I'm a believer in God. Can you please help me fix it? [Trollville]
Offline I'm a believer in God. Can you please help fix it?
- Login to post comments
Offline Nah, I've gotta give him that one, Will.. in about 2,000,000,000 years, the Sun'll expand and burn the Earth to cinders, at which point I'm pretty cool with saying everything I've done will be, at most, ashes.
Of course! How silly of me. I was thinking in terms of geologic time when I should have been thinking in terms of eternity.
Wow.
Saint Will: no gyration without funkstification.
fabulae! nil satis firmi video quam ob rem accipere hunc mi expediat metum. - Terence
- Login to post comments
Offline
How can you know the absolute truth when you only have a finite or limited perspective?
Your assertion regarding absolute truth and it's relationship to theism has yet to be established by you.
In fact you have made no attempt to answer my question. You avoided a simple request to explain your claims by shifting the focus to me. The validity of your assertions should not in any way depend upon my perspective. Either you have a valid argument to put forth or you don't.
Again, I ask you to validate your claim that "The realization of absolute truth presupposes some form of theism."
You are the one who decided to come onto this forum and challenge atheists as being irrational. You are the one making this claim regarding your personal beliefs.
No more of your esoterical bullshit, please. It's time for you to put up or shut up.
- Login to post comments
Offline Antibiotics have their place. But the traditional approach to treating bacterial infections (illness) is magic.
Does this have a point?
All the mystic practices I have ever heard of are nothing more than hacking your brain to flip into an unusual state. A misbehaving brain, being the center of neural processing, can make it seem as if you have felt the Hand of God Opening the Book of Ultimate Truth, but that doesn't mean you AREN'T in your living room tripping balls on shrooms. So you had a mystic experience that proves that There's Something Out There to you. Great! That has no bearing outside your cortex, for obvious reasons. As someone else here once put it "Congragulations! You just proved you have a brain."
Sam Harris seems to have had a different take on mysticism.
There is a form of well-being that supersedes all others, indeed, that transcends the vagaries of experience itself. I will use both "spirituality" and "mysticism" interchangeably here, because there are no alternatives. pg. 205 "The End of Faith" by Sam Harris
Your feelings about the universe don't matter one whit to physical reality; it's going to go on doing what it's doing billions of years after you're dead just like it did billions of years before you were born. I'm sorry that thought makes you uncomfortable.
This thought does not make me uncomfortable because I don't share it. However, I do understand why an atheist would have such a pessimistic outlook. I can't imagine what it must be like to live in such a cold and loveless world. You have my sympathy.
"Scientists animated by the purpose of proving they are purposeless constitute an interesting subject for study." - Alfred North Whitehead
- Login to post comments
Offline 2nd post
Actually, I don't believe so much that the consciousness is "out there" as it is "within me." So, the evidence is my own conscious-awareness. In particular, it is my own experience of pure awareness (samadhi).
Hello Paisley
? do you believe that you are God
- Login to post comments
Offline Paisley wrote:That's in your opinion... that's certainly not a fact.The quest for truth is ultimately a religious or spiritual one.
When I used "truth" in this context, I was referring to the "absolute truth."
I'll be honest, you've been quite rude since coming here.
Rude? I would say that my behavior has been exemplary.
It's as if you expect us to wave our magic wands and poof away your theism. Well, that's not quite how it works here. For one thing, we don't believe in "magic men" and certainly don't believe ourselves to possess any magic - just logic.
Evidently, logic has its limits.
For another thing, as others have been saying, it is up to YOU to open your mind and consider the evidence objectively. For instance, I was indoctrinated into Christianity. My deconversion was my own doing. I asked myself "what's the difference between a religion and a cult? Who's to say that belief that aliens are coming is any less absurd than the belief that Jesus is coming?" etc.. Now, you don't seem to particularly WANT to be rid of your god belief, so that's going to be hard for you. If you are really interested in hearing what we have to say then I suggest you drop the condescending sarcastic attitude, and start asking questions that don't pertain to strawmen.
No, actually I don't. But apparently you feel it is problematic.
To address a few issues you've brought up thus far - not all atheists are necessarily materialist. "Atheism" only pertains to lack of a belief in a deity. Although there aren't many here, I've no doubt that there are people out there who don't believe in a god, yet believe in the possibility of UFO's or ghosts. There is no set atheist doctrine that dictates what you can and can't believe - which is why, if you visit other threads, you'll often find atheists disagreeing with other atheists over various matters. Most of us don't mind having our beliefs challenged, and we even don't mind revising our stance on an issue, if we find it appropriate.
Yeah, I know the line: "Atheism is simply the belief that there is no God or the disbelief in God's existence." However, I would argue that the general public equates atheism with a materialistic worldview and certainly not with a spiritual one.
Another thing is, you seem to be confused over this whole purpose thing. We don't believe we were "created" so basically we're here by accident, or for no particular reason. That doesn't mean we mope around and wail about how pointless our lives are. Just as currency is assigned value, we assign value to our own lives. We don't need to be told what to do - we just do what we WANT to do. We try to get all that we can out of life, because this is all there is. Everyone on this site has decided on a different purpose for their life based on their own interests, but I can guarantee you that everyone on this site is a fulfilled individual, whether they are passionate about science, philosophy, or beer.
I am not confused. I understand the meaning of the term "ultimate" - a term which apparently gives atheists a conniption fit.
Now, one question for you: If you believe in a non-interventionist god, what makes you so sure that you will be "granted" eternal life by a god who could care less about you?
I'm not sure by what you mean by a "non-interventionist" God. I am not a deist. I see the Holy Spirit has having a continual presence in the lives of everyone and everything.
"Scientists animated by the purpose of proving they are purposeless constitute an interesting subject for study." - Alfred North Whitehead
- Login to post comments
Offline Because a rational worldview is one that has purpose and meaning. If it doesn't, then it isn't a rational worldview but an absurd one. Also, the atheist seems to have a preoccupation with his own ego. I keep hearing: Life is what "I want." "I define my own purpose." "I, I, I,"
Personally, I see something at work that is greater than myself. Something to which everyone and everything is being called.
"Scientists animated by the purpose of proving they are purposeless constitute an interesting subject for study." - Alfred North Whitehead
- Login to post comments
No more war , only love ! 
I love that atheist Jesus ! He was our friend ! atheist Buddha too ! But something is obviously still wrong this very new day ???
I say let's KISS alot and build our heaven of FUN now .... hey guys, make the girls super duper happy .... I AM MAN GOD ! 
, and visa versa to all girls ! WE could REALLY ROCK ! Let's do it ! ......
]
Appeal to authority.
Are you trying to argle the bargle until bagnosh arboffle? That's what your argument sounds like when you construct ad hocs from newly spawned undefined terms.
Oh, that helps.
It's not a worldview, either. If you want to address anything beyond the question of whether one believes in gods, you'll have to be more specific.
Is having undefined concepts as a basis meant to help your argument?
Hey god ..... can I get a double size smiley? , and god said YES ! just Ask and you will recieve !
Thanks GOD, .... That does make perfect sense ! Wow GOD, we rock , thanks ..... but I have some complaints ! I AM tired of always asking ..... can we speed this evolution up ? ..... and god answered YES again , as you so ask !
Atheism Books.
Nor have I had to discard my nonbelief in the existence or nonexistence of a God. I am curious, though, if you claim this is a theory, can you please share with the class a)what predictions the theory makes, and b)how it may be tested? Theories require both; without those two factors, you're talking about a hypothesis.
That's exactly what I mean by external purpose. My purpose is to be happy and satisfied while I exist. When I do not exist, my purpose has no relevance, as it is my purpose. I will die and cease to exist. Everyone I ever loved or knew, everyone I will ever love and know will cease to exist. All my efforts and labors will eventually come to nothingness. These things are meaningless. That I will die is meaningless. That all will eventually come to naught is meaningless. All that has meaning to me are the events of my lifetime. Until you can prove to me that anything beyond myself exists, that all of reality isn't a delusion, then any search for anything beyond my own lifetime would be irrational.
Cogito, ergo sum. That remains the only thing I can actively believe. Everything else is simply possibilities I cannot rule out.
"You've got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know... morons." - The Waco Kid
That last part's a big jump. My existence is definitely influenced by unconscious action, and my actions are naturally "informed" by unconscious influence. But just because something is outside of my ego doesn't immediately mean "universal mind".
Enlighten me.
Saint Will: no gyration without funkstification.
fabulae! nil satis firmi video quam ob rem accipere hunc mi expediat metum. - Terence
No. That's just being unreasonable. What constitutes evidence is consistent results from repeated observation (direct or indirect).
Speculation is subjective. Maybe you were thinking of speculation when you said "evidence" before.
Where did this even come from? How do you know anything about your Universal Mind concept? If you made it up, then you can make the rules for it, but if you didn't, and it's immaterial, how did you learn anything about it?
Why would I attempt to argue that something you just made up is not some kind of immaterial creature concept? You are bizarre.
The phrase "final causation" is a bit weird in a time-moves-forward universe. Do you mean this entity is responsible for everything? And just because the atheistic worldview somehow lacks your specific teleology, it has no purpose? Is it your intention to drag this into metaphysical naturalism?
Help me out here. I say the universe operates consistently and you ask me for a mathematical formula for purpose. Only I already said you get to make your own purpose. Is that freedom too scary or something?
Saint Will: no gyration without funkstification.
fabulae! nil satis firmi video quam ob rem accipere hunc mi expediat metum. - Terence
Oh THIS is what you're talking about. Holy crap. Did you really have to go through all that metaphysical garbage to get to this?
Yes, we die and cease to exist, just like everyone we ever loved or knew. But what's with the burnt to ashes? Things people wrote from 3,000 years ago have survived. Why do you assume everything we've ever written would get burned? And suffering just happens. Wanting it to be for something is fine, but wishing for something and it being true are different things.
You COULD always think of yourself as insignificant in geological terms, but then you'd be forgetting how important you are to the people around you, and the people you effect on a daily basis even if you don't know them. You're an immensely important part of a group and community, even if you don't feel like it. That's not meaningless unless you make it so.
Saint Will: no gyration without funkstification.
fabulae! nil satis firmi video quam ob rem accipere hunc mi expediat metum. - Terence
Nah, I've gotta give him that one, Will.. in about 2,000,000,000 years, the Sun'll expand and burn the Earth to cinders, at which point I'm pretty cool with saying everything I've done will be, at most, ashes.
"You've got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know... morons." - The Waco Kid
In what way? I'm not following you on this. (Actually, I'm not following you at all. You don't make a whole lot of sense, and you certainly aren't presenting a cohesive nor cogent argument. It's like arguing with a fairly smart kid who has ADD.)
Dawkins didn't say nature was a blind watchmaker-- he said evolution was a blind watchmaker. That's what I'm trying to tell you. You have conflated the concept of evolutionary life with specific human life to prove that specific human life has no higher purpose. That's fine, because the phrase "higher purpose" is so much philosophical drivel. That doesn't exclude life from having a purpose, however.
As far as atheistic materialism: you are limiting that phrase to a subset of people who hardly even exist. Most knowledgable people left the idea of Newtonian determinism behind many decades ago, yet that is the only description you allow for the group you label "atheistic materialists." So, you allow arguments only using your slightly unreal definitions, and then are so proud that you win when others use definitions that fit more with reality, and are generally more accepted.
The strange thing is, your arguments aren't even internally consistent, let alone consistent with the observable universe. Yet when other people point out your inconsistencies, you make strange statements involving poorly defined terms -- statements that don't even make up a logical argument -- and continue as if you've answered.
I respect people of faith. The ones I respect are the ones that say, "Here's what I believe. I have no real proof that I can present to you, yet I believe it still." Those people are intellectually honest, and understand that their belief isn't necessarily something they can defend on a logical empirical level. I also respect those who have enough knowledge to argue a case for the possibility of God using philosophic and perhaps even a smattering of quantum physics, while accepting there are other interpretations.
You say that atheism lakes teleology? That may be true (though I don't think so). Your case is worse, as it lakes ontology.
"Yes, I seriously believe that consciousness is a product of a natural process. I find that the neuroscientists, psychologists, and philosophers who proceed from that premise are the ones who are actually making useful contributions to our understanding of the mind." - PZ Myers