Do theists not comprehend the concept of disbelief in God? (Baptists, divorce)
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.
the two fields I was pointing too are the "logical field" and the "emotional field" and the excitations in those fields. what is the root cause of the excitation and how do these fields interact gives me a look into how that brain state is functioning. You need your experience to be real, I don't fully understand why. lol, that just may be a good thing for you.
You are worried about "separateness view". There is no "separation". But the "Q", is what you pointed too. What "YOU" experience as "oneness" is an illusion. I don't mean in any way that any part of the universe is "separated", but your "unified couscous field" is an illusion. Remember now, I don't mean "delusions", from your angle, perspective, world view, or whatever you want to call it, it is there, It's just not what you think it is.
Damn!! That's as good as I could have written.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arach Angle
you know what you want it to mean. I would stop gays from imposing their claim as quickly as I would jeff. I wonder if you would help jump jeff with the gays (no punn intented) just because he is religous? you know ... go team kinda stuff?
Very well stated. One can believe in the fsm for all I care. They can even try to pour the marinara or Alfredo sauce on me.
I'll state, why do I care? In essence, I don't. It's a reflection of that individual. My reaction is a reflection of me.
I've found it is pretty useless to debate metaphysical beliefs. One can have an open conversation between those who believe, those who don't believe, or those who do and don't believe. Too often it denigrates into 'proof': there is only proof on the inside. The rest is transient.
If one wants to contend laws, or state sponsored education, from a religious perspective, that is an inappropriate forum because human legalities were set up here to nix that.
If one wants to contend religious laws in a persons home or house of worship, that's just tacky or bad manners.
Besides, I don't find the physical laws of nature, the legal laws of man, or the laws of historical understanding as 'God's Laws' as mutually exclusive. They may come into conflict, but I always defer to the above. I know where my faith stops, human legal wise.
But I'm also very 'human' based on most of the hot button topics so maybe I'm the weird outlier.
Yes. It is heartening that the usual God-claims and religious claims seem to be increasingly understood as without substance. It is the more cosmic mind sorta god that is becoming more evident all the time. And since it is sinking in argument from design has has failed to make its case, argument from human feelings (and Good Old "Consciousness") is showing up more and more.
That is a logically untenable position at the outset, because human feeling may as well just be that and may be seriously unreliable. Just the alternative explanation make the use of feelings as evidence of a "god" without merit. Moreover, the other thing I notice more of is a growing understanding that Human feelings can in some cases be identified as an evolved survival instinct.
That is overlaid by centuries of human thinking, just as an instinctive basis of what is good for us as individuals, a group and as a species, has become an increasingly complex and sophisticated code of morals and ethics. But that is becoming more and more the better explanations of our human feelings than any god -claim.
When that goes, there will be virtually nothing left as a valid argument for any god -claim but Faith - which is no valid argument at all.
Do theists really believe that the only reason atheists and agnostics don't believe is because they want to sin?
Some theists have been taught an authoritarian basis for morality all their life. They often become an atheist for some short period in their lives and it is typically a rebelling against both morality and God since they have no rational basis for morality. When their life predictably goes to crap, they conclude that there parents were right after all and they snap back to the religion of their childhood. These sort typically do believe atheists as you describe because it is what motivated them in their superficial dip into atheism, which barely made a scratch in all the irrational thinking habits and absurd presumptions of the ideology in which they were raised.
But clearly this is not true of all theists.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wallflash
Can theists truly not grasp that some people simply see no evidence of a God , and certainly none that might want a person to follow a particular faith, and see no point in believing in something like this without solid evidence ?
Some theists, like myself, are scientists and therefore have an understanding of different standards of evidence. The vast majority know that there is no evidence for the existence of God meeting the standards of scientific inquiry. But they see no reason to limit truth and reality to those criterion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wallflash
On what basis would a theist who believes this claim that someone like Stephen Hawking just wants to sin ? What evidence would a theist have that Sam Harris's atheism is rooted in a desire to pretend God doesn't exist so he can sin without guilt ? What about Dan Barker , a former Pentecostal preacher who decided he no longer believed ? What evidence would a theist have that Dan Barker left the faith so he could sin at will?
Many Christians follow the dictates of their theology which basically says this desire to sin is the natural state of human beings.
Such is the blindness of ideology (theist or otherwise) for it only lets you see what it decides is real.
Some theists have been taught an authoritarian basis for morality all their life. They often become an atheist for some short period in their lives and it is typically a rebelling against both morality and God since they have no rational basis for morality. When their life predictably goes to crap, they conclude that there parents were right after all and they snap back to the religion of their childhood. These sort typically do believe atheists as you describe because it is what motivated them in their superficial dip into atheism, which barely made a scratch in all the irrational thinking habits and absurd presumptions of the ideology in which they were raised.
But clearly this is not true of all theists.
Some theists, like myself, are scientists and therefore have an understanding of different standards of evidence. The vast majority know that there is no evidence for the existence of God meeting the standards of scientific inquiry. But they see no reason to limit truth and reality to those criterion.
Many Christians follow the dictates of their theology which basically says this desire to sin is the natural state of human beings.
Such is the blindness of ideology (theist or otherwise) for it only lets you see what it decides is real.
What type of theist are you? By definition, or what?
atheist say I am not a real atheist (or in name only) and theist say I am not a real theist, so I was wondering what do you mean when you say " ... some theist like me ..."
atheist say I am not a real atheist (or in name only) and theist say I am not a real theist, so I was wondering what do you mean when you say " ... some theist like me ..."
It's pretty simple:
If you believe that a supreme being created our universe and is the source of all existence, then you're a theist.
If you don't believe that, then you're an atheist.
Yes it was, Out of context, any claim can be made to look like a joke.
The claim here is defending all peoples rights. Taken too-too far, its a joke too.
Glad I guessed right. It can be a car crash before you get that far, too. Doing right is a minefield and requires a look of goodwill and forgiveness on both sides.
Agreed. There is he the question of what one does about it.It is doesn't make any difference other than to how you feel about it, yo are an irreligious theist. If you feel tat you can propitiate to ge some benefit, you are a religious theist, or that's what I suggest is a handy definition.
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.
That's as good as I could have written.
you know ... go team kinda stuff?
