God is in semantics.
December 4, 2015 at 9:15 pm
(This post was last modified: December 4, 2015 at 9:27 pm by Dooker.)
Hello everyone,
Hope you are all well. This is my first post on these forums. To my question:
I have always yelled at my TV when watching debates between religious leaders of the 3 main religions and proclaimed atheists (e.g. Sam Harris, Hitchens, Maher, and others). Youtube their names and you'll see my area of interest. Just as the proponents of these religions have to twist themselves into pretzels to defend their religions and their violent teachings (in many instances) , so do their detractors! I am agnostic, but believe that we are not here from nothing. How can the religious detractors claim anymore validity of existence and reality than those who believe in jesus, mohammed, or moses? That is to say, how can they claim that there is no higher power or being for sure?
I've always laughed at priests, imams, or rabbis trying to defend the writings of their prospective texts. There's too much violence and contradiction. It puts them at such a disadvantage in a debate, however, I also feel that an atheist saying there is no god implies a similar kind of pretentiousness.
Rather I feel, within the context of the monotheistic religions, the question should be a hypothetical. This hypothetical answers both questions of atheists and debunks the unquestionable surety of Christians etc. Here is the question beyond any metaphysical idea that we're not even real:
The Universe exits. It is here and was probably created by the big bang( even christians acknowledge this). If that is so, than something made that happen. That "something" is god. This comes to a semantic definition of "something". Suffice it to say, if "something" didn't cause the universe to be, none of us would be here. I don't know how you reconcile that "something" as being anything but a god. This is where I think Christians et al, are wrong in thinking that my statement here agrees with them. They don't have a monopoly on god. Just because I believe there was a prime mover of the universe doesn't mean I think it was Moses, Jesus, Mohammed or any other human derived deity.
Anyways, thoughts on the semantics of "something"?
-Dooker
P.S. I didn't spell check this cause I gotta run, so don't condescend cause of an sp mistake, nobodies perfect!
Hope you are all well. This is my first post on these forums. To my question:
I have always yelled at my TV when watching debates between religious leaders of the 3 main religions and proclaimed atheists (e.g. Sam Harris, Hitchens, Maher, and others). Youtube their names and you'll see my area of interest. Just as the proponents of these religions have to twist themselves into pretzels to defend their religions and their violent teachings (in many instances) , so do their detractors! I am agnostic, but believe that we are not here from nothing. How can the religious detractors claim anymore validity of existence and reality than those who believe in jesus, mohammed, or moses? That is to say, how can they claim that there is no higher power or being for sure?
I've always laughed at priests, imams, or rabbis trying to defend the writings of their prospective texts. There's too much violence and contradiction. It puts them at such a disadvantage in a debate, however, I also feel that an atheist saying there is no god implies a similar kind of pretentiousness.
Rather I feel, within the context of the monotheistic religions, the question should be a hypothetical. This hypothetical answers both questions of atheists and debunks the unquestionable surety of Christians etc. Here is the question beyond any metaphysical idea that we're not even real:
The Universe exits. It is here and was probably created by the big bang( even christians acknowledge this). If that is so, than something made that happen. That "something" is god. This comes to a semantic definition of "something". Suffice it to say, if "something" didn't cause the universe to be, none of us would be here. I don't know how you reconcile that "something" as being anything but a god. This is where I think Christians et al, are wrong in thinking that my statement here agrees with them. They don't have a monopoly on god. Just because I believe there was a prime mover of the universe doesn't mean I think it was Moses, Jesus, Mohammed or any other human derived deity.
Anyways, thoughts on the semantics of "something"?
-Dooker
P.S. I didn't spell check this cause I gotta run, so don't condescend cause of an sp mistake, nobodies perfect!
