Without phenomenology to back it up, the theistic position has only religion to carry it from one generation to the next. So you'd basically be shooting yourself in the foot, or at the least biting the hand that fed you the god-biscuit in the first place. But yeah, there's no phenomenology to back it up, so it persists as bad folk tales, apologetic word-play, and arguments from ignorance.

Oh, and stop trying to suck up. It's ugly.

Be cool, man! Not everyone has an axe to grind.

The way I see it, I'm both.

Being sick of organized religion got me to read my Bible. Reading my Bible got me to see that Yahweh is just as much of a myth as Zeus.

Is there a "god"? Who knows? Is Yahweh it? I don't think so.

I hope you can get to the point where you read your Bible as thoroughly, DadaMungo.

If religions and believers kept their beliefs to themselves and out of the lives of others we have no problem. Unfortunately theists want to legislate morals and laws based on their mythical gods.

I was originally a fundie Lutheran with a Lutheran school teacher parent. As such  I participated in everything and went to parochial schools. When I was 18 I married a Catholic and converted. In so doing I studied Christianity and even went to a Jesuit grad school. Over time this knowledge helped me to see the problems with Christianity especially and led me to further study. In my case it was the multiple choice accounts in the Gospels and the so obvious errors in Genesis that pushed me over. In my view, in order for Christian belief to have basis and subsequent concepts such as Islam, Judaism and Yahweh must be proved first. The problem I have is it seems Yahweh is really a volcano god that has been modified through the years. Research into the ancient Jews indicate many problems with the Hebrew Bible and history of other lands. The more I studied the more I learned how the Jewish stories were just that stories.

I have no clue if there is an entity that is a god, but I'm sure what I was taught isn't true. The Universe is explained sufficiently without the addition of another layer called God did it, so why add it.

Perhaps I can help.

I have no real disdain for organised Religion. I live in a country (Denmark) where the problems that fundamentalism presents are "outside". I see crazy superstitions, and I don't like them, but they are always on TV, or on the internet. I have never been personally inconvenienced by religious believers, and when all's said and done, I really can't get truly riled by it, on a personal, emotional level.

So how did I arive at the notion that there is no God?

I didn't. I have never been told that he is real (nor have I been told that he is not), because in Denmark, it is a non-issue. The people that have helped shape my beliefs as I have grown up, have never adressed the issue of God with me.

So I didn't arive at anything. Which is why I don't believe in God. Because I have not moved anywhere on that issue since infancy. Does that answer your question?

And P.S: I would like to point out that I think the OP sounds passive aggresive too. I don't object to this, but at least admit that you know you aren't completely impartial. You are coming across as pasive aggresive, and you will have to present a very compelling case to me to convince me that you really didn't know that's what you were doing.

I can be both arrogant, condesending and agitated at times, but I don't try to pretend I'm not when I am.

My P.S here for example is slightly patronizing, I will readily admit. But I think it is called for, so I stand by it.

Stand by your slightly passive aggresive attitude, and you'll gain more respect from me, and if you persist in pretending you are completely impartial, you will loose my respect.

You assume here that the only reasonable conclusion to arrive at from reading the Bible is that it is a load of hogwash. This leads to the patronising attitude you manifest here.

Should the Bible be taken at face value? Certainly not. So, is it completely without merit? Again, certainly not. I don't want to get into a discussion about this here and now, but my observation of criticisms of Judaism/Christianity are generally straw-men arguments or based upon false premises, or at the least missing the point.

Personally, I find the Bible to be extremely enlightening on levels which I think are missed or at least not appreciated by the skeptic. Naturally, I have read the Bible thoroughly, and I don't really have any serious issues with it. Quite the contrary. To me, it is a profound book.

I dont think any human, not even atheists should ever fool themselves into thinking their wants of what a utopia would look like, can be a reality.

Even if either Christians get what they want, there would still be problems. Even if atheists get what they want, there would still be problems.

Our gripe is not that humans are different, we always will be. Our gripe is that logic and reason and science always seems to fly out the window and gets replaced with personal superstition BY ANY LABEL. It wouldn't be any skin of my nose if my neighbor, or the guy I never met in Iran, would keep their pet whims out of government politics, but they wont.

And as long as theists and facsists insist on having power watchdogs must exist to keep them in there place. Without question humanity can never improve.

And when I say theists, I mean any religion. When I say facsist I mean any concept of government ruled by the superstious worship of the state(being the god) or the theocractic idea that a deity should rule a government.

With freedom comes personal responsibility, including the most important that if one wants to have the autonomy of the mind, then all must have the common intrest of understanding that we are all individuals. Theocracies and facsism happen when the government becomes the extention of projecting personal wishes on all other individuals.

Juxtipose any holy writing of any polythiestic religion or monotheistic religion next to a Marvel Comic and it should, if one is being objective, be clear that the only difference between the two is one is baught as fact when both are fiction.

Star Wars has issues of morality in it yet we don't believe in "The Force". Harry Potter as well conveys issues of morality, yet we rightfully dont believe that a boy can litteraly fly around on a broomstick.

What scares me is that even the brightest minds can fall for such tripe and turn around and try to retrofit lagit science and turn it into junk simply to protect their own ego.

Just for the record...

The purpose of "The God Delusion" was to argue that:

1. Atheists can be happy, balanced, moral, and intellectually fulfilled.
2. Natural selection and similar scientific theories are superior to a "God hypothesis" — the illusion of intelligent design — in explaining the living world and the cosmos.
3. Children should not be labelled by their parents' religion. Terms like "Catholic child" or "Muslim child" should make people flinch.
4. Atheists should be proud, not apologetic, because atheism is evidence of a healthy, independent mind.^[

'Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto treasure hid in a field; the which when a man hath found, he hideth, and for joy thereof goeth and selleth all that he hath, and buyeth that field.'

The profound stuff doesn't just fall into your lap. You have to hunt for it, because it is hidden (as is implied by the above parable). I have found some real gems, and you're simply going to have to take my word on that. I'd love to talk about them, but it would be a case of 'casting your pearls before swine', if you pardon the expression - no offense intended. I'm sure you'll not find that at all satisfying, but you know my assessment is right.

One freebie, though, which you might enjoy: Gen 1:20-21 'And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly'

Note what's being said here: the waters bring forth life, leading to (implicit) life forms which fly. One might reasonably imply (based upon the physics involved) that a transition phase of moving on land comes between the water and the skies. That seems to match very snugly with what evolution states happened. It's right there in the Bible! The real problem is that in so many case "we" arrive at assumed interpretations, based upon our limited understanding at the time, of what was meant and the fight hammer and nail to stick to those assumptions even when fact is demonstrated to be contrary. The source is and has been quite compatible with what is now taken as fact.

The real issues with the Bible stem primarily from misinterpretation. For example the Flood. Tradition has it that the whole planet was flooded at the same time, but that's an interpretation. If the origin of the account came from Noah, what would he have recounted? From the deck of his ship he would have seen nothing but water. From his perspective (and this is vitally important), the whole Earth was flooded. And did he really have two of every kind of animal berthed away? I doubt it. Rather, he would likely have had just enough to get started again when the waters receded. There is evidence, both archaeological and historical, of such a local event occurring. So the skeptics and critics are chasing windmills on this and many other issues. Sadly, their opponents are generally just as blinded in believing the same Quixotic delusion.

I wish to state that the above are just tidbits, and not really worth getting all het-up about. The real value of the scriptures is in helping the individual understand who he/she is and how to become more full, even complete. This message is hidden, as I stated earlier. The real value is not in the literal understanding, though there is much to enjoy on the journey to real discovery.

'He that hath ears to hear, let him hear'

PS. Some might want to throw up the "God of the gaps" banner, but this can only really be applied to interpreted religion. Yes, "we" were wrong. And we'll be wrong again. But this isn't a phenomenon restricted to religion. It's happened/ing in science just as much, as theories are shown to be false or only poor approximations, and better, more precise theories take their place, based on clearer understanding.

This parable is actually badly written and promotes an activity you may not at first consider. It suggests deception is a good thing as no mention is made that the owner of the land is informed he has a treasure on his property. It may be the person discovers gold nuggets on the property as he is walking through the field. He knows the land is worth far more than for farming. I know that was not the intent of the parable but never the less it is a hidden meaning that is there. If I were you I wouldn't use this example.

Perhaps your judgment is skewed by your enthusiasm as you have just demonstrated. You are not considering all aspects of what you promote.

That there are flood stories that date to the time of the Sumerians predating Noah by a thousand years or more has been shown. That it was likely to have been a large hurricane that went up the Persian Gulf is also likely. See the myths of the Sumerians and the Gilgamesh story. The descriptions match the effects of such a tropical disaster.

The real value of the scriptures is it gives a glimpse of a belief system of an ancient people it however has many issues you choose to ignore. One can say the Star Wars films and the Matrix films also have hidden meanings that can help one understand and become more full and complete. This is true of many fictional accounts throughout the history of man.

I'm sure you have found some profound material as you can find something profound from just about anything written.  Given the time involved in looking for usable material and the amount of material you can get back, the bible is not a very good sourc.  If you're looking for something written that's going to make you think, how about Plato or Tolstoy?  Even popular writers LeGuin, Lessing, or Palahniuk are better than the bible in terms of making you think about the nature of life and getting you somewhere if you try to think about the story.  The cost/benefit analysis doesn't work out too well for the bible.

If you will step out of your "them and us" mentality for a moment you will see that I was making a point about humanity in general. That is the way we work. We express our experience in terms of our current understanding. As we gain more knowledge we leave behind our previous views and develop "purer" ones. Some ideas prove to be d34d-ends, but most build on the shoulders of their predecessors, and work better.

Religion does not have a monopoly on this phenomena as you well know, and so you shouldn't be so quick to point the accusing finger. Your ridicule profits no-one.

This principle applies to humanity and to individuals. Surely you have experienced it? Just because your views of the world have matured since your childhood, does that mean your childhood was a lie? Of course not.

Don't you find it profound, or at least intriguing that a document several thousands of years old outlines the creation of the world very much as modern science has discovered, and this despite millenia of misinterpretation and blinkered thinking? Lucky guess, say you? How do you explain that the authors of Genesis were right on the money about the beginnings of our world, the formation of land and sea, the development of life in ever increasing levels of complexity and intelligence?

And I'm not even going to talk of the parallels between scriptural themes and discoveries of the cosmos that are only now coming to light - things which the ancients could not have discovered with their limited technologies. They knew things that they simply could not have known.

From RRS Adnihilo. [brackets added by me]

You're traveling through another dimension -- a dimension not only of sight and sound but of mind. A journey into a wondrous land whose boundaries are that of imagination. That's a [religion] signpost up ahead: your next stop: the Twilight Zone!

You unlock this door with the key of imagination. Beyond it is another dimension: a dimension of sound, a dimension of sight, a dimension of mind. You're moving into a land of both shadow and substance, of things and ideas. You've just crossed over into [religion]... the Twilight Zone.

There is a fifth dimension beyond that which is known to man. It is a dimension as vast as space and as timeless as infinity. It is the middle ground between light and shadow, between science and superstition, and it lies between the pit of man's fears and the summit of his knowledge. This is the dimension of imagination. It is an area [also of religion] which we call "The Twilight Zone".

The best example that I can give is gay marriage. The resistance of it is fed by the religious here in America by trying to have constitutional admendments banning gay marriage or laws defining marriage as only between a man and a woman. There's various laws in the south east that ban anal sex, sex toys, missionary postion only, etc. The root of these laws and regulations are from the religious not wanting these 'dirty' things in their neighborhood.

If the man buys the field then he must buy it from someone so it must be owned. I understand what the analogy was supposed to be in the parable but it's still poor. Another way to consider it is if you discover a truth do you not proceed to do all you can to understand and learn. This is applicable to general knowledge not just Jesus belief and was likely a wise saying of the time.

As I was a Christian and have studied theology and religion even as a grad student in a Jesuit University I am  aware of what you consider to be pearls in these writings. As I became a skeptic and then an atheist my mind is far more open then when I was a Christian wearing blinders. Is there truth in these writings called the Bible, in places. Does it support the God concept of the Jews? No. It is writing by men who explained the world in various ways including fiction. Is my judgment clouded, not anymore. In the past everything was filtered through the accepted basis that God and the Christian stories were real. This view filtered all I accepted and was a cause for issues and concerns. As I grew in knowledge I concluded this filter had to be knocked down so I could discern reality. My position today is what I was taught is not true. What is truth? I have no idea and may never know, but not what I was taught. Science explains more without causing massive contradiction and issues. It always comes to a point where the less than sane Yahweh is said to have created the Universe with religion. One can claim that man misunderstood Yahweh and injected human understanding and emotions in the accounts. Or one can realize that the whole thing was likely created by Og and Ug one day in the ancient land of the Middle East as a volcano and thunder god when a lightning bolt nearly fried them into insanity.

Yes your tidbits are fine, but they are not particularly special.  The human race is a species that delights in story telling and an enormous body of fine literature has accumulated over the Millennia in all languages.  The value of fine literature, or art, or opera, or poetry, or drama, or any number of artistic endeavors is that at its best  it does what you say the bible does at its best, namely help individuals understand who they are and become more enriched as human beings.  But art doesn't have to be true to achieve this.  One can be deply moved by say, Wagner's Ring Cycle, without believing in the existence of the Nordic gods.   Personally, I think Shakespeare is better than the bible.  Not only does it contain more pround insights into the human condition than the bible but it has better stories.

As for the god-of-the-gaps bit, your comparison with science is invalid.  The scientific method is ultimately self-correcting and ensures that over time incorrect hypotheses are culled and the correct theories are adopted.  Science will always be a work in progress.  But the bible claims to be the absolute word of god and contain absolute truth.  How can this be if no one knows for sure how to interpret it?  And obviously, given the enormous number of denominations and sects within Christianity, it can't be correctly interpreted.  Or do you think there is just one correct interpretation...and what is it?

I don't think that is quite right. There are many who claim the Bible to be the absolute truth, but I think that stems more from their own xenophobia.

There are a couple of passages in the Bible (one in Deuteronomy, the other in Revelation) which are often misquoted about not permitting any changes, but those are usually taken out of context to apply to the Bible, which didn't exist as we have it today when those writings were made.

The Bible in fact supports the notion of open-ended enlightenment, i.e. that further understanding and greater knowledge are the right way.

As I said earlier, the Bible is simply a key (one of many) to unlocking truth. It is not the truth directly, if you take my meaning, and should not be treated so.

And of course, there are a multitude of other works of literature, art, etc. that convey truth. I for one love to learn form other sources as well. It's not as if I read the Bible at the exclusion of all else. My personal experience is that the Bible (esp. the NT) is replete with insight and instruction, if one is willing to look for it. I don't find Shakespeare to be as inspiring in the same way. Sure, perhaps we can say Shakespeare is more "honest" about human nature, but he doesn't inspire me to fulfill myself in the same way as scripture does.

I realize I asked these questions already, but this is the second time you've appealed to this same argument.  I'll remind you that the argument is unconvincing for a reason.  We'll see exactly what reason that is as you answer the questions I've posed.

There are very, very many who claim the bible to be the absolute truth and they are the dangerous ones, not the reasonable people like you.  There are powerful organizations such as:  Campus Crusade, Creation Ministries International, Tectonics, CADRE, Christian Research etc who are nutty enough to believe in an inerrant bible, who devalue science and its achievements and who wield power ruthlessly in their bid to gain authority and drive the USA back to a Bronze Age mindset.  They want the USA to be a Christian Theocracy  These are the ones indoctrinating American children in Jesus Boot Camps, trying to get prayers and Intelligent Design taught in schools.   These are the ones who put Bush into power not because he would be a good leader but because he was a Christian who was against abortion and gays.  And the price the USA is paying for such judgemental, bible-based, narrow-mindedness is that it is in fiscal crisis and ever more dependent on China, Russia and Saudi Arabia for funding. 

So it's more than an academic exercise.  The Christian fundamentalists are driving the USA, and with it the Western World, into a new Dark Age .     

Hi HP. Good for you... Where are you going with this exactly? It's a sweet little story, but do you think you are arguing for something? I'd love for you to come to Denmark one day. I really am amazed sometimes at how incredably blind people can be to the fact that other people don't see the world the way they do.

I hope you realize that your story, and your references in the end of your post, looks very familiar, and very wrong to us.

Understand, that we aren't in a position where we don't understand what you are talking about. We understand exactly where you are coming from, which is why we don't believe you. Your story is so obviously the story of an uneducated, emotionally vulnerable person, and the conclussions you have drawn are completely understandable, considering your situation.

Had you realized something that had no connection to your cultural background (of course you fall for Christianity, when you are in a community where that is what everyone else believes), and your own emotional background, then we might be slightly more intrigued.

I'd like you to read my respond to another person in this ( http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/15475 ) thread, and pay particular attention to the analogy I draw between an abused woman's faith in her abuser, and religion.

Beware Ken Ham - he's evil. He outright lies on his web site and in his presentations. He has some ulterior motive for keeping folks ignorant of solid science.

OK, not to change the subject, and i apologize for my grammar, spelling, and generally bad writting skills, but, i pose a question to all the other athiests out there. Suppose, for a moment that the christians are right. That their whole religion is correct, and yes i know, there are easily 100 different drastically different forms, but lets settle for the one that involves the rapture, and the second coming of jesus...suppose that happens. Say it happened right now. And up in the sky the entire world saw jesus. And all the christians were ppof. transubstantiated immediately, how many of you would realize your mistakes and ocnvert? This is just a hypothetical. I for one, when presented with a proff like that would more than likely champion the religion through the prophesied tribulation like a soldier. But i am just wanting to know what other atheist think on that hypothetical.

Also, i wanted to note an incongruency i found in the bible....and yes im aware there are many. Im refering to gen ch1 vs 26 here it states "AND god said, let us make man in our image, after our likeness," and the verse goes on to say that he created man and woman.(at the same time) now this is supposedly during the 5th day. If you read on you'll find that the tale continues thru days 6 and 7 when god takes a smoke break from all this creation. He then starts up again watering all the plants, and whatnot, then in gen ch2 vs. 7 it states: and the lord god formed man out of the dust and breathed life into him.....wait a minute now...if im understanding this....he has just made...man again? what happened to the first man and woman,....and if you read on further, in the same chapter verse 22 he takes the rib of the 1st? 2nd? man and made a woman (another one!?!?!?) so in summary, if i am assuming my reading skills are functioning, we have a total of 4 humans created, a man and a woman made together, then a man, then another woman. Any one care to make sense of this for me. or is it just another flaw in the bibles structure? thanks...and again, i apologize tremensely for my ineptitude at writting, grammar, punctuation, and basically everything one learns in 2nd grade english.

I would hope I could adequately adjust to this new information, and deal with it honestly. It's possible I've been accustomed to a certain view and it's doubtless that I'd regard something improbable with immense suspicion, not take it for face value (especially with the awareness of the sheer desperation the religious have been living with, to vindicate their views with something tangible, lo these millennia). That being said, it is, of course, unnecessary to dignify this scenario.

Many christians are right...right to fear the coming of rationality & reason, right to fear their perceptions of evolution and what it will eventually mean for the xian system, right to fear the militant religions of the world (including themselves); not to mention the literalists who are certainly, as a whole, politically right of center, etc.

So yeah, in many ways christians are right..... but continue

I assume the second coming of Jesus would involve him appearing in the sky with lots of fanfare, music, angels etc. Would such a vision effect me? Why, yes of course. I could further assume it was Jesus but I could also assume it was an elaborate trick by satan, OR that it was an alien with the power to fly/float through the air, OR that someone had slipped some good drugs into my diet Coke, OR... well, sure-- you get my point (and I won't call you surely.) 

See, I knew he'd be up in the sky. Knowledgeable people we Atheists, huh.

Transubstantiation would involve what exactly? Contrary to many, *strike that*, most theist believers, there are far too many disagreements between the various xian denominations and sects for me to understand exactly what you are referring to here. Clean it up and I'll respond....assuming I'm not transubstantiated before all the xians who certainly will be gone by late Sunday.

What you describe would likely not be proof, to me. It would take something on the magnitude of more than a miracle for me to believe an entity, who appeared in the sky was actually Jesus. Having said that let me also add, I would be most apt to believe in a god entity who arrived on our planet and began to show all the people how he could heal everyone and how he could help us to see what we previously considered impossible.... such as square circles and the like. Short of an entity offering up truly amazing, mind bending displays why should I assume that with god/jesus/trinity all things are possible? And if he were Jesus, he would know what it would take to convince everyone, don't you think? 

However, in a case where some being arrived and  did something that appeared to be an amazing feat, why wouldn't I assume the easiest, simplest explanation tends to be the correct one. If it was a small trick (or small bag of tricks), I'd most likely think it was a very powerful alien from another world which had developed/harnessed powers beyond our current capabilities/understanding, before I'd assume it was Jesus.

Embrace your skepticism, man.