Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Is agnostic closer to Christian than atheist? Apparently any other religion is closer to Christian to some people. So weird. They don't believe what you do, that's pretty much it no matter what else you say about it.
Certainly belief in the wrong god is considered 'closer' and therefore, better, than non - belief in any god. As to agnostic, it is important to understand that one can be an agnostic atheist or an agnostic theist (in fact we are all agnostic sine none of really know, though some may think that they do).
On the other hand, those who call themselves agnostic appear to be more inclined to give credibility to some sort of god - concept than those who call themselves atheist.
Is agnostic closer to Christian than atheist? Apparently any other religion is closer to Christian to some people. So weird. They don't believe what you do, that's pretty much it no matter what else you say about it.
You tell me.
The Atheists says : "I don't believe there is a god. The evidence seems weak. It's possible I guess, but unlikely. I am going to move forward believing there isn't a god until someone gives me evidence to the contrary".
The agnostic says : "I don't know if I believe in god, It seems like an unknowable thing. I don't care either way. It's not something the human mind can comprehend"
The Christian says : "THERE IS A GOD AND I WILL KILL ANYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH ME! Not only is there a god, but he is a vengeful god, also a loving god, also there's 3 gods, but they are really one god. And god wants you to eat his flesh and blood. And god loves you!! But he will BURN YOU IN HELL if you get out of line. Oh and god REALLY REALLY REALLY HATES HOMOSEXUALS!! Also, we should legislate the bible and FORCE everyone to be a christian too, because eveyrone elses god is full of crap!! Now, lets talk about how man and the dinosaur co-existed just like in the flintsones! But first, let's pass around the collection plate, because the thing god loves the most is YOUR MONEY!"
You tell me which 2 sound the most closely aligned.
World's most famous Atheist back pedals on his opinion.
Tripe. He said nothing at all that he had not already said in his book. So there is no back pedalling here at all. Just a journalist, who does not know his facts, who listened to something and ran amok with it when writing an article.
Get the book, read it, then compare to what was said in the talk in question and tell me where the difference is exactly. You will not find a difference, let alone a back pedal.
You Sir, have a dizzying intellect. All perfectly good answers. I'll study some more and return.
I hate my mind, to be honest. It's insanely active and extremely unorganized...
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
::Sigh: becasue you have absconded with it under false pretenses.
I am going to need evidence of that assertion...
Quote:
Of course it is not out of the realm of science . . .nothing is.
That's not exactly true. "Who is the greatest guitarist in the world?" is not at all a scientific question (for the record... it's Jimmy Page ). It's a question about the nature of our experiences, and these questions are inherently subjective, with different answers depending on who you ask. Thus, they are outside the realm of science.
Quote:
Wrong . . . PanENtheists are right.
All the non-Panentheists of the world would beg to differ...
Quote:
It is the limitations of our consciousness (requiring formation before we can even experience or measure reality and therefore at a level of being beyond our experiential one) that restricts us to a level of being that is inferior to that of God while our consciousness is nonetheless a part of God.
Um... this extremely long sentence makes absolutely no sense to me...
Quote:
We are like the cells of our body would be (were they aware as we are) trying to understand us . . . a most problematic perspective and enigma.
It was Carl Sagan who said "the Cosmos is also within us. We're made of star stuff. We are a way for the Cosmos to know itself."
Perhaps we are the cells of the universe trying to understand the universe. Or maybe we are how the universe learns... it's conscience, if you will...
Quote:
The definition of "personal God" is the crucial delimiter here...
Isn't that obvious? A god that participates in daily life (for example... answers prayers).
Quote:
but clearly the traditional religious understanding is doomed. In any case, finding out more about our God and how our reality works really does nothing to eliminate God. That is an oft-stated but untenable position.
And what if we find a natural explanation behind the Big Bang? What if the Big Bang really was a random, accidental quantum fluctuation, or the result of a collision between two giant membranes? How does that not rule out a higher power?
Quote:
Even this would not achieve your objective I'm afraid unless you butcher the concept of intelligent because that is what makes our reality intelligible. It is what most confounded Einstein . . . that our reality was capable of being understood. A far deeper issue than it might seem on the surface, btw.
Our universe is intelligible because we are intelligent enough to make an attempt to understand it. Your statement here is a bit like saying "the earth is so perfect for us that it must have been made for us". You're putting the cart before the horse.
The earth is perfect for us because we evolved to survive on the earth. Had we evolved on the scorched, hell-like conditions of Venus, then the earth's current atmosphere and environment would likely be toxic and uninhabitable to us. In other words, we were made for the earth; the earth was not made for us.
In the same way, the universe is only intelligible because we have the ability to understand it. It's not the other way around. And even then, any scientist worth his/her salt will tell you that all that we've gleaned about the universe is tentative. Why do you think there is no "proof" in science (only evidence)? Because we could discover something tomorrow that takes us right back to the drawing board in our understanding of nature. Hell... we could discover something tomorrow that forces us to throw out every single piece of knowledge we thought that we had, forcing us back into a sort of "scientific primitivism". What logic can really dismiss this idea?
All scientific theories can be falsified... that's the central rule of science. If it's not falsifiable, then it isn't science. Period.
Dawkins is a fool in spite of his grasp of certain aspects of the universe. I cannot dig into his psyche but the man is severely disabled and one has to question the strife and limitations he has experienced effecting his views of God the understanding of which can be comprehended by others with disabilty namely retardation or the nearly illiterate!
That's not exactly true. "Who is the greatest guitarist in the world?" is not at all a scientific question (for the record... it's Jimmy Page ). It's a question about the nature of our experiences, and these questions are inherently subjective, with different answers depending on who you ask. Thus, they are outside the realm of science.
How does this square with the most subjective issue of belief in God with different answers depending on who you ask?
Quote:
Originally Posted by NateHevens
Since science is how we answer questions about the nature of reality, and the question of the existence of a higher power or powers is the greatest question about the nature of reality, then it is a scientific question and can be answered scientifically. It hasn't, yet, and we may be generations away from answering it, but that does not mean it can never be answered.
???
Quote:
Um... this extremely long sentence makes absolutely no sense to me...
Sorry . . . Hmmm how about this. Our instantaneous awareness is not instantaneous. It must form in quantum time. It forms as a composite of the resonant neural energy field that comprises it. As a composite energy form, it exists at a separate level of being from our physical body and brain. It experiences things before our brain even registers the stimuli. Our physical being is like a "tape-delayed" broadcast of our actual existence. Our consciousness resides in the universal field that is God's consciousness and is a "cellular" part of that consciousness energy field.
Quote:
It was Carl Sagan who said "the Cosmos is also within us. We're made of star stuff. We are a way for the Cosmos to know itself." Perhaps we are the cells of the universe trying to understand the universe. Or maybe we are how the universe learns... it's conscience, if you will...
Exactly.
Quote:
Our universe is intelligible because we are intelligent enough to make an attempt to understand it. Your statement here is a bit like saying "the earth is so perfect for us that it must have been made for us". You're putting the cart before the horse.
No . . . there is no comparison.
Quote:
In the same way, the universe is only intelligible because we have the ability to understand it. It's not the other way around.
This is the part you do not yet seem to understand about the capability that WE possess and it relationship to the universe. Are you familiar with Chalmers' "hard problem of consciousness?" If not it is a good place to get a rudimentary understanding of the issue.
Quote:
And even then, any scientist worth his/her salt will tell you that all that we've gleaned about the universe is tentative. Why do you think there is no "proof" in science (only evidence)? Because we could discover something tomorrow that takes us right back to the drawing board in our understanding of nature. Hell... we could discover something tomorrow that forces us to throw out every single piece of knowledge we thought that we had, forcing us back into a sort of "scientific primitivism". What logic can really dismiss this idea?
None . . . there is nothing to disagree with here.
The Atheist says : "I don't believe there is a god. The evidence seems weak. It's possible I guess, but unlikely. I am going to move forward believing there isn't a god until someone gives me evidence to the contrary".
The agnostic says : "I don't know if I believe in god, It seems like an unknowable thing. I don't care either way. It's not something the human mind can comprehend"
The Christian says : "THERE IS A GOD AND I WILL KILL ANYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH ME! Not only is there a god, but he is a vengeful god, also a loving god, also there's 3 gods, but they are really one god. And god wants you to eat his flesh and blood.
And god loves you!! But he will BURN YOU IN HELL if you get out of line. Oh and god REALLY REALLY REALLY HATES HOMOSEXUALS!!
Also, we should legislate the bible and FORCE everyone to be a christian too, because everyone elses god is full of crap!! Now, lets talk about how man and the dinosaur co-existed just like in the flintsones!
But first, let's pass around the collection plate, because the thing god loves the most is YOUR MONEY!"
You tell me which 2 sound the most closely aligned.
Wonderful! You have an excellent grasp of the realities of day-to-day religion, my good fellow! I especially like your No. 3! It's so.... sooo... truthful! It doesn't resonate with Mystic's far more "elevated" philosophies. which I, with my aging and emotionally tired brain, can't participate at his level,, but he certainly is one of the first to acknowledge the overwhelming and stunning mass of intransigence that is so prevalent hereabouts with the flocks ofsheeple-iist followers and their unbending and frantic beliefs. The ones you've pegged so accurately..
Dawkins is a fool in spite of his grasp of certain aspects of the universe. I cannot dig into his psyche but the man is severely disabled and one has to question the strife and limitations he has experienced effecting his views of God the understanding of which can be comprehended by others with disabilty namely retardation or the nearly illiterate!
Das
What a nasty post...In other words is this what you are saying?...That anyone who does not believe in YOUR god is retarded or nearly illiterate...Why do you feel that Dawkins and atheists are such a threat...Is it the fear you suppress that we may be right?
Sanspeur you missed my point which is that even a retarded person with Holy Spirit enlightenment can "get" God, but a super intelligent misguide FOOL whether Hawkins or some other so -called spoke person who hasn't had nurturing in scripture in Hawkins case isolationism with a the obviously disadvantaged social interface and mobility options is a quart low on creationism and God the creator . Hawkins then becomes a very poor inexperienced role model. Hawkins is a space cadet. You need to get over it!!! Naturally we all respect the guy as one of the formost experts in grasping the cosmos, but he is out of his league as Sagan was when discussing God and or creation both men are then incompetent.albeit fools sorry to ruffle your delicate feathers.
Dawkins is a fool in spite of his grasp of certain aspects of the universe. I cannot dig into his psyche but the man is severely disabled and one has to question the strife and limitations he has experienced effecting his views of God the understanding of which can be comprehended by others with disabilty namely retardation or the nearly illiterate!
Das
So... you're saying that atheism is a mental disorder?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
How does this square with the most subjective issue of belief in God with different answers depending on who you ask? ???
Um... it doesn't. You said that nothing is outside the realm of science. I was correcting you. Only questions about the nature of reality are within the realm of science. "Who is the greatest guitarist of all time?" is not a question about the nature of reality, thus it is outside the realm of science. On the other hand, as we've agreed, "does God exist?" is a question about the nature of reality, thus it is within the realm of science.
Quote:
Sorry . . . Hmmm how about this. Our instantaneous awareness is not instantaneous. It must form in quantum time. It forms as a composite of the resonant neural energy field that comprises it. As a composite energy form, it exists at a separate level of being from our physical body and brain. It experiences things before our brain even registers the stimuli. Our physical being is like a "tape-delayed" broadcast of our actual existence. Our consciousness resides in the universal field that is God's consciousness and is a "cellular" part of that consciousness energy field.
I was confused by your big words, so you went with... even bigger words, and more of them...
Are you trying to twist my brain into knots? I'm a fan of the "For Dummies" books... give me that.
Quote:
No . . . there is no comparison.
This is the part you do not yet seem to understand about the capability that WE possess and it relationship to the universe. Are you familiar with Chalmers' "hard problem of consciousness?" If not it is a good place to get a rudimentary understanding of the issue. None . . . there is nothing to disagree with here.
I'm not, but if it's a duality hypothesis (our personalities/consciousness is separate from the chemical workings of the brain), I'm very likely going to disagree with it. The Duality idea has some problems with it that I have never seen dealt with:
1. Severe physical brain damage altering someone's personality, in some cases to the point where they are a different person with a different name, life, and everything
2. Mental illnesses such as Schizophrenia and Multiple-Personality Disorder
3. Depression, suicidal tendencies, stress, and so on
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur
What a nasty post...In other words is this what you are saying?...That anyone who does not believe in YOUR god is retarded or nearly illiterate...Why do you feel that Dawkins and atheists are such a threat...Is it the fear you suppress that we may be right?
Hm... interesting observation...
Quote:
Originally Posted by DASULAR17
Sanspeur you missed my point which is that even a retarded person with Holy Spirit enlightenment can "get" God, but a super intelligent misguide FOOL whether Hawkins or some other so -called spoke person who hasn't had nurturing in scripture in Hawkins case isolationism with a the obviously disadvantaged social interface and mobility options is a quart low on creationism and God the creator . Hawkins then becomes a very poor inexperienced role model. Hawkins is a space cadet. You need to get over it!!! Naturally we all respect the guy as one of the formost experts in grasping the cosmos, but he is out of his league as Sagan was when discussing God and or creation both men are then incompetent.albeit fools sorry to ruffle your delicate feathers.
Das (Got God?)
And yet it still reads like you think that atheism is a mental disorder.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.