(March 27, 2009 at 12:54 pm)Edward Wrote: Well, I'm certainly not part of the Christian Church.

Formally? Informally? I mean you seem to quote Christian teachings?

My problem lies (mainly) with religionists i.e. those who adopt a specific religion, I don't understand why they do it, why they believe in a specific deity on the basis of a bunch of hokey old writings that have nothing more than cultural and historic relevance to our lives now. OTOH (and I say this because I think this might be what you are or where you are headed) if you are a theist but not a religionist, whilst I disagree that there is a god (don't see how we can know, don't see any evidence for one) I have no specific issue ... it's not what I would think of as stupid, it's just not something I believe.

Kyu

(March 27, 2009 at 9:41 am)Giff Wrote: Edward, you are a christian. Just as Adrian say. You can come out of the closet

Seriously, many of the priest here in Sweden are like you. They have a very abstract view of their religion. Their thoughts acctually have many similarities with buddhism. The main reason why they are christians is that they think the christian view of life is great.

I knew I liked the Sweedish for some reason...I'm sure it was for the enlightened view of the priests...I'm sure that's what it was...well, that and the enlightened views of Amsterdam.

Quote:But religion is irrational. It's also non-logical and based on imagination and fantasies. It's giving easy answers on difficult questions. A perfect example that the human brain often try to find patterns where there are no patterns.

Yeah, but you don't really know, do you? I mean, you could be wrong given you just described mathematics as well as religion.

---

(March 27, 2009 at 9:51 am)Rockthatpiano06 Wrote: I agree with you guys, you can't try to be an atheist. It takes a long time to get to the point (for me it did anyways) to throw away a belief in any god. But, once you are shown the light, you can't unknow that knowledge. Even if you wanted to believe you couldn't anyway. So you were never really an atheist.

1. I used to say the exact same thing about the two tenets of Veridicanism (i.e., God is monistic, and the human purpose is to be Christ). Actually, I still do.

2. Let's say you are absolutely right. There is no God, there is nothing like a god (e.g., nature is not conscious, etc). All there is, is the material universe, and it exists for no reason--it just does. Plop. And we just happened to evolve the reason for which is no greater than that given a chaotic system and enough time, we were bound to. If that is the case, we can only live for our lives and the pleasure we can derive from them for the time we are here. There is nothing greater than pleasure and nothing worse than pain, unless the pain leads to a greater pleasure. We breed and reproduce for no reason other than instinct. We are not great--we are essentially as significant as the trees and grass. We come, we go. That's it.

If that's the case. If atheism is true. Then the best I can hope for is the delusion that God has planned me, intends something from my creation, has endowed me with gifts to use toward the fruition of my existence, and will be there in the end when I "come home."

If all I can have is the delusion, then all I can have is the delusion. You may have the truth, but what advantage does that give you in the end? You may see reality more clearly, but what do you gain for it? Better adaptation? What good is that in an atheistic universe? What good is truth if it brings only suffering?

Thus the best possible way, if you are right, is to learn the truth and then forget it and hope it never rears its ugly head again.

I know God exists, because I exist. I know the Father is there, because I am the Son. There can't be a Son without a Father. So, I am the proof I seek. And that's the place Jesus Christ was trying to get us all to. That is until we nailed him to a cross.

(March 27, 2009 at 3:04 pm)Edward Wrote: Let's say you are absolutely right. There is no God, there is nothing like a god (e.g., nature is not conscious, etc). All there is, is the material universe, and it exists for no reason--it just does. Plop. And we just happened to evolve the reason for which is no greater than that given a chaotic system and enough time, we were bound to. If that is the case, we can only live for our lives and the pleasure we can derive from them for the time we are here. There is nothing greater than pleasure and nothing worse than pain, unless the pain leads to a greater pleasure. We breed and reproduce for no reason other than instinct. We are not great--we are essentially as significant as the trees and grass. We come, we go. That's it.

If that's the case. If atheism is true. Then the best I can hope for is the delusion that God has planned me, intends something from my creation, has endowed me with gifts to use toward the fruition of my existence, and will be there in the end when I "come home."

If all I can have is the delusion, then all I can have is the delusion. You may have the truth, but what advantage does that give you in the end? You may see reality more clearly, but what do you gain for it? Better adaptation? What good is that in an atheistic universe? What good is truth if it brings only suffering?

Truth is always better than a delusion. The fact that atheists have morals is evidence you do not need a God to know "right" from "wrong". The truth tells us about the vicious nature of the world we live in, not how we should act in it. A delusion only causes more delusion, and it will always result in pain and misery as people continue to delude themselves (just look at the disagreements between religions these days).[/quote]

(March 27, 2009 at 3:04 pm)Edward Wrote: Thus the best possible way, if you are right, is to learn the truth and then forget it and hope it never rears its ugly head again.

No, the best thing is to learn the truth a then learn to cope with the truth. It's what we've been doing for thousands of years, and what we will continue to do. Just as the child learns to cope with the knowledge that fairies aren't real, we accept what science tells us about the universe, and try to use it to benefit mankind.

(March 27, 2009 at 3:04 pm)Edward Wrote: I know God exists, because I exist. I know the Father is there, because I am the Son. There can't be a Son without a Father. So, I am the proof I seek. And that's the place Jesus Christ was trying to get us all to. That is until we nailed him to a cross.

Oh you are hilarious. You've gone from a "I think I'm an atheist" to a fundamentalist Christian in a matter of days. Well done! Your argument is the same as the "building implies builder therefore creation implies creator" argument of God. Yes, every son has a father, but how does that mean God was your father? You have absolutely no evidence and you simply want to find some comfort in a world that is hard to cope in.

To be honest, I don't think you ever were thinking "I might be an atheist". I think it was a deliberate ruse in order to get into our conversation. Your quick reversal to fundamentalism seems far too quick for any rational mind to cope with. You are weak-minded, and religion is the refuge of the weak. Of course, your welcome to stay, but do please try to come up with some proper arguments for God instead of the easily refutable bullshit you just spouted. I mean, come on, make it a little hard for us.

(March 27, 2009 at 3:04 pm)Edward Wrote: If all I can have is the delusion, then all I can have is the delusion. You may have the truth, but what advantage does that give you in the end? You may see reality more clearly, but what do you gain for it? Better adaptation? What good is that in an atheistic universe? What good is truth if it brings only suffering?

Beliefs inform your actions, so as far as I'm concerned it's better to believe more true things as possible.

Besides, a drug addict is perfectly happy when they're high, but is it good for them? Nope.

(March 27, 2009 at 4:43 pm)Tiberius Wrote: To be honest, I don't think you ever were thinking "I might be an atheist". I think it was a deliberate ruse in order to get into our conversation. Your quick reversal to fundamentalism seems far too quick for any rational mind to cope with. You are weak-minded, and religion is the refuge of the weak. Of course, your welcome to stay, but do please try to come up with some proper arguments for God instead of the easily refutable bullshit you just spouted. I mean, come on, make it a little hard for us.

Agreed. Now he's gonna be like Lee Strobel. "Oh I used to be one of you but..."

Bullshit.

(March 27, 2009 at 4:43 pm)Tiberius Wrote: Oh you are hilarious. You've gone from a "I think I'm an atheist" to a fundamentalist Christian in a matter of days. Well done!

A fundamentalist Christian wouldn't say that. But really, I was just pretty disgusted with religion, and I thought I'd try on an atheist hat. It didn't fit.

Quote:To be honest, I don't think you ever were thinking "I might be an atheist". I think it was a deliberate ruse in order to get into our conversation. Your quick reversal to fundamentalism seems far too quick for any rational mind to cope with. You are weak-minded, and religion is the refuge of the weak.

Weak-minded? We'll see. As for the ruse: totally unintentional, I assure you.

Quote:Of course, your welcome to stay, but do please try to come up with some proper arguments for God instead of the easily refutable bullshit you just spouted. I mean, come on, make it a little hard for us.

The argument was not bullshit, it was circular. You know, you'd be amazed at the amount of words the English language has, Latin, too[/i].

So here, refute this one; we'll call it prima facie evidence for the existence of God: The universe displays intelligence; therefore, the universe is intelligent. An intelligent universe is what we call God.

We'll start you off with milk for now and try to move to rice-pudding and squashed peaches later.

(March 27, 2009 at 3:04 pm)Edward Wrote: 1. I used to say the exact same thing about the two tenets of Veridicanism (i.e., God is monistic, and the human purpose is to be Christ). Actually, I still do.

[SNIP]

I know God exists, because I exist. I know the Father is there, because I am the Son. There can't be a Son without a Father. So, I am the proof I seek. And that's the place Jesus Christ was trying to get us all to. That is until we nailed him to a cross.

Wow! So it's all true because you believe it is true? Because you can't "hack" a universe that doesn't give a sh**? Poor you but, despite the long-winded philosophical answer, colour me unimpressed (and YES I thought about that before I posted it).

So you ARE a Christian! Well there goes my last chance to respect your views

Kyu

---

(March 28, 2009 at 2:34 am)Edward Wrote:

(March 27, 2009 at 4:43 pm)Tiberius Wrote: Oh you are hilarious. You've gone from a "I think I'm an atheist" to a fundamentalist Christian in a matter of days. Well done!

A fundamentalist Christian wouldn't say that. But really, I was just pretty disgusted with religion, and I thought I'd try on an atheist hat. It didn't fit.

Um, based on near 15 years of debate with fundy's yes they would and, as you've been repeatedly told, you can't just choose to be an atheist so no, you didn't try on the atheist hat ... you were simply a disillusioned theist.

(March 28, 2009 at 2:34 am)Edward Wrote:

(March 27, 2009 at 4:43 pm)Tiberius Wrote: To be honest, I don't think you ever were thinking "I might be an atheist". I think it was a deliberate ruse in order to get into our conversation. Your quick reversal to fundamentalism seems far too quick for any rational mind to cope with. You are weak-minded, and religion is the refuge of the weak.

Weak-minded? We'll see. As for the ruse: totally unintentional, I assure you.

As I said to Frodo, "It's a bit like when theists claim that belief is the harder path ... it's rubbish, it's easy to believe, it's harder (much harder) to remain sceptical. I think it's a lot easier to believe in things like god (indeed recent research suggest we're built to believe), it takes education, training & discipline not to fall for that kind of rubbish."

(March 28, 2009 at 2:34 am)Edward Wrote:

(March 27, 2009 at 4:43 pm)Tiberius Wrote: Of course, your welcome to stay, but do please try to come up with some proper arguments for God instead of the easily refutable bullshit you just spouted. I mean, come on, make it a little hard for us.

The argument was not bullshit, it was circular. You know, you'd be amazed at the amount of words the English language has, Latin, too[/i].

So here, refute this one; we'll call it prima facie evidence for the existence of God: The universe displays intelligence; therefore, the universe is intelligent. An intelligent universe is what we call God.

The usual theistic metaphysical bullshit then?

(March 28, 2009 at 2:34 am)Edward Wrote: We'll start you off with milk for now and try to move to rice-pudding and squashed peaches later.

Fuck that! I prefer salad (suitably processed by which I mean fed to a cow and served up as steak).

Kyu

(March 28, 2009 at 2:34 am)Edward Wrote: The universe displays intelligence;

Do you have any evidence to back that up?

(March 28, 2009 at 2:34 am)Edward Wrote: therefore, the universe is intelligent.

This does not follow. Even if you could back up the first claim you need to prove that something displaying intelligence is in itself intelligent.

(March 28, 2009 at 2:34 am)Edward Wrote: An intelligent universe is what we call God.

No, there is already a name for a universe, it is what we call a universe.

^ What leo said.

Quote:The argument was not bullshit, it was circular.

Yeah...so it was bullshit. You do realise circular arguments don't work right? I mean, seriously. I think I'm going to have to add that quote to my signature. It's hilarious.

(March 28, 2009 at 2:34 am)Edward Wrote: A fundamentalist Christian wouldn't say that. But really, I was just pretty disgusted with religion, and I thought I'd try on an atheist hat. It didn't fit.

It didn't fit because it doesn't work. Once again, belief is not a matter of policy - and neither is forcing yourself into an ABSENCE of a belief...
If you genuinely believe in God then you can't force yourself to be an atheist any more than I, an atheist, can force myself to be a theist....

I could think in my head "I believe in God, I believe in God, I believe in God" everyday all day and go to church and read the bible, etc, etc. That WON'T make me believe in God because I don't.
Things can influence your belief/absence of belief into the opposite position...you can become convinced...you can search for information and good reasons and/or evidence on both sides and you can become influenced by that....

But you can't just FORCE YOURSELF into belief or non-belief....
If you believe in God but you are TRYING to be an atheist - that won't work you can't just force yourself you are still a theist.
Just as I DON'T believe in God. If I pointlessly 'TRY' to be a theist, then, likewise - that won't work either. I can't just force myself into believing if I'm an atheist.

Try on the atheist hat? What on earth is that all about?

'hating religion' doesn't make sense with 'trying on the atheist hat' specifically anyway! Hating religion is not part of the atheist definition...
Because you can hate religion but still be a theist actually...you can hate religion in general and still believe in God.
As a matter of fact I've heard theists say atheists 'hate God' but that's bullshit!

Its not part of the definition. And at least I personally; don't even see how that's possible!! How can you hate something that you don't believe exists?
You can be angry with God and 'hate God' if you believe in him however. "God why did you do this to me", "God why did you allow one of my family/friends to die" or whatever. That makes sense if you believe in God....

Those lines don't make any sense to an atheist. You can't be angry with a "God" you don't even believe exists!
So you can hate religion and be religious. You can hate religion in general but still 'love God' and interestingly enough - I don't see how its possible for an atheist to hate God but theists can.

Once again - atheism is not a belief, atheism is not a belief system. Atheism is just one ABSENCE of a belief. Its got no content whatsoever. Its the absence of a single belief.
If you hate religion...trying to be an atheism does no good and makes no sense. You can hate religion and still be a theist. Belief is not a matter of policy you can't just 'try' to an atheist...

If you are TRYING to be an atheist than implies you are NOT one. And you DO believe. Trying to be one won't do any good.
And you can't be disappointed or whatever with God for example - if you really ARE an atheist.
If you hate religion and are a theist why do you need to TRY to be an atheist? That won't change anything. Do you believe in God or not? And for what reasons?

And if you believe in God then you're still a theist whether you hate religion or not. And if you DON'T believe in God then you are an atheist whether you hate religion or not.
And if you believe in God you can have negative feelings towards 'him'...
If you are an atheist...how exactly can you? How can you dislike or feel bad towards something you do not believe exists?

EvF

(March 28, 2009 at 2:34 am)Edward Wrote: A fundamentalist Christian wouldn't say that. But really, I was just pretty disgusted with religion, and I thought I'd try on an atheist hat. It didn't fit.

Thus, as explained previously, you were never an atheist.

(March 28, 2009 at 2:34 am)Edward Wrote: The argument was not bullshit, it was circular. You know, you'd be amazed at the amount of words the English language has, Latin, too[/i].

So here, refute this one; we'll call it prima facie evidence for the existence of God: The universe displays intelligence; therefore, the universe is intelligent. An intelligent universe is what we call God.

http://www.logicalfallacies.info/presump...-question/

Read it, you just might learn something.

But here's the important bit just in case that was too much to read:

Quote:A circular argument fails as a proof because it will only be judged to be sound by those who already accept its conclusion.

There's also a non sequitur there at the end.