How has your view of religion or spirituality evolved as a result of spending time on the forum? (faith, Christian)
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 topic of this thread is: How has your view of religion or spirituality evolved as a result of spending time on the forum?
If we continue seeing attempts to derail thread by bringing up definitions of "reality," God being the Universe, listing of traits, and political agendas, etc., we will begin issuing infractions to the offenders. Please stop replying to attempts to derail threads.
If Bill doesn't want to be religious, he should be free from any pressure to be religious. But that doesn't mean he gets to control the general environment.
If Bill doesn't want to associate with Black people, he doesn't have to. But that doesn't mean that he gets to control the general environment.
yuppers. I have learned here that atheism definitely has different types of expressions. My version isn't worried about describing the universe due to how religious people react.
freedom of religion.
freedom from religion.
is the line.
One promotes freedom to believe [whatever] and the other starts to infringe on basic freedom to believe [whatever]. And there is over lap.
I will no sooner join freedom from religion than I would the NRA ... they are same mind set.
That to call something that (for all the argument I have seen presented to the contrary) works by natural forces "God" requires some clarification and does not in any way score a point against atheism (which seems to be the intent) because calling a non -god (for all we cn know) "God" is just a semantic trick, from the point of debunking atheism.
We could agree on the different usages but every time 'universe = 'God' is presented in a contexy of debunking atheism, it is going to be called.
This forum, and members I inquired of, evolved my spiritual view from Atheist to Theist.
It did this by way of enlightening me to Pantheist concepts of "God", and brought me to a point of greater understanding.
By what authority, info, data, or logic do you ajudge something/someone to be a "non-god"?
When were you deemed "Ultimate Arbiter" of what "God" must be, or not be, to qualify as God?
You must consider yourself such to make the claims you did.
This forum, and members I inquired of, evolved my spiritual view from Atheist to Theist.
It did this by way of enlightening me to Pantheist concepts of "God", and brought me to a point of greater understanding.
By what authority, info, data, or logic do you ajudge something/someone to be a "non-god"?
When were you deemed "Ultimate Arbiter" of what "God" must be, or not be, to qualify as God?
You must consider yourself such to make the claims you did.
We've done this many times before (Dictionary definitions, remember?) and I certainly don't intend to do it again. Especially it isn't on topic.
This forum, and members I inquired of, evolved my spiritual view from Atheist to Theist.
It did this by way of enlightening me to Pantheist concepts of "God", and brought me to a point of greater understanding.
By what authority, info, data, or logic do you ajudge something/someone to be a "non-god"?
When were you deemed "Ultimate Arbiter" of what "God" must be, or not be, to qualify as God?
You must consider yourself such to make the claims you did.
trans is right here.
the definition of deity is the definition of a deity. But your type of god has enough evidence, scientifically speaking only, that all we can say is that we call it "this" and you call it "that"
the definition of deity is the definition of a deity. But your type of god has enough evidence, scientifically speaking only, that all we can say is that we call it "this" and you call it "that"
Arach has it right. I call it nature and you call it 'God'.
Which is absolutely fine, so long as you don't make it the basis for debunking atheism or saying our view is wrong. All the time you don't claim it is intelligent and somehow dabbles in human affairs with a forward - planning intent, we are apparently saying the same thing but in a different dialect.
the definition of deity is the definition of a deity. But your type of god has enough evidence, scientifically speaking only, that all we can say is that we call it "this" and you call it "that"
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRANSPONDER
Arach has it right. I call it nature and you call it 'God'.
Which is absolutely fine, so long as you don't make it the basis for debunking atheism or saying our view is wrong. All the time you don't claim it is intelligent and somehow dabbles in human affairs with a forward - planning intent, we are apparently saying the same thing but in a different dialect.
Really? Do atheists understand Nature as Christians understand God? What is the fallacy here?
God is a loaded word and it is understood only in one way - a creator being that will reward you and punish you with a heaven and hell. It is difficult to get past that in any discussion pertaining to spirituality or religion if we use that term to denote "something else."
Do atheists believe in "something else"? How would you define it?
Really? Do atheists understand Nature as Christians understand God? What is the fallacy here?
God is a loaded word and it is understood only in one way - a creator being that will reward you and punish you with a heaven and hell. It is difficult to get past that in any discussion pertaining to spirituality or religion if we use that term to denote "something else."
Do atheists believe in "something else"? How would you define it?
Understanding "nature" is an attempt by humans to understand how the universe we exist in functions. We have learned, through practical experience, that the most productive method for understanding the functioning of nature is through empirical observation and practical experience. Empirica is the Greek word for experience.
Religion, on the other hand, is the attempt to understand nature as being the result of supernatural cause, as opposed to entirely natural cause. So a religious person attempts to explain a tornado, as one possible example, as a supernatural event deliberately caused with an intelligent intention. Empirical observation, on the other hand, explains a tornado as being the natural result, ultimately, of nature at work. Ultimately, like everything else that occurs, a tornado is the result of quantum mechanics in action. No intelligent intent is involved.
So what is the difference in understanding nature and "understanding" God? One is based on the direct observation of nature in action, and the other is based imagining a supernatural cause.
So... we are faced with two competing methods for attempting to understand the nature and function of the universe we exist in. One method has led to modern technology, i.e. electrical power, TV's, cell phones, robots on Mars, and the like. The other method has led to stories of devils and demons, belief in witches, flying reanimated corpses, and the like. One method is based on direct observation resulting in practical functioning applications, and the other method is based on make believe and wishful thinking, resulting in centuries of ongoing EMPTY CLAIMS.
So... which method has the better claim to being factual?
Attempting to clearly frame the differences in these two methods has a direct impact on how the various views on religion and spirituality are evolving. Not just on this forum, but in the world in general.
Really? Do atheists understand Nature as Christians understand God?
No. When we talk about nature, we are referring to natural forces without intent. Christians understand their god as an extension of their personality. Beware the hell threat Christians.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cb2008
God is a loaded word and it is understood only in one way - a creator being that will reward you and punish you with a heaven and hell.
No. We do not believe in different definitions of gods, whether they are first cause creator gods or the Chinese god who fires lasers out of his nose. We do not define the gods, we do not believe your definitions of gods.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cb2008
It is difficult to get past that in any discussion pertaining to spirituality or religion if we use that term to denote "something else."
Do atheists believe in "something else"? How would you define it?
This atheist believes natural forces can create complexity without the need of an intelligence, as that is what we see throughout the universe. I also believe our universe is not a friendly place, only our small section of it is, and not all the time. I also believe some spiritual people are too busy searching in books instead of experiencing life, and too busy thinking they are better than other animals.
No. When we talk about nature, we are referring to natural forces without intent. Christians understand their god as an extension of their personality. Beware the hell threat Christians.
No. We do not believe in different definitions of gods, whether they are first cause creator gods or the Chinese god who fires lasers out of his nose. We do not define the gods, we do not believe your definitions of gods.
This atheist believes natural forces can create complexity without the need of an intelligence, as that is what we see throughout the universe. I also believeour universe is not a friendly place, only our small section of it is, and not all the time. I also believe some spiritual people are too busy searching in books instead of experiencing life, and too busy thinking they are better than other animals.
post above claims that a person's views on "religion and spirituality" are an "extension of their personality."
so then in that framework, the views and beliefs above (in bold) by the atheist posting are an "extension of his personality."
post also generalizes in line one (bold above) that applies to all members of this or that identified group.
so then in that framework, the view applies to all atheists.
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 11-27-2020 at 10:45 AM..
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.
