There is no evidence for GOD...but I believe anyway. (priests, Christianity)

[victorianpunk]

Originally Posted by GoCardinals

G W Bush said God told him to invade Iraq. This indicident killed millions, and also destroyed the families and lives on an astronomical level. Don't you wonder how and where God would've told him to so?

And reason, logic, and the scientific method told scientists in the US that is was 100% ok to let innocent people die of syphilis as long as they got their data: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskeg...lis_experiment

Your point?

And having faith in GOD is not the same as believing GOD speaks to people.

[GoCardinals]

Originally Posted by victorianpunk

And reason, logic, and the scientific method told scientists in the US that is was 100% ok to let innocent people die of syphilis as long as they got their data: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskeg...lis_experiment

Perhaps that's another reason why there is a God out there.

We use our logic, reason, intelligence, research and common sense to make choices.
And in the end, we will be responsible for our choices that were made with free will.

Otherwise, how will justice be served to Hitler. He had his reasons to do whatever he did, just like the scientists had their reasons to let people die.

They both will face a final judgement, IMO as a believer in God.

And having faith in GOD is not the same as believing GOD speaks to people.

I totally agree with that.
The notion of "God speaking to people", IMO, should be limited to actions (if any) only to the person who believes that God speaks to them.

If "God speaks to me" results in actions involving any other human being, animals, environment and general welfare of the planet, then it should be filtered through the law of the land.

I wonder why I never heard anyone saying God spoke to me and ordered me to not eat for a month. Or God spoke to me and said that I should pay more taxes than what I owe.

It's almost always along the lines of, God spoke to me and told me to harm others. Such people should land in jail before carrying out "God's orders".

[TRANSPONDER]

Originally Posted by GoCardinals

Plz refer to the post. I must have overlooked your response in some other thread. You already know I don't ignore you.

It doesn't matter. I have made the same offer here. Are you up for it?

Originally Posted by GoCardinals

G W Bush said God told him to invade Iraq. This indicident killed millions, and also destroyed the families and lives on an astronomical level. Don't you wonder how and where God would've told him to so?

Well...isn't that what we unbelievers always say? That either God is a right bastard, or doesn't exist and all these claims of god -inspiration are simply the delusions of the people who have them. Dubhya was a prime example of why religion has to be removed from power and influence.

Originally Posted by GoCardinals

I don't have any problem with this approach.

The only thing that both Atheists and theists, need to acknowledge is that "reason and logic" is subjective. It varies from person to person.

Something that's logical and reasonable to you, may not be logical and reasonable to someone else.

If both parties understand and acknowledge this then the next step is two things.

1 - Avoid demeaning each other's belief or non-belief system, and do not impose our ideas onto others.
2 - Wherever possible, engage in a knowledge sharing dialogue (instead of a hosing down contest) to better understand each other's reason as to why some of us belief and others don't.

I think the challenge is not to find whether God exists or not, but how can we live together in peace and harmony.


Whether God exists or not? Perhaps we will all find out eventually, as there is no escaping from death.

Wromg. There are RULES about logic and reason. Just as there are rules about mathematics -and they are equally valid and in fact based on realities. It makes no more difference that some people mistake 'common sense' as it is called, winning any way you can, self delusion and mistaken thinking for 'Reason and logic' than some people ( ) can't add up a column of figures means that mathematics is unreliable or a matter of personal opinion.

I don't blame them - or me for not having a clue how to reason for decades They teach Math in school, bit nobody teaching logical reasoning or critical thinking. Yet you point up what a crying need there is for it.

I agree with you about under...well let's quote your post.."2 - Wherever possible, engage in a knowledge sharing dialogue (instead of a hosing down contest) to better understand each other's reason as to why some of us belief and others don't."

But the fact is, chum, that if you observed your own recommendation, you would see that we have all the cards on reason and evidence and should at least respect that instead of constantly throwing illogical arguments at us.

I understand of course, that you either have to accept that we are right on all evidence or keep trying to prove us wrong -in spite of the evidence. It can't be easy for you.

As to the god-claim -personal gods, we know that one -as reliably as we know there are black holes. As to a possible creative intelligence? Perhaps. It really doesn't matter whether we believe it or not.

And apart from the suspicion that the first step towards living in peace and harmony is...No not getting rid of religion - that's the 2nd step - understanding ourselves and the instincts that drive us is the first. Mind, the second step is getting in the way of the first.

[TRANSPONDER]

Originally Posted by victorianpunk

Okay, that very large word salad amounted to basically this: you agree that it is impossible for someone to base their every thought on the rational alone.

Which is exactly what I am saying. My believe in GOD is irrational. I admit that. After all, everyone, including yourself, engages in activity that is not 100% rational 100% of the time.

That's my point. The only difference is that those of us with faith admit as such, while the Fedora-boys will deny it with their dying breath.

I'm sorry if my post went over your head.

But at least you admit that your Faith is irrational. In which case, why on earth are you posting to complain about us not sharing it?

Originally Posted by victorianpunk

And guess what? That opinion is also baseless and absurd as it has no scientific evidence to back it up.

Even if the often -seen claim that negative evidence doesn't count as evidence was valid, the logic is that an irrational claim (ass you admit) isn't worthy of belief. So why should we believe it? And more importantly, why to we get attacked and criticized for not believing it?

Originally Posted by victorianpunk

This would be a great reply if not for two little details:

1) "Belief in GOD" and "the belief one may have that GOD talks to them," are two completely different things that are not necessarily mutually inclusive and


2) I already addressed this "point" several times in this thread. Respect for one's own faith should logically lead to respect for faith as a whole, and not killing people when one does not need to is indeed a part of respecting another's justification for their beliefs, i.e., their faith.

I would go into greater detail, but I've already explained this several times.

But presumably nobody explained that your reasoning is irrelevant. Belief in a god and belief in a god that talks to them are as different as belief in Atlantis and belief in alien technology built the pyramids. While it is a nice little basis for a college paper on where they differ or connect or even become part of the same belief system, it makes no difference to the fact that both are equally without credibility.

And you can save yourself explaining your irrelevant point about belief in one faith implying respect for the others. This only works if you believe in a sorta -god without connection to any particular religion. And, if you can get people to think like that instead of rival creeds and sects, splendid.

Atheists and irreligious theists ought to be on the same side. It is a tragedy that the 'agnostics' are so bitter towards those who don't see why they should believe an irrational (your words) god -belief.

[TRANSPONDER]

Originally Posted by GoCardinals

Perhaps that's another reason why there is a God out there.

We use our logic, reason, intelligence, research and common sense to make choices.
And in the end, we will be responsible for our choices that were made with free will.

Otherwise, how will justice be served to Hitler. He had his reasons to do whatever he did, just like the scientists had their reasons to let people die.

They both will face a final judgement, IMO as a believer in God.



I totally agree with that.
The notion of "God speaking to people", IMO, should be limited to actions (if any) only to the person who believes that God speaks to them.

If "God speaks to me" results in actions involving any other human being, animals, environment and general welfare of the planet, then it should be filtered through the law of the land.

I wonder why I never heard anyone saying God spoke to me and ordered me to not eat for a month. Or God spoke to me and said that I should pay more taxes than what I owe.

It's almost always along the lines of, God spoke to me and told me to harm others. Such people should land in jail before carrying out "God's orders".

I must say that the two of you are providing at least some good bad arguments for us to show up.

VP's point above is related to the Great Atrocity Debate or trying to validate religion on moral grounds. It's futile, as not only is there mot much to choose between either side, it makes no difference to what is actually true.

But Cardinal's point "If "God speaks to me" results in actions involving any other human being, animals, environment and general welfare of the planet, then it should be filtered through the law of the land." is very pertinent. It touches on the atheist view that morality comes through human reasoning and not from holy books or divine revelation, and it debunks the idea that human law should be set aside where it conflicts with the religious convictions of the faithful.

I'm encouraged by your posts. Really.

[Amaznjohn]

Originally Posted by GoCardinals

G W Bush said God told him to invade Iraq. This indicident killed millions, and also destroyed the families and lives on an astronomical level. Don't you wonder how and where God would've told him to so?

Of course I do, but based on your logic, he has a legitimate claim, if he bases this on his faith. When faith is legitimized then no one can condemn anyone for anything they believe or do based on faith. Would you expect someone to ignore what they believed by faith that their God(s) told them to do?

[Amaznjohn]

Originally Posted by victorianpunk

This would be a great reply if not for two little details:

1) "Belief in GOD" and "the belief one may have that GOD talks to them," are two completely different things that are not necessarily mutually inclusive and


2) I already addressed this "point" several times in this thread. Respect for one's own faith should logically lead to respect for faith as a whole, and not killing people when one does not need to is indeed a part of respecting another's justification for their beliefs, i.e., their faith.

I would go into greater detail, but I've already explained this several times.

1) Conceded

2) Should one respect the faith that drives one to kill an entire race in gas chambers?
Should one respect the faith that wants to kill homosexuals?
Should one respect the faith that the West is the devil and should be exterminated"
Should one respect the faith that says all should live under the rules that their faith requires?

As one who understands, admits, and justifies belief in your God is irrational, are there other irrational beliefs you proudly hold and consciously act upon? Is irrational belief something you desire?

[maat55]

Originally Posted by victorianpunk

And guess what? That opinion is also baseless and absurd as it has no scientific evidence to back it up.

Enlighten me with verifiable supernatural events. Finding your keys after praying isn't going to cut it. I can easily verify that the abrahamic religions are immoral, so you need to put up or shut up.

[maat55]

Originally Posted by GoCardinals

I don't have any problem with this approach.

The only thing that both Atheists and theists, need to acknowledge is that "reason and logic" is subjective. It varies from person to person.

Something that's logical and reasonable to you, may not be logical and reasonable to someone else.

If both parties understand and acknowledge this then the next step is two things.

1 - Avoid demeaning each other's belief or non-belief system, and do not impose our ideas onto others.
2 - Wherever possible, engage in a knowledge sharing dialogue (instead of a hosing down contest) to better understand each other's reason as to why some of us belief and others don't.

I think the challenge is not to find whether God exists or not, but how can we live together in peace and harmony.


Whether God exists or not? Perhaps we will all find out eventually, as there is no escaping from death.

The problem with religious zealots is that their standard of morality for others religions or philosophies isn't the same for theirs. My rose colored glasses didn't come off because someone respected my religious beliefs. My beliefs were ridiculed and challenged. IMO, the OP willfully worships an immoral mythical god. My challenges are to enlighten others that are not zealots and think rationally.

[hutennis]

Originally Posted by GoCardinals

I don't have any problem with this approach.

The only thing that both Atheists and theists, need to acknowledge is that "reason and logic" is subjective. It varies from person to person.

Something that's logical and reasonable to you, may not be logical and reasonable to someone else.

If both parties understand and acknowledge this then the next step is two things.

"This" can not be neither understood nor acknowledged nor accepted.
Because it is wrong.
Yes, something that's logical and reasonable to me, may not be logical and reasonable to you.
But one of us will be wrong. We can not both be right. Objectively can not.

If statement "A=A" looks logical and reasonable to me and does not look logical and reasonable to you, then you are objectively, demonstrably and verifiable wrong.
Logic and reason are objective b/c they are objectively verifiable.