Friend or Foe?

[Brian37]

Cognitive does not mean anything mysterious, Brian. It actually is quite cognitive. I'm pretty sure he does not think it is supernatural, either. I think he is trying to say that he does not understand why so many people close their minds to it, not that God is closing their minds or something. Believing in God without religion makes him a deist. Do you give the same speech to people who have deist in their "views?"

I already explianed that.

Deist is nothing but code for "I have a pet invisiible beiang but I wont judge others when they claim theirs".

Jefferson was a deist too and as much as he contributed to secular goverment and pluralism, that does not mean becuase one says "I am not like the others" means that their own personal pet deity claim is credible.

I know what a "deist" is.

Jefferson thought that God started everything and then stepped aside. Eienstien and Hawkins although never claiming a personal god, metaphorically thought of "god" like Jefferson as a metaphor for nature.

What I object to is even using the word "god" or "God" when science says that a god is not required, not even in the context of discribing nature as being above us.. Even Hawkins said a god is not required.

So when you say he is a diest, SO WAS MY HERO JEFFERSON, but that does not make any claim of a club cognition or a personal cognition or nature being a god, a scientific reality.

It just means humans speculate. If ifs and buts were candy and nuts(Including Jeffersons deist god) we'd all have a party.

I am not interested in kind motifs, we all have them because we all like to think we are kind. Reality and evolution only favor repoduction, not our politics or religions or our intent.

[Angrboda]

The fuck?

[Mystic]

Brian37 thanks for your opinion but when you can provide conclusive proof of either of these:

1) God doesn't exist
2) If God exists now, he did not give us a way to know him in a properly basic manner(in spiritual way).

Then your opinion is more then an opinion but an argument to convince with proof on your side. Then we can actually have a conversation like there was a conversation when I provided ontological arguments from morality, greatness and beauty (and they weren't the classic ontological arguments).

Otherwise, I don't have proof to show you neither do you have proof to show me. The best argument I've come by for Atheism against "God" (doesn't disprove a Creator though) is the problem of evil. I've made a thread about that and we had a good discussion on it.

The proof lies within each of us, either way. If I don't know God exists, it's something I have to realize myself, not through others, and it certianly won't happen just by you asserting it. Likewise, if I have spiritual knowledge of God, I can't be relying on others to verify that. I can't go relying on others to believe in morality or free-will, it's all about self reflection. I might make you unconfortable in that I hold such a claim, but at the end, you can't know God through me, it has to be through self-reflection. If the whole world believes in morality, it doesn't prove it. And if the whole world disbelieves in one day, it will not disprove it either. Belief in morality is properly basic and lies in self-reflection.

Anyways apophenia answered my question, and I hopefully will read more on the subject. It seems by what she says that we really shouldn't be angry at religious people being blind towards logical problems. It's not entirely their fault. It can't be all blamed on willful want to not know the truth or to being blind to it.

That also tells me we should tone it down with aggressiveness towards religious people.

A mistake done by religious people often is that since they sincerely believe in what they believe, they think every sincere person would come to the same conclusion as them. This is not the case....

I understand you sincerely have come to Atheism, and lack a belief in God and think this is the logical step humanity should go through. I have my reasons to think otherwise. Be they correct or incorrect, is another thing.

But don't be angry and upset at others not coming to the same conclusion as you. So much people have all types of views about all sorts of issues.

---

And thanks Shell B .

[Shell B]

By saying one believes in a god, but not in a religion, one is not saying, "I am not like the others." Well, at least that is not the statement. The statement being made is that their idea of god and their worldviews do not conform to religion or they do not agree with organized worship, or, or, or . . . You make it sound like they're being pitiable rebels for the sake of being rebels. It's a little condescending, but I can hardly talk. I do that to Bible thumpers all the time without meaning to.