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.
You got to have faith to believe that you have a soul or a spirit, what about science?
blind faith is the snake oil sales trick. Here, eat this "insert statement of belief", err, I mean apple.
Don't get me wrong, we have them on our side too. The "some of us blindly believe that religion is so dangerous that we get to decide what is proper for public consumption ... so long as its anti-religion that is."
"science" has. "Lets double check ourselves to try and limit personal bias and error as best we can."
whats yours again? "dude died, woke up, and flew away for our sins. or youre wrong and going to burn for eternity."?
...In this case, lack of conceivability is not very likely to be a problem. Conceivability does not imply agreement. I can conceive of things and still not reach the same conclusion as someone else. And it seems you've failed to notice that I'm agnostic precisely because I can conceive to many things that I can't rule out as being possibly true. I simply require some standards of evidence and rational argument before saying I believe in this or that.
Based on your saying this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gaylenwoof
...I'm also unsure about the assumption that God (if such a being exists) is all good. I suspect that "God" is just, basically, "us" (the totality of beings). If we are not pure good, then God is not pure good either. "God" is no better or worse than our collective efforts as conscious beings.
I said this. The words in blue got cut when i posted it, I have added them back in, if that helps for clarity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tzaphkiel
we differ there. I am certain and have faith in God who is mercy, compassion, justice, generosity, kindness, comfort beneficence and yes good. it sounds like you can't see or conceive of God being any thing greater than well just people....
My observation is that there are people who are really uncomfortable with God being greater than humans.
there is an intelligence greater than the combined intelligence of all humans.
There is a love greater than the love of humans.
there is compassion and mercy and justice and generosity and honesty and integrity greater than that which humans express and outpicture.
when people can't see beyond God being "all human minds added up together"
or God being "a little baby that is just learning like us in the same way we humans are just learning" or God "really no different than humans"
my observation is they can't conceive of, or they don't like, or they are really uncomfortable with something that is smarter than they are.
i get that you are "agnostic" and can't/don't/won't commit to "believing" anything on this topic without your personal "criteria" being met. We are just discussing views and possibilities and what you do or don't like about them, what you see is problematic.
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 12-16-2017 at 07:06 PM..
it sounds like you can't see or conceive of God being any thing greater than well just people.
those are your views and your beliefs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tzaphkiel
Based on your saying this.
I said this. The words in blue got cut when i posted it, I have added them back in, if that helps for clarity.
The added words don't change anything. Just because I suspect that there is probably no such thing as a God fitting the descriptions you provide, there is no rational basis for asserting that I can't conceive of such a being. I'm reminded of that classic line, repeated over and over again by a character in "The Princess Bride." Anytime anyone says anything even the slightest bite surprising, he responds "Inconceivable!"
Quote:
My observation is that there are people who are really uncomfortable with God being greater than humans.
I suppose there are such people, but I am not one of them. I'm not "uncomfortable" with the idea. Why would I (or anyone, for that matter) be uncomfortable with there being a Divine Creator who is all-loving and who makes sense of everything, etc.? What you're describing is, in fact, potentially very comforting. But I can't believe in something just because it would be comforting to believe it.
Quote:
there is an intelligence greater than the combined intelligence of all humans.
There is a love greater than the love of humans.
there is compassion and mercy and justice and generosity and honesty and integrity greater than that which humans express and outpicture.
These are some very adamant-sounding assertions. Anybody can make strong-sounding assertions about virtually anything. How is this for a strong assertion: "There are people who make strong assertions about things they obviously know very little about." Example: There are people who make strong assertions about what I think, or what I feel, or what I am unable to conceive, or how I am unable to experience true love, etc. In all cases, these are people who don't know me at all. In virtually all cases, these are people who have never even met me. So how do they know these things about me? When I inquire into the sources of their knowledge about me, it often leads to many posts digging deeper and deeper into the groundwork upon which they have built their seemingly profound knowledge of my mind, heart, and soul. And, when all is said and done - when the curtain is finally drawn back to reveal the Great and Wonderful Oz - the answer becomes clear: It's because I don't agree with them.
Quote:
when people can't see beyond God being "all human minds added up together"
Did I ever say, or even remotely imply, that I "can't see beyond it?"
Quote:
my observation is they can't conceive of, or they don't like, or they are really uncomfortable with something that is smarter than they are.
So we come back to this again. I suspect that you don't really know what these people can conceive, or what they don't like, or what they are uncomfortable with. If I could place a bet, I'd bet that a majority of them simply don't agree with your beliefs.
Quote:
i get that you are "agnostic" and can't/don't/won't commit to "believing" anything on this topic without your personal "criteria" being met. We are just discussing views and possibilities and what you do or don't like about them, what you see is problematic.
Yes. Exactly. And in my case, for me to believe in things, they must meet a certain minimum level of rationality and evidence. And if I have a personal experience that I can't really explain, then I don't expect that evidence to count as rational evidence for anyone but me.
... I'm not "uncomfortable" with the idea. Why would I (or anyone, for that matter) be uncomfortable with there being a Divine Creator who is all-loving and who makes sense of everything, etc.? What you're describing is, in fact, potentially very comforting.
Because you said this. That's what I was commenting on, and other people in this thread have said similar things.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gaylenwoof
...I'm also unsure about the assumption that God (if such a being exists) is all good. I suspect that "God" is just, basically, "us" (the totality of beings). If we are not pure good, then God is not pure good either. "God" is no better or worse than our collective efforts as conscious beings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gaylenwoof
... these are people who have never even met me. So how do they know these things about me? When I inquire into the sources of their knowledge about me, it often leads to many posts digging deeper and deeper into the groundwork upon which they have built their seemingly profound knowledge ...... I suspect that you don't really know what these people can conceive, or what they don't like, or what they are uncomfortable with....
Online we get to know someone through what they post and how they interact with others and their comments views and responses. And what they get upset or irritated or tetchy about. Also when we post online our views become visible so there is a level of being held accountable.
your posts do reveal some about you and much of it is very heartfelt and inspiring, genuine and sincere. It is apparent you think deeply about things including big questions, and care deeply about things and are warm hearted. That comes through and I think highly of you for many reasons. You seem to genuinely care about figuring things out, and making sense of things, and that these things at some level do matter very much to you. I can't help but admire that.
And I meant what i said about wanting to read your books or chapbooks of poetry. That writing sets hearts aflame.
... And in my case, for me to believe in things, they must meet a certain minimum level of rationality and evidence. And if I have a personal experience that I can't really explain, then I don't expect that evidence to count as rational evidence for anyone but me.
you've already made the most beautiful eloquent case there is and it is utterly convincing and sound. It is solid gold. No one has to convince you of anything, you've already made the best case yourself.
.... And if I have a personal experience that I can't really explain, then I don't expect that evidence to count as rational evidence for anyone but me.
Neither does anyone else.
That's the whole point of being in relationship with God.
It's a relationship. Not a science experiment.
That's why the whole premise of using science to validate God is.....absurd.
blind faith is the snake oil sales trick. Here, eat this "insert statement of belief", err, I mean apple.
Don't get me wrong, we have them on our side too. The "some of us blindly believe that religion is so dangerous that we get to decide what is proper for public consumption ... so long as its anti-religion that is."
"science" has. "Lets double check ourselves to try and limit personal bias and error as best we can."
whats yours again? "dude died, woke up, and flew away for our sins. or youre wrong and going to burn for eternity."?
which one is more reasonable.
It was faith for me in the beginning, but it has nothing to do with faith now. If I had not been shown the truth by now, I might very well be an Atheist, if I was still a Pentecostal, I would have turned out an Atheist. My life changed on Dec 14th 1998, my birthday. I had decided there was no God and I was going to prove it.
I suppose that's it, really. On the basis of evidence (scientific kind) the god -belief case is invalid. Logically one should be an unbeliever.
But a personal experience can change all that, and the evidence becomes irrelevant (or so it seems) besides an inner conviction of the reality of God..or whatever.
We goddless bastards know that. All we say is that this is a personal conviction -experience which we accept is not unknown amongs humankind. And being personal experience means that we are not obliged to accept it as what it is claimed to be.
You's think that could be left to lie there, and get back to the organized religions, man -made gods and fabricated Holy Books, which is really the only beef atheism has with religion. But we still get this individual faith -experience claims trotted out as to why we as atheists are wrong.
And it's futile, because these are persona experiences and prove nothing to anyone else. Especially when those who have had then come to blows over just what it is they have experienced.
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.
