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.
Believe what you want. You already do anyway and make up things as you go along.
It's my understanding that mordant wanted to believe the claims of evangelical Christianity, but was forced to stop believing because of the evidence against those claims.
I went through a similar process of deconversion.
It's simply not true that atheists/agnostics are believing what they want to believe or making things up as they go along. Often it's just the opposite.
It's my understanding that mordant wanted to believe the claims of evangelical Christianity, but was forced to stop believing because of the evidence against those claims.
I went through a similar process of deconversion.
It's simply not true that atheists/agnostics are believing what they want to believe or making things up as they go along. Often it's just the opposite.
What impresses me most about those who have made journeys similar to yours, mordant's, Pieroo's and others (okay - and mine to a lesser-but-still-darned-admirable extent) is the courage it required both to question beliefs instilled when young, and to follow where the non-answers led.
Because there's a certain amount of tippy-toeing on un-tested ground. And the quicksands of dis/un/belief abound -- even if you only half-believe the dire predictions of the nuns of the 1950s.
Although we have followed different paths, we have arrived at a place which accepts all benign beliefs, or non-beliefs.
Ours is the cause of truth. Scientists and shamans share the goal but take different, albeit occasionally intersecting and often parallel paths.
Seekers tend to lean towards one or the other but should prepare to high-5 each other when the intersections come around.
Which happens now and again here on CD. One of the reasons I hang around like a wart.
Except that is what everyone does without exception, whether they admit it or not. Even if not one other human shares your basic assessment of god, you concocted it yourself and you are still a human being.
Unless of course you're seriously suggesting that god is whispering in your ear, and can prove it ... you are just another person basing your opinion of God on what man says or does. You get a couple of brownie points to the extent that you're not just going with the most popular and widely subscribed beliefs, but as even the Bible admits, there is "nothing new under the sun". "All is vanity and vexation of spirit". Even if you evade some overt trappings of religion that are particularly hypocritical or irrational it's highly unlikely you've had a new thought or belief about god just the same.
All that said, I don't think I should base my opinion of deities on what is popular either, but I go a step further and refuse to base it on comforting legends or empty promises but rather insist that there be some sort of verifiable factuality to religion ideations. Which I have yet to discover to even a minor extent.
And you certainly can't accuse me of going with the popular or majority view here because trust me, most people WANT to believe, and facts be damned.
I respect your opinion in that as humans we cannot help but be influenced by others to some extent. The argument of proving God exists or does not will never be accomplished by man. I don't claim to have any new ideas. My beliefs are based on my experiences in life, and in particular my experiences with God. I've never heard an audible voice, but I know without a doubt He lives in my heart. I cannot prove that to you or anyone else, but that is what Faith is all about- believing without seeing.
I respect your opinion in that as humans we cannot help but be influenced by others to some extent.
It doesn't even require others. We can be unduly influenced by ourselves, too. We all tend to be in love with our own ideas. For some of us, that no one shares them actually makes them more attractive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bryan85
The argument of proving God exists or does not will never be accomplished by man. I don't claim to have any new ideas. My beliefs are based on my experiences in life, and in particular my experiences with God. I've never heard an audible voice, but I know without a doubt He lives in my heart. I cannot prove that to you or anyone else, but that is what Faith is all about- believing without seeing.
Indeed, personal gods aren't falsifiable propositions and can only be convincing via the failed epistemology of faith. But I do not begrudge you your personal beliefs, especially when you own them as such. Not many theists are capable of that in my experience.
Originally Posted by Eusebius You have no proof that the writers of the Old Testament created their version of Yahweh. So why say it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by AREQUIPA
I must say there is no-one like you for keeping it going. The stories about YHWH are demonstrably wrong (I have done it, so don;'t trouble to say I haven't) so since the stories about him are made up, the conclusion the Bible was made uop follows, and thus the god described in it was made op.
I know that isn't prof to you. Nothing is. So asking for it is just a way of keeping it going.
Dear friend, stating what you did above is in no way proving the writers of the Bible created their version of Yahweh. Don't you believe it is disingenuous to make false statements as if they were the truth?
You are correct you saying what you did above isn't proof to me. It would never pass as proof to anyone who is trained in critical thinking.
And no, asking for someone to prove what they say is not "just a way of keeping it going." If you actually have verifiable proof the writers of the Bible created their version of Yahweh, I'd like to see your proof.
Originally Posted by EusebiusYou have no proof that the writers of the Old Testament created their version of Yahweh. So why say it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by cupper3
I have given many references of the evolution of Yahweh from the Canaanite gods. Many.
Sorry but just saying so is not proving so.
Yahweh revealed Himself to specific individuals and explained to them the truth. Some were idol worshippers at the time. Yahweh was revealing to them that He is the One True God in the midst of all the nations who were worshiping idols of wood and stone and metal objects. This should tell you that the writers of the Bible didn't create their own version of Yahweh but Yahweh had to reveal Himself to them. Sometimes the Israelites would go back to worshiping the false gods. And Yahweh had to send them off as captives in a foreign land for a set amount of time. That (the curses and blessings of the law) was all in the law given to Moses on Mt. Sinai by Yahweh. Time and again Yahweh had to send His prophets to turn the people back to the One True God. So if the Israelites wanted to create a god of their own, it would have turned out more like the gods of the nations.
Yahweh revealed Himself to specific individuals and explained to them the truth. Some were idol worshippers at the time. Yahweh was revealing to them that He is the One True God in the midst of all the nations who were worshiping idols of wood and stone and metal objects. This should tell you that the writers of the Bible didn't create their own version of Yahweh but Yahweh had to reveal Himself to them. Sometimes the Israelites would go back to worshiping the false gods. And Yahweh had to send them off as captives in a foreign land for a set amount of time. That (the curses and blessings of the law) was all in the law given to Moses on Mt. Sinai by Yahweh. Time and again Yahweh had to send His prophets to turn the people back to the One True God. So if the Israelites wanted to create a god of their own, it would have turned out more like the gods of the nations.
The Muslims agree. But they believe that the One True God is actually Allah, and not the Christian Trinitarian God.
Is there some experiment we could run in order to determine which God is real?
So now it's because "fundamentalists" are mean. OK. Gotcha. Yay.
In large part, yes.
I was raised in fundamentalist home. It was churchgoers who first convinced me that fundamentalism could not be relied upon to produce good people. IOW, it was not true that following biblical teachings led to righteousness.
After I had reached that conclusion, I was more open to other beliefs. Finally, I reached the conclusion that intellectually, none of them could be supported. But it was my negative emotional reaction to the church I was raised in that started me on my way.
Yahweh revealed Himself to specific individuals and explained to them the truth.
Do you seriously not see the problem here?
You are asserting that Yahweh revealed himself to some people several thousand years ago.
I quote your own words back at you - "Sorry but just saying so is not proving so."
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.
I must say there is no-one like you for keeping it going. The stories about YHWH are demonstrably wrong (I have done it, so don;'t trouble to say I haven't) so since the stories about him are made up, the conclusion the Bible was made uop follows, and thus the god described in it was made op.
