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.
well, as far as beliefs, pantheism is at least consistent with observation.
A living universe isn't all that bad. I lack belief in it myself, but its possible.
Being in a living system, using a much smaller volume, is considerably more probable. The word "organism" may be an issue. But only a basic discussion on that would show that "Why would "alive" mean it has to have only one set of identical genes ?"
In fact, its so probable that "I lack belief", based on "I don't know what is being said", starts to look like just that. A person really doesn't know what they are talking about. And that is totally fine. Until they take steps to avoid learning about it and or are constantly telling people they lack belief, and thats that.
at some point, the extent of atheist thought includes trying to learn.
People that believe we may be part of a living system have a serous amount of evidence to make the case. When terms like "woo" and "romanticizing it" come up, they are not actually objective, they are more emotional.
Telling people to "take it somewhere else" well, that's a cop out and serous avoidance. Its actually a red flag when we hear it.
The belief has a mechanism, repeatable predictions, and is consistent with observation. That really determines if a claim is reliable. That is how some atheist think.
no god forbid, some of us atheist actually believe we should apply our standards to ourselves also.
well, as far as beliefs, pantheism is at least consistent with observation.
A living universe isn't all that bad. I lack belief in it myself, but its possible.
Being in a living system, using a much smaller volume, is considerably more probable. The word "organism" may be an issue. But only a basic discussion on that would show that "Why would "alive" mean it has to have only one set of identical genes ?"
In fact, its so probable that "I lack belief", based on "I don't know what is being said", starts to look like just that. A person really doesn't know what they are talking about. And that is totally fine. Until they take steps to avoid learning about it and or are constantly telling people they lack belief, and thats that.
at some point, the extent of atheist thought includes trying to learn.
People that believe we may be part of a living system have a serous amount of evidence to make the case. When terms like "woo" and "romanticizing it" come up, they are not actually objective, they are more emotional.
Telling people to "take it somewhere else" well, that's a cop out and serous avoidance. Its actually a red flag when we hear it.
The belief has a mechanism, repeatable predictions, and is consistent with observation. That really determines if a claim is reliable. That is how some atheist think.
no god forbid, some of us atheist actually believe we should apply our standards to ourselves also.
Notice that it has been 3 months since this thread got any activity.
I've invited & challenged a debate of the claims here scores of times...but they always back down from the challenge, and say things like "Your moronic claims and arguments don't merit a response".
That way, they do not have to confront logical claims. Claims that can only be contested by resorting to illogical ad populum arguments such as, "That's not what most people call God" (Diety only)...or, the equally meaningless, "The Universe already has a name."
I try to explain that, from my perspective, "G-O-D" is a title, that can be reasonably assigned as a descriptor to that which merits such a designation. Inevitably, I will get a repeat of some "God is Deity Only" (typically the Abrahamic Deity) argument...and the declaration that offering any other manifestation of "God" for consideration is "off topic" and cannot be discussed...then throw in comparisons to Santa Claus, The Easter Bunny, The Tooth Fairy, Garden Gnomes, etc.
This...even though Pantheism (considering Nature/The Universe/Everything to be God) is probably the oldest Theistic Concept there is, and has been embraced by more humans than any other Religious idea throughout Homo sapien history.
I present the information that PROVES "G-O-D" is known to be defined (among other meanings) as The Supreme/Ultimate Reality and Something of Supreme Value. Invariably, the meaning that defines "G-O-D" as a Religious Deity Being is pointed to, and it is declared that no other definition/meaning is to be considered or discussed.
That is how they can keep saying, "No Evidence for the Existence of God". And why they will not assess any other claims relative to the existence of a God Entity.
We have not backed down, we just do not want to refute your arguments again that you simply repeat, ad nauseam, just as you repeat your misrepresentations ad nauseam.
Keep fishing for responses, but until you finally make a rational argument, why should we waste our time?
Notice that it has been 3 months since this thread got any activity.
I've invited & challenged a debate of the claims here scores of times...but they always back down from the challenge...
We have not backed down, we just do not want to refute your arguments again that you simply repeat, ad nauseam, just as you repeat your misrepresentations ad nauseam.
Keep fishing for responses, but until you finally make a rational argument, why should we waste our time?
You have never rationally contested the base argument for my Pantheistic Beliefs.
"G-O-D" is known to be defined as "The Supreme/Ultimate Reality" and "Something of Supreme Value"...that has been proven prima facie. I can prove it again if you would like.
"ALL That Exists" is certainly "The Supreme/Ultimate Reality" and "Something of Supreme Value"...and is self-substantiating to exist unequivocally & irrefutably.
"ALL That Exists" thus merits the assignment of the title "God", and is a objectively existing God Entity.
THAT IS a rational argument to support Pantheism.
You just make a off-hand declaration that "the argument isn't rational" or "you keep repeating your claims" (which is done with any and every claim...including Atheistic claims) without ever presenting a logical rebuttal.
Let's see you refute any of that without pointing to Religious Deities or the Gods of ancient Mythology and their purported attributes & traits...which, while comporting definitively, only exist as Metaphorical, Allegorical, and Mythological representations of God and aspects of God.
The God I perceive is the Entity those Deities and Metaphorical/Mythological Creatures represent and are just Allegorical Characters in writings, not God itself.
Pantheism....Pan (ALL) Theos (GOD)....ALL GOD.
Everything that Exists (even what we may not know about) both animate & inanimate, in totality as One Entity, is considered to be "God" in Pantheism.
ALL That Exists is as "Godly" as it gets. If ALL That Exists couldn't be considered as meritorious of the title "God", then we shouldn't even have the word/term.
Rationally & logically contest THAT...in detail, with a reasoned rebuttal. I wanna see it...and I challenge you to finally do it.
I agree. Only bashing, insulting, harassing, and mocking Religions and the beliefs and adherents thereof (on a forum titled "Religion and Spirituality") is what interests them.
They are not interested in the actual logical and reasonable assessment of all claims.
I agree. Only bashing, insulting, harassing, and mocking Religions and the beliefs and adherents thereof (on a forum titled "Religion and Spirituality") is what interests them.
They are not interested in the actual logical and reasonable assessment of all claims.
Or perhaps your constant mantra about this (multiple times per day) is why they turn away from any discussion with you.
Notice that it has been 3 months since this thread got any activity.
I've invited & challenged a debate of the claims here scores of times...but they always back down from the challenge, and say things like "Your moronic claims and arguments don't merit a response".
That way, they do not have to confront logical claims. Claims that can only be contested by resorting to illogical ad populum arguments such as, "That's not what most people call God" (Diety only)...or, the equally meaningless, "The Universe already has a name."
nipped for space ...
That is how they can keep saying, "No Evidence for the Existence of God". And why they will not assess any other claims relative to the existence of a God Entity.
In this case, I don't think its backing down. I would actually agree with phet in this case.
They are only interested in fighting the major religions and they are using their statement of belief about god as a weapon to do so. ("lack belief" and "we don't have to say anything" is starting to look dogmatic)
Discussing belief, in terms of spirituality, that we may be in a living has to be avoided and/or suppressed. The more we talk, The more evidence we are allowed to bring, the more rational it becomes. For some reason they fear that will slow them down.
You most definitely have a point about limiting us to a specific deity. Out side of that, "lack belief" and "we don't have to say anything" can easily be made to look less reliable. In fact, it can be made look childish. That's why strawman has to stay hidden and distort what is actually being said. He can easily get the restriction lifted and talk to me directly.
I might even side with them if they said "We are only addressing a deity because we are fighting religion." ewverytime we called them out on with "some beliefs have evidence, lets talk about them." But they feel, that kind of honesty would slow them down.
Or perhaps your constant mantra about this (multiple times per day) is why they turn away from any discussion with you.
like the mantra of ... almost every thread every day.
"bad religion" "
we don't need evidence",
"we don't have to say anything".
and bad Christians.
over and over and over and over again?
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.
