Can the religious God find favor with atheists in the future? (disciples, science)
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.
Since science is in the Reality explaining business, they are automatically in the God explaining business. As they get deeper and deeper into the source of our reality and its functioning, they will inevitably encounter the fact that our science is simply not up to the task of explaining it all. There is no way to incorporate subjective experience into the sterile mathematics of physics.
That is not true. Science does not begin with an answer and go in search of validation, ignoring that which is disconfirming. Science begins with a question and goes in search of ways to answer it. You begin with the assumption of god being a reality and of course you will end up with only one answer. You write as though you do not actually understand what science is, what it does, or what methods it considers valid and what methods it rejects. Well, it rejects your methodology.
Subjective experience has no place in mathematics, sterilized or otherwise. 2 plus can of paint does not equal two cans of paint. Until you grasp this, you will remain wrong.
Your entire approach is false, and since you begin with a false premise, you could only wind up right by accident.
Transponder, I don't understand why you are asking me these questions all of a sudden. I can't make myself any more clear than I have. It's hard to have a meaningful discussion about something that no side really knows much about. It will always be unknown and unresolved. I don't intend to debate something that is so unknown.
Uncanny. You are doing pretty much the same argument here as Mystic - dismissing all the stuff that we do know and trying to fond Unknowns to pop god into, and then being dishonest about what the argument is actually about. Cleartly you are ignoring everything that is being posted. We KNOW that we never entirely disprove a god. We also know that there is no good reason to believe in one. That is not the argument (though we will debate the evidence and the logic behind the claim). What the debate is really about is the theist claim that the Faith they have in this god should impact all out lives.
Mystic says it should because Cosmicdustgod is sending religions one after another (as Eric Morcame said "All the right notes, but not necessarily in the right order") to teach us "Agape " love which if he is an example of it manifests as arrogance, intellectual dishonesty and a brain screwed up by Faith in his own Rightness.
In your case, though you don't so much appeal to your own brain as evidence that God is guiding us, it is the Book and the religion (s) explained therein that are (or ought be) our guide to life.
The arguments made here have been showing that this is not a tenable theory and the Questions are really to appeal to to your objectivity, which must be in there somewhere, and get you to accept the points made instead of of going through the very familiar fallback defence -method of the theist. Change the subject "What about this? What about that?" Going on the attack, fist on the debate , later pointing at what's wrong with atheism. And always using flawed, if not dishonest arguments.
Just look at the way the massacre at Bezieres went. You tried to laugh it off,tried to dismiss it as too often asked (with a connotation of 'something wrong with atheism' for making the argument), and then the dishonesty of calling it an 'ignorant' point when what you meant was that you didn't like it that deemed to be used against the religion do don't seem to actually believe, but nevertheless battle for against atheists.
The actual point (explained to you) is that, yes - this is what humans do. But then religom/the Bible cannot be held to make us any better and is not a reason to have it in our lives other than on the Mythology shelf.
This is what the atheist campaign is about and not whether we can prove a god or not.
You and Mystic are therefore doing the same argument - battling for a religion and Book that neither of you really believe in, but you do believe in your own Rightness (which you call "God") and cannot look at atheism with anything but distrust and loathing because of that.
The questions are put in the (rather distant) hope that either or both of you will see that you are fighting for something we can do without (something that seems to horrify you as much as it does prof. Stavrakapoulou) and so you battle 'New' Atheism for the same reason. Personal investment in the continued importance of what's in the Bible, even though all three of you find different things to value in it.
And I suspect we are on the edge of the final 'defence' to abandon the last dugout and flounce off with hope last word or other: "You deniers will never win against the massive numbers of believers in the world" (Mostly non -Christians, but them getting the last Word is what matters, not making it an honest one)
with the expectation that you will pop up later on another thread, making exactly the same arguments.
We are appealing to you to be honest. But (knowing that this is not anything to bet on) doing it for the thousands of Lurkers out there. Who may respond more homestly.
Finally The reason why I have gone into such lengths is not because you have 'Rattles our bars' as the believers say, not that I know 'deep down' that you are right. Because we can see and can show that you are wrong. But because you asked a question and it deserves an full answer.
I am neither extreme in my views or a fundamentalist.
But has you have constantly had problems understanding what atheists and agnostics are, your confusion about other words does not surprise.
"Extremist Fundies" is pretty much the last ditch excuse used by believers who have no arguments left as a pretext for mot listening to us. We are Extremist fundies and therefore wrong, and never mind the arguments.
It's instructive to not that 'Fundy' (as we realised long ago) does not mean 'adhereing to literal Dogma' (though it is handy for arguing that atheists HAVE a Dogma) but is used in the popular usage of a synonym for "Religious extremist, violent, unreasoning and unreasonable, dangerous and on no account to be engaged in dialogue or even tolerated. Exterminate them!"
The kneejerk visceral hatred that those who believe in some definition of "God" for those who don't is far from uncommon, and always rather sad. Especially as it will give unintentional suport to those who would take away the rights of atheists, if they had the power. And if I may field another disgraceful Saying by a theist that Ozzy will probably also try to laugh off "George Bush "No, I don't know that atheists should be citizens".
Uncanny. You are doing pretty much the same argument here as Mystic - dismissing all the stuff that we do know and trying to fond Unknowns to pop god into, ....
This entire post was amazing, and extremely accurate. It is likely to make Ozzy, and perhaps Mystic, rather uncomfortable if they have any real self-awareness.
Mystic says it should because Cosmicdustgod is sending religions one after another (as Eric Morcame said "All the right notes, but not necessarily in the right order") to teach us "Agape " love which if he is an example of it manifests as arrogance, intellectual dishonesty and a brain screwed up by Faith in his own Rightness.
.
That is quite well expressed. Just as the believers do not seem to understand that we do not see faith as any sort of virtue, they do not understand that none of us aspire to agape status. All it actually means is being overawed by something, like the way the Incas had their minds blown when the Spaniards showed up on horseback with steel weapons. Having never seen a horse, they assumed, in their agape way, that horse and rider were all one creature and that killing the horse would also kill the man. Agape is 70,000 Fatima pilgrims seeing the sun dance because they came in the expectation of a promised miracle.
A sense of wonderment is handy for motivating us to want to explore matters and get to the truth behind that which impresses us so. Agape at best should be a starting point for learning, not the end goal. It is akin to a stage magician. We may marvel at the illusions we are seeing, they may generate a sense of awe, but if we stop there we are left with believing the illusions were real....which we know aren't.
Since science is in the Reality explaining business, they are automatically in the God explaining business. As they get deeper and deeper into the source of our reality and its functioning, they will inevitably encounter the fact that our science is simply not up to the task of explaining it all. There is no way to incorporate subjective experience into the sterile mathematics of physics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRANSPONDER
Wrong. You know at least that science is explaining more and more that was once Unknown and therefore a handy gap for God. Or in your case "God" (intelligent nature). You cannot know whether or not science can ever explain it all or at least explain it enough that ascribing feelings that you get in your head to "God" is simply not tenable. You cannot correctly assert that science can never assert subjective experience into biological explanations of how the mind works.
You know, from the discussion I had with Gaylenwoof that 'subjectivity' is not so much something we can't explain, but something we can't escape -our own bodies and minds. That doesn't matter. What matters is the methods used to eliminate imperfect human perception and understanding of the way the world works.
You have already accepted that the Bible is wrong about the way the world works. You sneer at the Bible s much as you do at materialism. You are wrong about the gospels, though you try to dress up the execution of a nuisance and troublemaker by the Romans as a lesson in love by this intelligent nature of yours. Being denialist about evidence is one thing. Being deluded into making plonking faith -claims as though they were fact is another, but trying to bamboozle people by using sneeringly deprecatory terms like 'sterile mathematics' flags up your huge bias and the intellectual dishonesty that your brand of Faith in the god in your head had imposed on a fine mind and a decent person.
Your defensiveness is what causes you to attribute "sneering" and "deprecation" to me as well as other derogatory attitudes. None of them accurately portray my usual attitude. It is unavoidable that I have an intellect among the top 99.9% of humanity. It is unavoidable that I have accumulated significant knowledge in science, mathematics, physics, and philosophy. You pretend to be able to assess my scientific acumen which is laughable. You pretend to be able to "suss" when I have been debunked by those claiming to be experts in some field - equally laughable. Now THAT is being deprecatory of your capabilities! Why do you provoke me into such unloving responses, Arq? I know what I know, I know what are the limits of what I know. I know that you have no clue about any of it.
This entire post was amazing, and extremely accurate. It is likely to make Ozzy, and perhaps Mystic, rather uncomfortable if they have any real self-awareness.
It's more likely to make them laugh at me as comprehensible because of all the misstypes. I hardly understood what i saying myself. Must have been a small hours post before I staggered off to bed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
Your defensiveness is what causes you to attribute "sneering" and "deprecation" to me as well as other derogatory attitudes. None of them accurately portray my usual attitude. It is unavoidable that I have an intellect among the top 99.9% of humanity. It is unavoidable that I have accumulated significant knowledge in science, mathematics, physics, and philosophy. You pretend to be able to assess my scientific acumen which is laughable. You pretend to be able to "suss" when I have been debunked by those claiming to be experts in some field - equally laughable. Now THAT is being deprecatory of your capabilities! Why do you provoke me into such unloving responses, Arq? I know what I know, I know what are the limits of what I know. I know that you have no clue about any of it.
Mystic, 'defensiveness' is so utterly Projection here that I needn't elaborate. While I won't contest your claimed intellect, education and knowledge, I still assert that all this is wasted when you misuse all of it by fiddling it to support what you believe on Faith. As you misrepresent that argument I am making right here. And if you won't accept that I have demonstrated that several times, others - all the others - have come to the same conclusion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandstander
That is quite well expressed. Just as the believers do not seem to understand that we do not see faith as any sort of virtue, they do not understand that none of us aspire to agape status. All it actually means is being overawed by something, like the way the Incas had their minds blown when the Spaniards showed up on horseback with steel weapons. Having never seen a horse, they assumed, in their agape way, that horse and rider were all one creature and that killing the horse would also kill the man. Agape is 70,000 Fatima pilgrims seeing the sun dance because they came in the expectation of a promised miracle.
A sense of wonderment is handy for motivating us to want to explore matters and get to the truth behind that which impresses us so. Agape at best should be a starting point for learning, not the end goal. It is akin to a stage magician. We may marvel at the illusions we are seeing, they may generate a sense of awe, but if we stop there we are left with believing the illusions were real....which we know aren't.
Quite. The point I made to Mystic, years ago and several times since is that if human perception is unreliable, then the conclusions it jumps to about what is seem or experienced are even more unreliable. The scientific method has a pretty good track record of correcting all the misunderstandings of earlier years, and which were pretty much copied into the Holy books and which have either had to Interpret the stuff to make it fit science (1) or simply dismiss science as Wrong - about that, anyway.
To do them credit, Mystic and Ozzy aren't that bad, and we live in hopes.
(1) the one I like best is dividing up the current scientific estimate of the age of the universe into 7 and calling each one a "Day" and ignoring that these 'Days' are clearly marked by night and sunlight. Even though the sun and moon hadn't been made yet.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 10-04-2018 at 12:23 PM..
That is quite well expressed. Just as the believers do not seem to understand that we do not see faith as any sort of virtue, they do not understand that none of us aspire to agape status.
Yes. I hear the word agape and my eyes roll back in my head and I hear a staticky buzzing sound.
It is unavoidable that I have an intellect among the top 99.9% of humanity. .
Then shouldn't your posts reflect that claim rather than constantly refute it? If you are so smart, why are you unable to detect that your methodology is false? We have. The above is something that you apparently need to keep telling yourself in order to cope with a group of people, who also aren't stupid, who tell you that you are wrong.
There are PhDs in the study of mythology, or in the study of the history of spirituality. There are no PhDs in mysticism. The closest to something like that would be a degree in divinity from Earl & Buck's Real Good Right Learnin' University.
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.
" love which if he is an example of it manifests as arrogance, intellectual dishonesty and a brain screwed up by Faith in his own Rightness.
or other: "You deniers will never win against the massive numbers of believers in the world" (Mostly non -Christians, but them getting the last Word is what matters, not making it an honest one)
The reason why I have gone into such lengths is not because you have 'Rattles our bars' as the believers say, not that I know 'deep down' that you are right. Because we can see and can show that you are wrong. But because you asked a question and it deserves an full answer.
Must have been a small hours post before I staggered off to bed.
