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.
Chango, your journey sounds very similar to mine. I never believed in an Abrahamic God, but I was pretty convinced about reincarnation until a few years ago. The more I've read and reflected (especially since learning about critical thinking in grad school a couple years ago), the more questions have been answered to my satisfaction by conventional scientific explanations. I do believe there are still things we don't understand, though, and I try to guard myself against the atheist equivalents of "Science doesn't have an answer, therefore Goddunit" -- namely, "It doesn't jibe with current scientific knowledge, therefore I don't believe it actually happens, regardless of how many people claim to have experienced it" or "I read a theory that it's just filtered infrared rays bouncing off isolated low-pressure vortices, which causes people to squint in such a way that the brain releases hallucinogenic chemicals. Case closed." In other words, sometimes the answer is still "We don't know."
"Science doesn't have an answer, therefore Goddunit."
Atheists call that God of the gaps argument, but atheists also have their chance of the gaps argument for everything.
That is why I would not mind if God is called chance because the chance atheists have in their mind and heart is pretty similar to God creator of everything.
Now, atheists insist that if science cannot come to an explanation of a phenomenon that really exists and operates, then they can just say they don't know the explanation.
With myself as a theist I would say there is an explanation even if science cannot find one; you just have to think up a concept in order that an explanation is available in all instances where science has no explanation.
And that concept is God as maker of everything, which is chance for atheists.
Is that concept valid, a maker of everything, not an intrinsically impossible concept, like for example the concept of square-triangle?
Yes it is a valid concept, because by analogy if a baker makes all the pastries in his shop and a carpenter makes all the carpentry works in the shop of the baker, it is a valid concept that a guy who is both a baker and a carpenter makes all the pastries and all the wood works in his shop.
So also the concept of a maker who can and does make everything.
"Science doesn't have an answer, therefore Goddunit."
Atheists call that God of the gaps argument, but atheists also have their chance of the gaps argument for everything.
That is why I would not mind if God is called chance because the chance atheists have in their mind and heart is pretty similar to God creator of everything.
How so?
Quote:
Now, atheists insist that if science cannot come to an explanation of a phenomenon that really exists and operates, then they can just say they don't know the explanation.
Nothing better than an honest answer is there?
Quote:
With myself as a theist I would say there is an explanation even if science cannot find one; you just have to think up a concept in order that an explanation is available in all instances where science has no explanation.
So you are saying that when you don't know something you just make stuff up...Not only is it not honest, it's just plain moronic.
Quote:
And that concept is God as maker of everything, which is chance for atheists.
Is this the best you could come up with? Admit it you don't know that there even is a god, let alone if he made anything...
Quote:
Is that concept valid, a maker of everything, not an intrinsically impossible concept, like for example the concept of square-triangle?
If you are saying that the concept of god is just as likely as a square triangle, then I agree.
Quote:
Yes it is a valid concept, because by analogy if a baker makes all the pastries in his shop and a carpenter makes all the carpentry works in the shop of the baker, it is a valid concept that a guy who is both a baker and a carpenter makes all the pastries and all the wood works in his shop.
That has to be the worst analogy I've ever seen....Makes no sense at all.
Quote:
So also the concept of a maker who can and does make everything.
Think about that.
I thought about your "maker" for many years, and the concept of a maker makes as much sense to me as your baker/carpenter analogy...None at all.
I actually think atheism need not to be studied. Atheism came from theism. If one can see any religion with normal, healthy human skepticism, none of the religions can stand.
It's hard to let go of something you have believed to be true all your life.
The funny thing is, I've heard your story over and over. Once a theist decides to really read the bible, do some other research and really study, they all come to their senses. All it takes is education instead of indoctrination.
It will get better and instead of feeling like you lost something you will feel like you found your whole life.
definitely, the huge feeling of freedom and honesty and letting go of all the fairytales and the horrible scary (loving)deity that would strike you dead at every "sin" and just looking at your own doings and being responsible; there's nothing like it..I am so glad I was able to figure it out
"Science doesn't have an answer, therefore Goddunit."
Atheists call that God of the gaps argument, but atheists also have their chance of the gaps argument for everything.
That is why I would not mind if God is called chance because the chance atheists have in their mind and heart is pretty similar to God creator of everything.
Now, atheists insist that if science cannot come to an explanation of a phenomenon that really exists and operates, then they can just say they don't know the explanation.
With myself as a theist I would say there is an explanation even if science cannot find one; you just have to think up a concept in order that an explanation is available in all instances where science has no explanation.
And that concept is God as maker of everything, which is chance for atheists.
Is that concept valid, a maker of everything, not an intrinsically impossible concept, like for example the concept of square-triangle?
Yes it is a valid concept, because by analogy if a baker makes all the pastries in his shop and a carpenter makes all the carpentry works in the shop of the baker, it is a valid concept that a guy who is both a baker and a carpenter makes all the pastries and all the wood works in his shop.
So also the concept of a maker who can and does make everything.
Think about that.
Ryrge
The greatest argument against "God" is a five minute conversation with the average true believer.
[ Disclaimer: The message following is no attempt whatever to proselytize atheists to become believers in God, if you atheists think it is so, you are really self-hoodwinking yourselves so that everytime a person who knows God tries to explain what is God to himself and to anyone curious to know, you imagine from self-adulation that he is trying to bring you to God. There are people who believe in God and whose passion is to bring other people to come to the knowledge of God. I am not one of them. ]
That is the trouble with you guys, atheists.
You are stuck with your concept of God that is what very ancient peoples pictured God to be.
Better brush up on today's concept of God from peoples who know God today.
Of course with you guys you cannot update and upgrade your concept of God because you might lose your primitive mindset whereby you consider yourselves so 'intellectually' smart as to not see God everywhere where science can bring your eyes, and nose, and ears, and tongue, and fingers to, in the highest heavens and deepest atom entrails and also within your body, and moreover inside your pysche.
Time to update and upgrade your brain as regards the concept of God today, unless you want to remain primitive when it comes to the highest strata of human knowledge.
In brief I can say that atheists have for so long gotten the wrong idea of God which they continue to bash, owing to their refusal to see God as God is known to peoples who do know God as now they know science today.
You claim to know science but your knowledge of God is still of the pre-scientific eras of mankind.
And exactly which modern god view is the proper, updated, correct one? None of you theists agree on anything, except that what YOU beleive is right and what the other guy believes is wrong.
Whether it's the old version or the updated version, there is no evidence there is a god.
I am not an atheist because I don't like the old god of the bible, I am an atheist because I do not believe in ANY deity whatsoever.
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.
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.
