Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 01-11-2014, 01:37 PM
 
63,570 posts, read 39,862,781 times
Reputation: 7820

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by PoppySead View Post
You view the world as the womb of God. Just you. You speak to others as though you are teaching truth, you are a vessel of knowledge not yet known to us. In reality you are only trying to convince others what you hope is the truth, your experience without proof equals your opinion, just like the rest of us. It's a bit condescending to assume otherwise, and that is why you feel you are defending yourself. In fact it's the opposite, you were correcting others and they in turn were debating your corrections.
I have admitted to a habit that cannot be broken easily after 30+ years. I was a Professor and my habit of speech and explanation emanates from that vantage point. I am not TRYING to be condescending.
Quote:
Here is your first response on this thread:

Putting faith in religion is a separate issue from putting faith in the existence of God. I realize that the two are usually joined at the hip for most people and no distinction is made between them. But they are quite separate issues entirely. One (religion) requires faith in the man-made assertions and conclusions ABOUT God . . . the other doesn't.


This leads to the obvious question: How do you know? You speak as if you know for others, not just what you wish to be true for yourself. This is why you get debate, you invite it. You might want to express your views as opinion, and stop correcting others if you don't want to start debate. But, your choice, some like a good debate. You are trying to convince others that you know and they do not. That is an invitation, you are not being attacked.
My purpose in that cite was to establish the parameters that divide religions and their accompanying beliefs ABOUT God . . . from the separate issue of the existence of God. IMV the beliefs ABOUT God have to stand on their own merits irrespective of the existence issue. The existence of God is an entirely scientific question . . . as ALL questions of existence ultimately are. We have the tools to test and answer that question separate from ANY beliefs about it.

What we do is accumulate evidence that would support and evidence that would deny the existence . . . and make a preliminary determination. That has not been done in science because of the religious persecution that created the schism in the first place. Science has simply adopted the "No God" default . . . initially defensively . . . to protect the discipline from religious autocrats. It has simply been retained and not really seriously questioned . . . preferring the safe haven of "We don't know." I accept that as a preference . . . NOT science.
Quote:
I do believe you really think you know something we don't, but in respect for others who think the same you might want to state it as opinion because almost every Theist I've talked to thinks they know the truth about God and need to correct others, with no proof I might add. Just clever analogies and revelations.
You are correct. I DO believe I know something you do not . . . but I am not trying to convince anyone of it. It must be acquired through personal experience and few if any even try. I am told prepeatedly that there is an explanation that is better than the one I have come to . . . but I have tested it sufficiently over the years to be certain they are wrong. My certainty remains MINE and I do not ever try to proselytize it to others . . . just explain and defend.

 
Old 01-11-2014, 01:46 PM
 
63,570 posts, read 39,862,781 times
Reputation: 7820
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoppySead View Post
Mystic, to my understanding, was an atheist before the great reveal. I thought he/she might remember how it was on the other side of the God net.
I thank you for editing my posts so the masses can comprehend them. I corrected the issue.
I am a he, Poppy. I very much remember how it was on the other side. Consistent with my temperament . . . I was as equally certain of my atheism as I now am of my theism. I have plowed a lot of intellectual fields in the development of my synthesis to explain to my intellect HOW what caused my certainty could possibly be true. My harshest critics call it confirmation bias . . . I call it seeking plausible and believable explanations.
 
Old 01-11-2014, 01:48 PM
 
63,570 posts, read 39,862,781 times
Reputation: 7820
Quote:
Originally Posted by AREQUIPA View Post
No prob. I sometimes wish people would edit my posts Mystic as an atheist before the Godrush, reminded me rather of CS Lewis...in fact of a lot of atheists. They hadn't got the rational backup to atheism, so when the 'There isn't anything there' thing collapsed under one or other of the conversion methods, there was no rationale to fall back on.
But I may have Mystic wrong. He'll tell you.
You have me wrong, Arq. I was entrenched in the rationale of verificationism and naturalism. It is why I was compelled to explain to my intellect what at the time seemed inexplicable but undeniable.
 
Old 01-11-2014, 02:04 PM
 
63,570 posts, read 39,862,781 times
Reputation: 7820
Quote:
Originally Posted by psvitagamer89 View Post
I think the random events theory is more plausible simply because it makes more sense than the world having been created by some being for which there can never be any evidence.
Me being an atheist, do I ever have any private doubts that maybe I'm wrong? Nope. I'm as sure as all hell that no God that humanity has ever believed in exists. Why would I doubt that? Would you doubt your belief that unicorns don't exist? Its the same thing to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metaphysique View Post
Created by what or who, exactly? Like we're the result of some extraterrestrial's 7th grade science experiment? Or some other extraterrestrial race a la Engineers in Prometheus?

If you're referring, more specifically, to having been created by a mythological deity, no, I'd gather skeptics don't privately weigh such matters. Since mythological deities are characters in ancient literature and are akin, to say, Voldemort or Sauron, I'd wager they're not on a skeptic's radar as a legitimate "First Cause."

However, if you're speaking in more broad terms, as in, there having been a Cause, as in, First Cause, a Prime Mover, etc., well, that depends on the atheist.

I am a relative metaphysical atheist and I contemplate and study all sorts of First Cause concepts. I find them quite fascinating; however, I am not wed to the idea or any one idea. I also identify with agnosticism because I believe the existence of a First Cause is unknown (weak). While I believe it to be unknown at this point in time, I still entertain various concepts. It's fun.
I completely understand your predicament. I went through it during my odyssey. When the light bulb finally went off . . . it was an existential rationale . . . not a creation rationale that won out. I abandoned all the creation by Will nonsense in favor of mere existence. It is the existence of God and the requirements for that existence that establish the parameters of our reality . . . especially our consciousness. God as pure consciousness . . . produces the field that establishes our reality.

As a living entity, God must be maintained (and grow) by the processes that we experience as our reality including our consciousness. Just as our conscious Will has little to do with the processes that maintain and grow us . . . I see a parallel relationship for our reality to God's Will. This eliminated a myriad of problems . . . not the least of which is theodicy. Just as the pain signals in our body can alert us to problems and issues that need to be addressed. Prayer and meditation can play a similar role in directing God's attention, IMO.

Last edited by MysticPhD; 01-11-2014 at 02:48 PM..
 
Old 01-11-2014, 02:46 PM
 
Location: S. Wales.
50,083 posts, read 20,582,163 times
Reputation: 5927
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
You have me wrong, Arq. I was entrenched in the rationale of verificationism and naturalism. It is why I was compelled to explain to my intellect what at the time seemed inexplicable but undeniable.
Ok. I accept I was wrong.
 
Old 01-11-2014, 04:20 PM
 
Location: The point of no return, er, NorCal
7,400 posts, read 6,351,299 times
Reputation: 9636
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
I completely understand your predicament. I went through it during my odyssey. When the light bulb finally went off . . . it was an existential rationale . . . not a creation rationale that won out. I abandoned all the creation by Will nonsense in favor of mere existence. It is the existence of God and the requirements for that existence that establish the parameters of our reality . . . especially our consciousness. God as pure consciousness . . . produces the field that establishes our reality.

As a living entity, God must be maintained (and grow) by the processes that we experience as our reality including our consciousness. Just as our conscious Will has little to do with the processes that maintain and grow us . . . I see a parallel relationship for our reality to God's Will. This eliminated a myriad of problems . . . not the least of which is theodicy. Just as the pain signals in our body can alert us to problems and issues that need to be addressed. Prayer and meditation can play a similar role in directing God's attention, IMO.
I don't quite see it as a predicament. I've experienced the entire spectrum of Christian theology from hyper-fundamentalism (I was worse than Sarah Palin, think Jerry Falwell) to Christian mysticism/pluralism/monism, and then left the Abrahamic tradition entirely and spent several years studying comparative mysticism, esotericism, Eastern philosophy, ancient history, early Christianity, Biblical hermeneutics, etc.

I've explored many fascinating traditions and philosophies, and have an immense appreciation for a handful. Still, I identify as a relative atheist - agnostic pantheist/pandeist (or panentheist/panendeist). There are many concepts, deity characters, I reject as fanciful and mythical, and this includes the Abrahamic deities. This includes all deities in ancient literature, though I do happen to really like Thor. However, I am open to the existence of a Source, or, to borrow from Hinduism's non-duality based philosophy, Advaita Vedanta, Ultimate Transcendence. Or it could be called the "Tao" or "Creator" (Kabbalah). I have strong leanings toward Eastern philosophy and Neopagan traditions. I also have a deep appreciation for the Gathas and am comforted when I read them. So, in many ways, my deeper spiritual beliefs are eclectic.

While I believe the existence of a First Cause or Ultimate Transcendence is unknown (weak agnosticism), I am open or inclined to believe anyway. However, such "entity" is definitely not tied to classical or Abrahamic theism. Western theism doesn't quite appeal to me.

ETA:

Surprisingly, I never struggled with the issue of theodicy, and that has to do with having a deeper understanding of why omnibenevolence (all of the omni characteristics, actually) doesn't fit into the framework of the Israelite tradition or Hebrew text.
 
Old 01-12-2014, 06:37 PM
 
Location: Here
2,301 posts, read 2,027,979 times
Reputation: 1712
Quote:
Originally Posted by iwishiwerethin View Post
I saw this question asked of churchgoers, so I thought it might apply to atheists, too. Do atheists ever think that maybe the world was created?
There is kind of a difference between believing that some sufficiently powerful entity might have created the cosmos billions of years ago, when compared to believing that there is a god who can see the actions of mankind, not to mention hearing prayers, working miracles, etc. Personally, I think it is possible that some entity of some kind created the cosmos long ago. I put the chances at something like 1 in 50. But as for the god looking down on his flock, so to speak; I pretty much dismiss that as nonsense.
 
Old 01-12-2014, 07:24 PM
 
Location: Hyrule
8,390 posts, read 11,575,374 times
Reputation: 7544
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
I am a he, Poppy. I very much remember how it was on the other side. Consistent with my temperament . . . I was as equally certain of my atheism as I now am of my theism. I have plowed a lot of intellectual fields in the development of my synthesis to explain to my intellect HOW what caused my certainty could possibly be true. My harshest critics call it confirmation bias . . . I call it seeking plausible and believable explanations.
Well Dr. Mystic we share tenure but as my years were spent in southwest history and not religion I only have my personal views on it. One thing I've seen over the years is certainly a consistent need for people to yearn for meaning. We all go about this in our own way and I only intervene when that option is threatened. Since you pose no threat to that, have fun in your personal discovery. We all have that right whether others think we are on the right path or not. Nobody knows, so the discovery door is wide open.

The condescending nature of Theism is so subtle and common place. To declare you've found a God, and eternal life regardless of how you act while others in your opinion are lost, ill informed or just lack luster is going to get you into conversation. Those whose beliefs come with eternal life add an extra kick into the condescending car tire.( I have eternal life and you of course don't simply because you don't know God.) Then add hell into the mix and you actually have Theists happily accepting a belief in which others would burn in a hell for eternity. Taking this on is a huge responsibility but yet some take it so lightly, without thorough study, I wonder if they realize the power of condemning another to hell. But you as a former atheist would be aware of how it sounds to atheist/agnostics. You know it's patronizing to argue a belief. So I appreciate you stating you are not doing it intentionally.

I see you seeking, plowing and planting the seeds of your new found belief (what you wish to be true) which is wonderful for you but not arguable because it's still yours and yours alone without proof, the seeds won't grow here without it. You cannot prove anything from an analogy, only hope to enhance informal understanding of a proof that is already presented. Your proof is not. Abuse of analogy won't do anything for me but turn me off. But, I do wish you well on your journey.
 
Old 01-12-2014, 08:28 PM
 
Location: NJ
17,574 posts, read 46,063,218 times
Reputation: 16273
My guess is not many. Simply because of the reaction identifying yourself as an atheist can get. I don't see any advantage to declaring yourself as an atheist, but privately doubting it.
 
Old 01-13-2014, 12:13 AM
 
63,570 posts, read 39,862,781 times
Reputation: 7820
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoppySead View Post
Well Dr. Mystic we share tenure but as my years were spent in southwest history and not religion I only have my personal views on it. One thing I've seen over the years is certainly a consistent need for people to yearn for meaning. We all go about this in our own way and I only intervene when that option is threatened. Since you pose no threat to that, have fun in your personal discovery. We all have that right whether others think we are on the right path or not. Nobody knows, so the discovery door is wide open.
Since I did nt consciously search for meaning and was actively seeking to achieve comlete indifference to the pleasures and pains of this life as a Buddhist atheist . . . I hardly corroborate your search for meaning theory, Poppy. Meaning and God kind of dropped in unannounced and unexpected . . . altering my life dramatically.
Quote:
The condescending nature of Theism is so subtle and common place. To declare you've found a God, and eternal life regardless of how you act while others in your opinion are lost, ill informed or just lack luster is going to get you into conversation. Those whose beliefs come with eternal life add an extra kick into the condescending car tire.( I have eternal life and you of course don't simply because you don't know God.) Then add hell into the mix and you actually have Theists happily accepting a belief in which others would burn in a hell for eternity. Taking this on is a huge responsibility but yet some take it so lightly, without thorough study, I wonder if they realize the power of condemning another to hell. But you as a former atheist would be aware of how it sounds to atheist/agnostics. You know it's patronizing to argue a belief. So I appreciate you stating you are not doing it intentionally.
I feel the same as you about this. I do not take it lightly and "take it on" just as actively as any atheist. Theism has nothing to do with dictating to or judging others.
Quote:
I see you seeking, plowing and planting the seeds of your new found belief (what you wish to be true) which is wonderful for you but not arguable because it's still yours and yours alone without proof, the seeds won't grow here without it. You cannot prove anything from an analogy, only hope to enhance informal understanding of a proof that is already presented. Your proof is not. Abuse of analogy won't do anything for me but turn me off. But, I do wish you well on your journey.
It is what I know to be true . . . not wish to be true . . . but thank you for the well wishes. I am not planting seeds . . . just explaining and defending. I found it immensely helpful reading what others thought. We are all looking at the same reality after all..
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.


Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:18 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top