Which was first: Atheism or Religion?

[Knowledge of God]

So we're back to...

Atheist: "I'll believe it when I see it."

Theist: "I'll see it when I believe it."

Precisely. One side is about intellectual honesty despite one's biases, the other side is about strongly conforming to one's biases.

Intellectual honesty, as far as they have intellect..

[Esquilax]

Precisely. One side is about intellectual honesty despite one's biases, the other side is about strongly conforming to one's biases.

Intellectual honesty, as far as they have intellect..

If the best you can do is "you're dumb!" then fuck off back to Legoland, okay? You could at least attempt rational discourse, even if we both know you'd fail.

We can believe intellectually by the power of deduction. You've seen how it works so don't go acting dumb on me now. The rewards of belief are evident. Here's the tricky bit, be sure to concentrate..... to a non believer those effects can be explained away.

Okay, serious question: when you talk about the rewards of belief, what do you mean? I ask out of politeness, because I don't want to put words in your mouth for my next question, which is: how do you know those rewards are from the god you believe in, and not some other source? You say they can be explained away, what are you using to verify that the source you attribute them to is correct, over the secular alternatives?

The trouble with using deduction alone is that it's very hard to be sure you're stripping out all the biases that come with being human, that's why evidence is preferable. Now, I see elsewhere you say that your beliefs are verified by the fact that other christians have similar experiences, and I somewhat accept that as valid reasoning, the problem I come across is the huge variations between individual christians and, more broadly, christian denominations. The variance of reported experiences is quite wide; at what point do we say that it's too wide to draw any meaningful trends from?

[Knowledge of God]

Intellectual honesty, as far as they have intellect..

If the best you can do is "you're dumb!" then fuck off back to Legoland, okay? You could at least attempt rational discourse, even if we both know you'd fail.

WTF are you doing?

We can believe intellectually by the power of deduction. You've seen how it works so don't go acting dumb on me now. The rewards of belief are evident. Here's the tricky bit, be sure to concentrate..... to a non believer those effects can be explained away.

Okay, serious question: when you talk about the rewards of belief, what do you mean? I ask out of politeness, because I don't want to put words in your mouth for my next question, which is: how do you know those rewards are from the god you believe in, and not some other source? You say they can be explained away, what are you using to verify that the source you attribute them to is correct, over the secular alternatives?

Ecclessiastes 2;26 To the person who pleases him, God gives wisdom, knowledge and happiness, but to the sinner he gives the task of gathering and storing up wealth to hand it over to the one who pleases God. This too is meaningless, a chasing after the wind.

[GrandizerII]

Precisely. One side is about intellectual honesty despite one's biases, the other side is about strongly conforming to one's biases.

I think accusations of dishonesty are going too far. There are definitely powerful experiences that could be called religious, and there is enough consistency in them for them to be meaningfully discussed by religious or spiritual people.

I'm of the thought that honesty/dishonesty comes in various forms. by adding intellectual before "honesty", I am specifying exactly what form of honesty I am referring to. It is not in contrast with that conscious practical form of dishonesty where you are telling a lie and you know it. It is in contrast with not acknowledging one's own biases and, therefore, continuing to go along with them as the basis for what to believe.

For the record, I was a Christian myself at one point and had my share of religious experiences as well. It was not insincere, but I was, in a way, lying to myself regardless.

[Esquilax]

WTF are you doing?

Pointing out that your last post is not an argument.

Ecclessiastes 2;26 To the person who pleases him, God gives wisdom, knowledge and happiness, but to the sinner he gives the task of gathering and storing up wealth to hand it over to the one who pleases God. This too is meaningless, a chasing after the wind.

Bible verses mean nothing here.

[Bad Wolf]

WTF are you doing?

He was scalding you for being an asshole.

Ecclessiastes 2;26 To the person who pleases him, God gives wisdom, knowledge and happiness, but to the sinner he gives the task of gathering and storing up wealth to hand it over to the one who pleases God. This too is meaningless, a chasing after the wind.

Please provide evidence that belief in god makes you somehow wiser.
Happiness? Don't need god for that, midget porn also makes some people happy.
Knowledge? You have really dug yourself into a hole here haven't you? Please provide an example of any fact that has been discovered just because someone believed in god. How did god impart this knowledge? Did he transfer the theory of gravity directly into Newton's head using psychic abilities? Did he do the same thing for Darwin?
Conclusion: don't say stupid things that you can't back up.

[Knowledge of God]

WTF are you doing?

He was scalding you for being an asshole.

Ecclessiastes 2;26 To the person who pleases him, God gives wisdom, knowledge and happiness, but to the sinner he gives the task of gathering and storing up wealth to hand it over to the one who pleases God. This too is meaningless, a chasing after the wind.

Please provide evidence that belief in god makes you somehow wiser.
Happiness? Don't need god for that, midget porn also makes some people happy.
Knowledge? You have really dug yourself into a hole here haven't you? Please provide an example of any fact that has been discovered just because someone believed in god. How did god impart this knowledge? Did he transfer the theory of gravity directly into Newton's head using psychic abilities? Did he do the same thing for Darwin?
Conclusion: don't say stupid things that you can't back up.

Seeing without believing ey?

[Tonus]

Ecclessiastes 2;26 To the person who pleases him, God gives wisdom, knowledge and happiness, but to the sinner he gives the task of gathering and storing up wealth to hand it over to the one who pleases God. This too is meaningless, a chasing after the wind.

But every human is a sinner, yes? Then no person is able to please god, and thus none have wisdom, knowledge, happiness. Everyone is simply storing up wealth to give to no one.

Why would you think that quoting such a vacuous text would mean anything to us?

[Bad Wolf]

Seeing without believing ey?

Something tells me you don't have a future here.

[Cyberman]

Let's run through this one more time. Whenever we - all of us, theists included - are confronted with the results of an effect, we automatically determine the cause. You return home to find your front door wide open? Maybe you left it unlocked and unlatched; maybe it's burglars; maybe it's aliens. Without further information, all options consistent with evidence are equally plausible - but not all options are equally probable. It's not at all rational to leap in a single bound from the scenario as presented straight to the least likely cause without eliminating all other more likely simple possibilities first.

It's not that atheists and more general sceptics are rejecting evidence out of hand, at least on principle. It's more that any evidence that may be presented doesn't actually do what it says on the tin - it's not as compelling nor as plausible as might be claimed.

And it's not that we are asking for evidence of the supernatural, again on principle. All I ask, for one, is evidence for supernatural claims and/or evidence for the supernatural effects on the natural world. Eliminate all the other options first; it might not be necessary to make that final leap at all.