Why I'm on these forums (Q/A)

[Mystic]

MK, we may have differing ideas on what constitutes proof, etc, and that's fine. Live and let live.
I'm suspecting most here don't mind you because you're not rude or a troll.

Please answer one question for me.
What drives you here. To an atheist forum? What do you enjoy most about conversing with atheists?
You're always fighting an uphill battle, like other theists. But you persist against the odds.
I personally like the tenacity and the stubborn fight in you. And the fact that you are never outright rude.

I've always wondered why theists persist here.
Kingy and CL have stayed for the social aspects of it predominantly.
I want to know what drives you deep down?

Cheers.

Deep down. There is many factors.
I don't have too much of a social life. I go to gaming forums, religious forums, and here too. 
But to be honest, going on forums has been a journey. I've learned so much and developed views that I feel more confident in having discussed arguments with other people and heard various sides of the issues.
So I like to learn and socialize from people of differing views.
That said, I really wanted to understand Atheists as well. I wanted to see if they reasoned properly with regards to this issue.
I also wanted to see the best Anti-God arguments out there. I came up with some of my own as a result as well.
That said, I feel warranted and justified in believing in God, and think that knowing God exists sometimes comes when sharing perception. It's like the more we think about we are seeing, the closer we get in that vision.
I always felt the hope that perhaps someone will come to realize the vision of God and think about what they are seeing. 
As of now. It's to continue to reflect, bring different discussion, discourses, and see what the Atheist community can say with regards to these issues.
Now I have a motive aside from this due to Islam, to be a caller towards God and his way.  I don't want to preach or anything, but I want to present the case for Islam that I reasoned myself to, to others.
 
If nothing more but to test the strength of my reasoning.

[The Grand Nudger]

You aren't testing the strength of your reasoning, so if that was your goal, then you've failed.  You have routinely presented us with un-reason, and you have predictably concluded that your un-reason was strong, as you did in this post.  If there is some lesson to be learned here, some test to perform, you aren't learning it...you aren't profiting from that tests results.

[Losty]

We all know you're secretly addicted to the dark forces.

[robvalue]

I think it's good you're looking to learn and to understand other perspectives, whatever your conclusions.

[Whateverist]

My biggest criticism of your arguments, MK, is that they have revolved around the meaning of words. You always seem to start by reflecting on the definition of a word and then reasoning how such a thing could only mean X is the case. But I don't think language carries any grand secrets about the universe. From the definition you may assume absolutely nothing about the thing//idea represented by the word.

[Mystic]

My biggest criticism of your arguments, MK, is that they have revolved around the meaning of words.  You always seem to start by reflecting on the definition of a word and then reasoning how such a thing could only mean X is the case.  But I don't think language carries any grand secrets about the universe.  From the definition you may assume absolutely nothing about the thing//idea represented by the word.

I think the difference is I see a lot of things about us as a living reality that is spiritual and see living reality as non-absolute connected to the absolute, non-eternal connected to the eternal, while you just take things are and there is no observation of this link can be made. I observe things more then simply dead concepts, but somehow how living signs of an absolute reality connected to us. I see eternal link or eternal property of features of our existence, including reasoning.  I think Atheists can't even acknowledge themselves as a living reality (ie. they are an experience created by the brain with no living essence in actuality, when it comes down to it). They say "what is a soul?" and what not, and can't even see the most apparent of things like our very real existence. It's not that they can't see the soul, it's they taken a stance, that it blinds them to the clearest sights they have constantly. That said, a lot of this "definition" is about defining parables I think. These parables I've come to know through Islamic literature, like the sword of honor of God, the face of God, the name of God.  I've been actually wanting to get into the sky/earth, trees/tree growth parables more regarding the nature of our soul and good actions, and the water of life/light from higher realm, but I doubt people will really see through it here. They will just call it word salad. 

I know through all this, it would be said "what does this mean" or I would be accused like Pharaoh accusing Moses of speaking non-clearly. Aeron/Ali excel in conveying and are eloquent at it, and as such were a great help to Moses/Mohammad respectively, some people are very good at conveying deeper truths, I'm not.

This is what we are missing in this day and age though, the deep doors to the knowledge of the self, like the likes of Ali, explaining the Quran to us clearly and manifesting it's wonders.

Most people who experience the inward kingdom through the power of the heart/soul/spiritual eyes, have a knot on their tongue. If the likes of Moses needed Aeron for his superior conveying qualities, then what of me, who can't compare to the intelligence of Moses?

I do my best. I know people don't understand everything I say, but, perhaps a few of you will be more charitable and lend the divine ear in your soul that can perceive and see the light as much as it can hear the wisdom. Then perhaps the word salad will be real healthy salad to the soul and awaken you to something.

You mentioned language doesn't carry any secrets of the universe while I believe it was created by God's Name/face. Adam was taught "all the names" and was the one to convey them to the Angels.

That said, somethings like time, if we focus on what we know of it, I believe will form good arguments for a Creator. So I like to focus on it's definition, to show it cannot be but this and that, which then leads to this and that, and so forth.

I do believe there is a secret in language, it's after all formed on reasoning in it's inward (for example A->B, Not B, therefore Not A), which is from God's existence and is of his name/face.

[*Deidre*]

You know Mystic, it's funny but not until I identified myself with atheism, and it took a lot for me to own that ''label'' if you will, for a while...but eventually, I did. And logically, I was comfortable with it, maybe on the emotional side, I never was? Idk. But, the best way to really understand how atheists think, is you'd have to come to a natural conclusion about atheism. I've often felt that atheism isn't really a choice, as much as it is a natural path or conclusion one comes to. Or maybe the person has been an atheist all of his/her life. That said, you can learn from atheists, but its almost like playing a sport. You can learn about it, watch it, but until you play it...you don't fully APPRECIATE what it's honestly about. If that makes sense. Not telling you to become an atheist, haha Hope you know what I mean.

[Mystic]

I've listened to the reasoning of Atheists of why they are Atheists, and all of them seem to be circular in reasoning. I heard no one say "I've come to believe that I have no vision of myself as being a soul because this and that, while properly basic vision of God or knowledge of God is a rational possibility, I believe it is untrue from sincere observation of myself, and I've looked at this and this arguments, and I've reasoned they are wrong for this and this reasons, I've also tried to come up with arguments myself and this is the best arguments I can come up with, but I think don't hold to scrutiny because" etc...

Also, I haven't seen anyone do what I did which is go through as much as unbiased debate with oneself...come up with arguments for and against, etc, and see which ones hold at the end, and how much you can modify your argument to counter argument.

People lost a magical feeling, gave up on it, and concluded all arguments don't stand for God, even when they refute them with the most irrelevant of remarks.

[Mystic]

And for example saying we don't observe we are soul by assumption we aren't soul is circular reasoning, while saying we can't see we are soul if we are soul, requires justification, why is that the case? And how do you know this? Because it seems rationally possible and even more logical to believe, if we are a soul, we can rationally see/observe we are a soul.

[Losty]

And for example saying we don't observe we are soul by assumption we aren't soul is circular reasoning, while saying we can't see we are soul if we are soul, requires justification, why is that the case? And how do you know this? Because it seems rationally possible and even more logical to believe, if we are a soul, we can rationally see/observe we are a soul.

We can't see we are soul. Wtf does that mean?