Religion's affect outside of religion

[TubbyTubby]

I don't even know what you mean by this. And it wasn't "tested by the wind and rain", it was tested by comparing it to demonstrable reality.

Tested by the wind and rain points back to the parable of the wise and foolish builders Jesus told. In essence to be tested by the wind and rain equates to having one's faith tested by whatever means you need to prove or have your faith/belief fail. Yours failed when you put it through "Demonstrable reality." that was a storm your system of belief could not endure, because (according to Christ) Your's was not a faith/house built on the truth of who God/He really was.

On a side note Dripster, isn't it about time you got a new avatar. I was sat on a bus the other day, staring out the window and dreaming dirty naughty thoughts when a huge fucking sunflower appeared over the top of a fence and burned my eyes and made me think of you. I sicked in my mouth. Change it to a warthog or something, don't get many of them on my bus journey route.

[TheRocketSurgeon]

I don't even know what you mean by this. And it wasn't "tested by the wind and rain", it was tested by comparing it to demonstrable reality.

Tested by the wind and rain points back to the parable of the wise and foolish builders Jesus told. In essence to be tested by the wind and rain equates to having one's faith tested by whatever means you need to prove or have your faith/belief fail. Yours failed when you put it through "Demonstrable reality." that was a storm your system of belief could not endure, because (according to Christ) Your's was not a faith/house built on the truth of who God/He really was.

Ah, that. Shifting sands. Gotcha.

So what you're trying to suggest here is that a "faithful" person is one who believes so strongly that not even reality can shake his belief.

Nice. If reality constitutes a "storm" against your "faith", which you feel you must resist, then you're in a cult. Congratulations.

[Neo-Scholastic]

It’s taken me a while to read through all the posts. I do not agree with the most of the conclusions of Drich and Godschild with respect to Natural Selection, but I do not think that makes them irrational. Nor do I consider that important. No matter how the physical reality was created, the Bible is absolutely clear that the God the Father is its Creator.

The OP is not just wrong, but insulting. Atheists do not have a monopoly on rational thinking and science. Nor does it mean that atheists are free of cognitive dissonance and delusion. Ontological naturalists continue making value judgments. Some atheists claim their lives can have meaning and purpose even while saying that the universe has no meaning or purpose. Some adhere to materialist dogma by ignoring their own felt experience. Etc. Etc.

[MTL]

Atheists do not have a monopoly on rational thinking and science. Nor does it mean that atheists are free of cognitive dissonance and delusion.

I'll readily agree with this statement;

There are certainly people out there who are Atheist,
but who are also capable of being irrational or deluded to some degree.

[Drich]

How about you stop talking about proof and actually show it, but I'm guessing you'll respond like "you are the living proof" or some ridiculous non-logical typical theist response like that, failing to actually answer any questions but continuing to act like we are the blind ones.

How about: The proof offered is not mine to Give. Because the Proof of God is God Himself. That 'proof' is only offered and controlled by God. Since God is not a magical genie or a grinder money (granting wishes or does tricks on demand) One must follow the instructions left by Him, if they want to see Him. After all, a common man would have no issue with the 'vetting process' we would have to go through to see someone like the President or even Pope. So why would we expect that the creator of Everything (the Pope's boss) would be at out beckon call to weave Himself in and out of the little mind games those who did not want to believe wanted to play?

My role is to simply show you the direction on how to obtain 'proof' if and when you ever would truly want to see the truth.

When you can't justify your life's beliefs with something that everyone can understand and accept as some form of evidence(whether or not they agree/disagree) you have failed to reconcile your faith with credibility.

That's not true. What has happened in the last few generations is to move the goal posts of 'evidence' beyond the scope of what God initially is willing to offer. Man/unbelievers want God to chase them, and their ever increasing demand for more and more 'proof.' When in fact God has already set a standard. God has provided enough 'evidence' for all of us to generate a mustard seed's worth of faith. We all have it. Whether or not we place it in science or we place it in God we all have to have the tiniest measure of faith to believe whatever it is we start out believing. The only difference being, If and when we plant that mustard seed's worth of faith in God's ground He will provide the growth/proof to establish and maintain an unshakable belief.

Laughing at people who make legitimate points and always coming back to the same conclusion that we cannot understand god because he's too great you fail miserably to realize that if humans cannot understand him, you fall under the same category and cannot claim to do so.

Me laughing was not at a general failure to understand God, but at the incompetence and ignorance some of those here want to charge people of belief in God with. ignoring their own failure to grasp basic 'science.' All the while (and as condescendingly as possible) want to scold and mock what they perceive as ignorance, yet ironically do not see their own ignorance or the paradigm of Ironic faith their ignorance in science has created. Meaning: If one does not fully grasp all the major components of evolution (fossilization being a pretty big component) then one is dependent on a tremendous amount of faith that the theory they are claiming to be the origins of everything is indeed correct.

This puts a person in the same realm as all of those who said the earth was flat. Or ironically (the funny part) the same realm who blindly believe. It's not an issue of right or wrong. It is an issue of simply believeing something because everyone else believes it. (God's follow don't HAVE TO Blindly Believe.) Because if you can not look at the sum total of various componets of a given theory and verify the majority of them then one is believing by FAITH that everyone else who supports said theory is indeed correct. Which again is what those who believed the world was flat were working off of, and those who blindly believe in God, Except Faith when it comes to belief in God is not a 'Bad thing.'

Common, unless you are one of those doom-auses who believes in science out of faith, and at the same time condemns Christians for presumably doing the same, You have to see the Humor there as well!

And after all of your excuses, question dodging, and nonsensical answers you will probably still reach the conclusion "God exists because I know it".

Actually I know God exists because He has made Good on His promises with me.

That's the result of denying logical reason and evidence I guess, because as Sam Harris said "If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?" Until you learn to accept logic, reason, and evidence, you will forever be stuck in an endless loop of justifying your beliefs with ridiculous claims that fail to contain any rationality and in turn, fail to answer any of the questions anyone will ask.

Now if you can, put all of the typical Christian/Atheist Rhetoric aside for a moment and carfully examine what I have written. At any point do I deny a need for Proof? Do I fail in basic logic and reason, Have I ignored any 'proof' that counters my claims? Now be honest with yourself and don't get caught like the last guy did (Arguing stereotypes/what he thought my responses should be, rather than what they were.)

In truth all I've done is point you in the direction of God for what you seek, because He is the only one to offer it. Me sharing my experiences is what I needed in the way of 'proof' to turn my life around. God has promised to provide all of us with what we need (Iron clad proof on an individual level.) so as not to destroy the lives of people who don't want to know God in this life.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

It’s taken me a while to read through all the posts. I do not agree with the most of the conclusions of Drich and Godschild with respect to Natural Selection, but I do not think that makes them irrational. Nor do I consider that important. No matter how the physical reality was created, the Bible is absolutely clear that the God the Father is its Creator.

The OP is not just wrong, but insulting. Atheists do not have a monopoly on rational thinking and science. Nor does it mean that atheists are free of cognitive dissonance and delusion. Ontological naturalists continue making value judgments. Some atheists claim their lives can have meaning and purpose even while saying that the universe has no meaning or purpose. Some adhere to materialist dogma by ignoring their own felt experience. Etc. Etc.

So why do you think that the Middle Eastern ethnocentric Jewish deity created the universe?  Is it just because he gets the credit in their ethnocentric religious fairy tale?  Is it impossible for you to consider some other reason?

[Drich]

It’s taken me a while to read through all the posts. I do not agree with the most of the conclusions of Drich and Godschild with respect to Natural Selection, but I do not think that makes them irrational. Nor do I consider that important. No matter how the physical reality was created, the Bible is absolutely clear that the God the Father is its Creator.

The OP is not just wrong, but insulting. Atheists do not have a monopoly on rational thinking and science. Nor does it mean that atheists are free of cognitive dissonance and delusion. Ontological naturalists continue making value judgments. Some atheists claim their lives can have meaning and purpose even while saying that the universe has no meaning or purpose. Some adhere to materialist dogma by ignoring their own felt experience. Etc. Etc.

I never thought I kudo someone for disagreeing with me.

[TheRocketSurgeon]

It’s taken me a while to read through all the posts. I do not agree with the most of the conclusions of Drich and Godschild with respect to Natural Selection, but I do not think that makes them irrational. Nor do I consider that important. No matter how the physical reality was created, the Bible is absolutely clear that the God the Father is its Creator.

The OP is not just wrong, but insulting. Atheists do not have a monopoly on rational thinking and science. Nor does it mean that atheists are free of cognitive dissonance and delusion. Ontological naturalists continue making value judgments. Some atheists claim their lives can have meaning and purpose even while saying that the universe has no meaning or purpose. Some adhere to materialist dogma by ignoring their own felt experience. Etc. Etc.

I actually agree with this statement, almost completely. Where I draw the line (on agreement) is where you continue to claim, despite our best attempts to explain to you, why it's entirely possible to make value judgments despite being an "ontological naturalist".

From the Wiki article:

"Metaphysical naturalism, also called ontological naturalism, philosophical naturalism and scientific materialism is a worldview which holds that there is nothing but natural elements, principles, and relations of the kind studied by the natural sciences, i.e., those required to understand our physical environment by mathematical modelling. In contrast, methodological naturalism is an assumption of naturalism as a methodology of science, for which metaphysical naturalism provides only one possible ontological foundation. Broadly, the corresponding theological perspective is religious naturalism or spiritual naturalism. More specifically, metaphysical naturalism rejects the supernatural concepts and explanations that are part of many ."

I'm not sure why you persist in claiming that we cannot make "value judgments" unless we have a magical friend in the sky.

[Drich]

Tested by the wind and rain points back to the parable of the wise and foolish builders Jesus told. In essence to be tested by the wind and rain equates to having one's faith tested by whatever means you need to prove or have your faith/belief fail. Yours failed when you put it through "Demonstrable reality." that was a storm your system of belief could not endure, because (according to Christ) Your's was not a faith/house built on the truth of who God/He really was.

Ah, that. Shifting sands. Gotcha.

So what you're trying to suggest here is that a "faithful" person is one who believes so strongly that not even reality can shake his belief.

Nice. If reality constitutes a "storm" against your "faith", which you feel you must resist, then you're in a cult. Congratulations.

No. A believer has little need or room for faith. One believe, because he knows what the truth is. I don't need faith anymore, because I have been given opportunity to believe, and I took it. Belief differs from faith because belief is tangibly based acknoweledgement resulting in action of what one knows to be true. Faith is believeing without anything tangible to believe in, and acting on what they want to be true..

That is the difference between jumping out of an airplane with a bed sheet in hopes of making some sort of a parachute on the way down, and Jumping out with a parachute that you know works, and understanding why it works, thus putting you in a position of a working belief that your chute will open and do it's job.

If you believe you had belief, and it could not stand up to basic rational thought.. I hate to be the one to tell you it was only faith in your system of belief, and again according to Christ that belief is the 'house' that the winds and rain tested and came down on itself. If what you know to be true can whether any storm then that belief can be solidified as Truth.

Is that cultish behavior in of itself? (Belief in what you know to be true) Only if your looking to hit the panic stop button on this particular conversation. (It's easier to label someone crazy than it is to go line by line and prove that they are using their own content.)

Cultish behavior is easy to identify in that one believes in something but has no reason for belief. They believe because the cult believes.. (which btw sounds more like some of your peers who believe in science, yet they do not understand a fraction of what they believe in.) My beliefs are based on what God has done for me over the last 20+ years. Not because someone told me what to believe. But because I have personally witnessed and experienced what was laid out in the bible. Most of which happened before I knew what it was I was looking for. It wasn't till years later that I could verify what I had experienced. Again, non of which was 'church'/cult taught.

[Drich]

Tested by the wind and rain points back to the parable of the wise and foolish builders Jesus told. In essence to be tested by the wind and rain equates to having one's faith tested by whatever means you need to prove or have your faith/belief fail. Yours failed when you put it through "Demonstrable reality." that was a storm your system of belief could not endure, because (according to Christ) Your's was not a faith/house built on the truth of who God/He really was.

On a side note Dripster, isn't it about time you got a new avatar. I was sat on a bus the other day, staring out the window and dreaming dirty naughty thoughts when a huge fucking sunflower appeared over the top of a fence and burned my eyes and made me think of you. I sicked in my mouth. Change it to a warthog or something, don't get many of them on my bus journey route.

That particular sunflower represented hope when I had none. It was light on my darkest day (they only bloom/look good for a day or two.) this one bloomed, and was taller than my house the size of a very large dinner plate, or a serving platter. On a day where I just wanted to say F-it all, it made me stop for a moment and admire it and the few dozen smaller ones growing around it. So I stopped and took a breath and a few pictures, and shared them with my wife (the one who planted them.)  It serves two purposes now (almost 10 years later) One, to remind me of the hope I need to bring here, to you all 'good people,' and two to give me hope again when things here get tough.

So, sorry if I messed up your bus ride, just wait a few more days and if the flower is allowed to goto seed it will get very heavy with sunflower seeds and begin to droop below that fence line.