systemstrike_7 Posted February 7, 2007 Group: Nonbeliever Followers: 1 Topic Count: 12 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 540 Content Per Day: 0.08 Reputation: 1 Days Won: 0 Joined: 12/04/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 08/07/1987 Share Posted February 7, 2007 What's a "black hole of thought" anyway? Without religion what would have atheists pondered, talked about, and foamed at the mouth about for the past 7,000 years? Many of the deepest most profound concepts in philosophy originated from religious faith and thought. Black hole? Feh. Thanks for joining us Ovedya. Without religion there would be any Atheist. We only call ourselves that to separate ourselves from you. Maybe, one day, we can all just be people. Not many, TONS of the deepest, most profound concepts in philosophy originated from religious faith and thought. Philosophy stretches over both indeed. However, let's take a step back and time and look at who was religious and who was not. I think it'd be safe to say that more than 99 percent were religious to some extent before 150 years ago. Why? Many reasons, personal conviction and fear ranking high among those I'm sure. So, if 99% were religious, about the only place for these philosophical insights to come from at the time would be that corner(HUGE corner) of society. Atheism had it's place but was known for being part of only the aristocratic circles. Is feh a way to sign-off? Of saying good-bye? Very good post. feh (???? ????) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdrehfal Posted February 7, 2007 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 9 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 207 Content Per Day: 0.03 Reputation: 3 Days Won: 0 Joined: 12/12/2005 Status: Offline Author Share Posted February 7, 2007 The original topic of this thread was "What would be acceptable proof"... If every proof is relegated to Confirmation Bias, then you're saying there is NO ACCEPTABLE PROOF to you... That's a very good point, but not on this issue. I see you might undestand confirmation bias. If I SEE God and he talks to me candidly, I'd have a hard time ascribing it to confirmation bias. Again, if I see God like I see you, and He's tangible, and we speak and do anything, I'll have a very hard time convincing myself that I just wanted to see that.... If I see Him, I'd be a believer and would want others to believe following it. Something tells me he won't hit me up on that challenge. Floatingaxe, who speaks for God, told me he doesn't play games. You must realize that in the spirit realm, there are many entities that could 'appear' as God. However, if you are really open to belief, I would suggest that you pray daily asking God to reveal himself to you... I can assure you it will do you no harm. Please understand that it's my job as a Christian to help you "get in touch" with God. Im not doing this out of pride, arrogance or anything else. I certainly don't want to see you perish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdrehfal Posted February 7, 2007 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 9 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 207 Content Per Day: 0.03 Reputation: 3 Days Won: 0 Joined: 12/12/2005 Status: Offline Author Share Posted February 7, 2007 You must realize that in the spirit realm, there are many entities that could 'appear' as God. However, if you are really open to belief, I would suggest that you pray daily asking God to reveal himself to you... I can assure you it will do you no harm. Please understand that it's my job as a Christian to help you "get in touch" with God. Im not doing this out of pride, arrogance or anything else. I certainly don't want to see you perish. I know tdrehfal, and I truly appreciate the concern. It's heartfelt. I just wish it wasn't coupled with an unchanging, conservative mindset unable to adjust to changes in knowledge. Truth, by definition, is unchanging and as you would say 'conservative'... I can't just ignore truth anymore than you can just ignore Newton's laws. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
systemstrike_7 Posted February 7, 2007 Group: Nonbeliever Followers: 1 Topic Count: 12 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 540 Content Per Day: 0.08 Reputation: 1 Days Won: 0 Joined: 12/04/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 08/07/1987 Share Posted February 7, 2007 The truth you speak of can only be experienced by "personal revelation", and St. Paul knew this all too well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdrehfal Posted February 7, 2007 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 9 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 207 Content Per Day: 0.03 Reputation: 3 Days Won: 0 Joined: 12/12/2005 Status: Offline Author Share Posted February 7, 2007 The truth you speak of can only be experienced by "personal revelation", and St. Paul knew this all too well. http://christian-thinktank.com/ This is a great website if you're seriously seeking... It answers a lot of the kind of questions you have. Check it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdrehfal Posted February 7, 2007 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 9 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 207 Content Per Day: 0.03 Reputation: 3 Days Won: 0 Joined: 12/12/2005 Status: Offline Author Share Posted February 7, 2007 What would be acceptable evidence of God to the atheist/agnostics posting here? I'm curious as to what you would find an acceptable 'proof beyond a reasonable doubt' as to God's existence? Just as there is no way to prove God doesn't exist, there is also no way to prove that God does exist. At least, not with the tools that we have availabe to us. I don't think seeing is believing, and feelings are not a kind of proof either. I think, fundamentally speaking, that this is why and real God would be immoral to expect faith. Believing is not an act of morality, and act of morality is acting on what you know. That doesn't include acting on what you refuse to admit that you don't know either. Be honest with yourself and ask the honest question, if this is God, then for what moral purpose could he possibly expect anyones faith? It's just senseless and immoral on his part. What's more, look at how much real responcibility you are avoiding by trying to cling to such a simple answer to such a big question. You beleive and therefore not only do you justify yourself to spend little time questioning your belief, but you also spend time doing things you think are good only because your simple answer tells you they are good. Look for God yourself in facts, not your feelings. even if you can't find god in that way, at least you really tried and spent your time learning, rather than wasting your time accepting the simple answers and changing nothing of what mankind knows. Just imaagine this scenario for a second please. God is face to face with a man of his creation. The man tells God, "I want to believe that you are God, and I enjoy your company, but how can I possibly trust for sure that you are God, when all of this could actually be an illution or a delution that only reflects what i want to see? I mean no disrespect, but I must place you as an equal, unless proven otherwise, even if that is not possible." In that scenario, many portions of the old testament and a few different sects of Christianity would like you to think that an honest God's response to this would be fire and brimstone. But if that were truly an honest and reasonable God, the very sort of God that would have made such a brilliantly logical and reasonable universe as this, then wouldn't his response more likely be "hmm, well, when you put it that way, it makes a lot of sense. I'm glad that you question your own senses as you are not the one who made them and you know already that they are not yet perfect in every way. You are questioning me, but in reality it's yourself that you are questioning and that is very wise for any being as youthful and curious as yourself to consider... of course you never know if I haven't made it this way because I want yo to question yourself as openly and as clarly as you are for eternity. Your openminded scepticism is admirable, go ahead and keep it up old chum." Please for yourown sake and for the sake of others around you be sceptical of yourself first and foremost, including the part of you that thinks God is talking to you in many ways and at all times. This debate hasn't been an honest discussion as it should have always been, but rather, it's turned into a fight over different teams nd who feels they won each argument. You are the only one who can effect your own thinking or let your own thinking be directed y other people. Think for yourself on this one and give up this idea that what people believe matters so much in reality. It really doesn't matter in the least Of course. What people believe doesn't matter. The Muslim that blows something up because he think's he's guaranteed entrance into heaven isn't affecting reality in the least. And I can have enough faith to believe that we're not living in "The Matrix", which is basically what you seemed to describe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Shiva82 Posted February 7, 2007 Share Posted February 7, 2007 You shouldn't be 'scared' into Christianity! Christianity wouldn't be where it is today if people weren't scared into Christianity in the Middle Ages. And you can quote the Bible both ways, both in being scared and not being scared. Stop using the Bible as the answer. It's just a book that is interpreted in different ways by different people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdrehfal Posted February 7, 2007 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 9 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 207 Content Per Day: 0.03 Reputation: 3 Days Won: 0 Joined: 12/12/2005 Status: Offline Author Share Posted February 7, 2007 No. Simply Open-minded about the existence of God. The important question is, how can we stop at God? Do you understand that making a definition thrust it into the imagination? What about the Breh that create Gods? What about the Derj that create Breh? What about the Monquis that create Derj? It can keep going and make perfect sense using your logic, it just takes a couple definitions..... That to me is open-minded to the point my brain falls out. Belief in God is not infinite causal regression. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeCajunboy Posted February 7, 2007 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 113 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 1,430 Content Per Day: 0.22 Reputation: 33 Days Won: 1 Joined: 12/24/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 06/28/1952 Share Posted February 7, 2007 I understand that, I'm not an idiot. I was merely kidding. But, you believe that it is the truth, while I don't, so there is no need for me to worry. Unless you're wrong! Right? And what's this "fear" thing all about? I don't get it. Are you telling me that you didn't feel "special" and relieved when Jesus removed your "cross" or "sin" from you for the while that you believed? Because if you are telling us that, you have not truly witnessed the "supernatural" powers and healing of God Almighty. The moment that God lifed the veil of sin (my cross) from my life, I did not know the (fear) you speak of. The only time I can honestly say that I knew "fear" was when I was younger and I knew that something wasn't quite right in my life and I knew that I had to change my ways. Once I committed to that understanding, trust, and belief, I had no reason to "fear" God or man. Now I only "fear" that many will miss the opportunity to discover a truly happy life without fear of anything. But I do witness (fear) all around me, as well as the fear I hear in many souls hear who refuse to give up what they perceive as their pleasures that life tricks them with. If you want to know the true pleasure of man......GIVE GOD A CHANCE! After all, HE's willing to give us one or two... And for those that think I've been "brainwashed" by some denominational belief all my life. I was in the same boat for a good part of my life as many of the atheists here and didn't know the church of God. But something inside of me told me I had to change my life and lifestyle or I wouldn't be around very long. What I don't get is how someone who claims to be knowledgeable has not even "tried" to give God a real chance! And if you tell me "you've TRIED HIM, I blessings Cajunboy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tdrehfal Posted February 8, 2007 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 9 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 207 Content Per Day: 0.03 Reputation: 3 Days Won: 0 Joined: 12/12/2005 Status: Offline Author Share Posted February 8, 2007 (edited) What would be acceptable evidence of God to the atheist/agnostics posting here? I'm curious as to what you would find an acceptable 'proof beyond a reasonable doubt' as to God's existence? Just as there is no way to prove God doesn't exist, there is also no way to prove that God does exist. At least, not with the tools that we have availabe to us. I don't think seeing is believing, and feelings are not a kind of proof either. I think, fundamentally speaking, that this is why and real God would be immoral to expect faith. Believing is not an act of morality, and act of morality is acting on what you know. That doesn't include acting on what you refuse to admit that you don't know either. Be honest with yourself and ask the honest question, if this is God, then for what moral purpose could he possibly expect anyones faith? It's just senseless and immoral on his part. What's more, look at how much real responcibility you are avoiding by trying to cling to such a simple answer to such a big question. You beleive and therefore not only do you justify yourself to spend little time questioning your belief, but you also spend time doing things you think are good only because your simple answer tells you they are good. Look for God yourself in facts, not your feelings. even if you can't find god in that way, at least you really tried and spent your time learning, rather than wasting your time accepting the simple answers and changing nothing of what mankind knows. Just imaagine this scenario for a second please. God is face to face with a man of his creation. The man tells God, "I want to believe that you are God, and I enjoy your company, but how can I possibly trust for sure that you are God, when all of this could actually be an illution or a delution that only reflects what i want to see? I mean no disrespect, but I must place you as an equal, unless proven otherwise, even if that is not possible." In that scenario, many portions of the old testament and a few different sects of Christianity would like you to think that an honest God's response to this would be fire and brimstone. But if that were truly an honest and reasonable God, the very sort of God that would have made such a brilliantly logical and reasonable universe as this, then wouldn't his response more likely be "hmm, well, when you put it that way, it makes a lot of sense. I'm glad that you question your own senses as you are not the one who made them and you know already that they are not yet perfect in every way. You are questioning me, but in reality it's yourself that you are questioning and that is very wise for any being as youthful and curious as yourself to consider... of course you never know if I haven't made it this way because I want yo to question yourself as openly and as clarly as you are for eternity. Your openminded scepticism is admirable, go ahead and keep it up old chum." Please for yourown sake and for the sake of others around you be sceptical of yourself first and foremost, including the part of you that thinks God is talking to you in many ways and at all times. This debate hasn't been an honest discussion as it should have always been, but rather, it's turned into a fight over different teams nd who feels they won each argument. You are the only one who can effect your own thinking or let your own thinking be directed y other people. Think for yourself on this one and give up this idea that what people believe matters so much in reality. It really doesn't matter in the least Tdfehrel, you've completely overlooked what I'm saying. The muslim isn't acceptable for killing based on what he believes. My point is that neither is the christian. Both are killing for causes which they KNOW nothing about. The matrix is only a relevant metaphor because it expresses the ablility to understand that even what we observe can bear questioning. A true God knows this and therefore it makes sense why a true God would not present himself to you or I AND for that reason he would also not require or will any faith from you. Especially not some silly inconsistant faith that comes out of a book and is only understandable through subjective interpretation. In the case of the atheist, he or she has no more proof that there is no God, but look at the difference in thier logic from yours. You or a muslim might say, "belief is everything, I better go kill and save everyone around me from their lives after they die and so that God will love me for it." Whereas an atheist might say, "let me ponder the concepts of what can be proven as right or wrong without the appeal to another authority." Then that atheist will go and research philosophy and ethics and thus fall upon the concepts of deontological justification vs causationist justifications of morality. Then, from the strict standpoint of logic and reason the atheist develops his or her philosophies of right and wrong with what can be proven as the most critical and skeptical standpoints. The atheist doesn't need god or the threat of punnishment to know what good and evil are, and to do good for its own sake. More importantly he or she refuses to accept the appeal to authority in deciding what is right and wrong. In essense the atheist is in a better moral standing for this reason than the muslim or the christian, because the atheist is working towards universal proof of a right or wrong, not just accepting the appeal to the unproven authority of a pastor or book. In the same way there's nothing stopping you from being a philosophical theist in the same way. It's the fact that you are a christian that hinders you from learning the truth for yourself, or at least, it gives you the excuse to avoid finding truth for yourself. I never said an atheist needs God to know right from wrong. They do need Christ to be acceptable in God's sight, though. God says a sense of right and wrong is already written on people's hearts. People know right from wrong. I never said a Christian should be killing people, unless it's simply self defense, and even then, try to show mercy. We should avoid killing unless absolutely necessary. What I was saying is that your beliefs shape what you do. Your beliefs and/or worldview shape how you behave. At least then agree that what Jesus taught is good in the philosphical sense. I find no fault with Christ's teachings. There isn't any. What's wrong with what He said? The only thing people object to is that He also claimed, and rightfully so, that He was God. Even unbelievers refer to Christ as a 'good moral teacher'. Rarely do I ever hear anyone say they would object to loving their neighbor as theirselves and doing good even to those who hate you. Mercy triumphs over judgement. Why is it that people seem to think Christianity involves checking your brains at the door? Being a Christian somehow automatically places me in the 'idiot' category, yet noone seems to be saying that about muslims or buddhists or hindus. But Christians? What idiots we are... If you can respect the beliefs of others, than respect mine. I didn't call you a stupid atheist, did I? Edited February 8, 2007 by tdrehfal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts