppose y’all believe in ghosts being real, and alien visitors anal probing dudes in Arkansas, and psychic powers, too. C’mon guys… honestly. This is starting to sound like the Enquirer website or something. Anybody care to tell me my horoscope for 2005?
You are a scared, scared little boy. Why does one with faith in God scare you so? Does the best defense you have against consist of name calling and belitteling?
I don’t see anyone on this thread trying to convert you, yet you seem to be personally insulted that there are rational folk out there who have a different value-system than you. Why is that? Does it make you feel like a ‘big boy’ to make fun of christians, or any other faith ?
You are not only a scared little boy - you are a sad one as well.
[/quote]
[…douche]
I understand Lothario’s surprise. I often must remind myself that the masses still hold faith as a valid system for forming beliefs – it is shocking to me, as one who is utilizing faith seems to necessarily suspend their reason. And reason is what human’s do – or CAN do.
Faith just makes people feel better in the face of uncertainty or harsh reality.
[quote]jana wrote:
Right Side Up wrote:
… My athiesm results from the lack of any rationale reason to posit the existence in a god. There could be a god, but there is no good reason for me to believe in him.
Believers often ask athiests to prove why God doesn’t exist; to argue why one ought not believe in god – this onus is misplaced and unwarranted.
You believe that there is no God. You believe that there is no ‘higher power’. You exhibit the same faith as those that believe there is a God. You don’t want to call it faith because that would mean that you actually believed in something not seen, or proved. In your case it is not the existence of a God, but the abscence of one.
I think Battlelust paints an accurate picture of both sides. Whether or not one chooses to admit he believes in something, or nothing, is another story.
[/quote]
This is a cute argument, but one riddled in sophistry.
My conclusion that God doesn’t exist is not absolute. It is simply the best conclusion to uphold with the evidence that is available.
Rejecting god’s existence requires no faith, sorry.