Merry Andrew
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Dec, 2008 10:25 pm
@edgarblythe,
I can't argue with that. I have no inflated ideas about the superiority of mankind. We're pretty pathetic when you come right down to it. And I don't believe that I've said anything which would make one think that I find humankind particularly outstanding.

What's that got to do with God?
Rockhead
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Dec, 2008 10:27 pm
@Merry Andrew,
The great spirit flows through all of us, big and small...
Merry Andrew
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Dec, 2008 10:31 pm
@Rockhead,
Yeah. Hamsters, too. Laughing
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Dec, 2008 11:01 pm
@Merry Andrew,
The only thing anything at all has to do with a God is, in my view, injected by human thinking. Other than that, nothjing.
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Dec, 2008 11:02 pm
@edgarblythe,
I agree with EdgarB.

But I said I'd never never never never never... post on this issue again.
0 Replies
 
Merry Andrew
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Dec, 2008 06:36 am
@edgarblythe,
Quote:
The only thing anything at all has to do with a God is, in my view, injected by human thinking. Other than that, nothjing.


That's because you and I are using two different definitions of 'God'. I said the problem is semantic not ontological.
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Dec, 2008 06:48 am
@Merry Andrew,
Merry Andrew wrote:

I dunno, ed. I'm inclined to be in agreement with JL. The problem is that too many people think of "the old man with a white beard" when they declare themselves atheists. It's a matter of semantics. I don't consider myself an atheist but I certainly don't believe any of the crap that the churches feed us, except perhaps as poetic allegory. To me, organized religion has nothing whatever to do with God. In fact, I never feel so far away from God as I do in a traditional church. Go to the woods, go to the seashore, go up into the mountains or out into the desert if you want to feel the presence of God.

I use the word 'God' when I refer to a higher power which, obviously (to me), keeps this crazy contraption called the universe up and running, because it is such a simple, short word. I have absolutely no idea what God is. And I have a feeling that neither do the priests and ministers and rabbis and imams etc. etc. They just talk a good fight out of their own ignorance by relying on scriptural authority, rather than the evidence of their senses and their own powers to reason. And even Jesus is quoted as having said, "God is not of the flesh but of the Spirit."

I see no conflict whatever between a religious orientation and a scientific search for the physical facts of life and the universe in which we live.


An entirely reasonable and admirable viewpoint. Without internal inconsistency, contradiction, or compulsion to inflict itself on others
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Dec, 2008 07:01 am
@Merry Andrew,
There is no evidence that the world is other than just "is" and using the term, "God," injects an element not evident in a proveable way. However unconsciously intended, it's still anthropomorphism.
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Dec, 2008 07:13 am
@edgarblythe,
edgarblythe wrote:

There is no evidence that the world is other than just "is" and using the term, "God," injects an element not evident in a proveable way. However unconsciously intended, it's still anthropomorphism.
Well, let's concede your little semantical triumph. So what?

It proves nothing. It doesn't establish any contradiction in the views Merry Andrew expressed. If you regard it as the foundation for another view, I will be bemused by your credulity, but otherwise unoffended.
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Dec, 2008 02:35 pm
@georgeob1,
It may be semantical to you. To me it's an important distinction. I've tried to show why. I respect Merry Andrew and was not seeking to "triumph" over him or anyone else.
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Dec, 2008 04:23 pm
1) If religious belief had efficacy, it would be demonstrable, given all the s0-called "miracles".

2) There have been thousands upon thousands of different religious beliefs, most of which contradict each other.

3) Religious belief's efficacy as a predictive tool is zero.

4) Religious belief's is not based on demonstrable cause and effect.

Thus religious belief is tantamount to superstitious belief.

The nature of Man's existence forces us to make certain assumptions based on belief, however the extent to which religious people go in that regard relegates their mindset to that of a child.
Eorl
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Dec, 2008 06:39 am
@Chumly,
Hey! Chumly is back. Cool.
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Dec, 2008 02:31 pm
@Eorl,
Chirp!
aidan
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Dec, 2008 03:30 pm
@Chumly,
Chirp chirp - and this is just WRONG - (as in not true)
Chumly said:
Quote:
1) If religious belief had efficacy, it would be demonstrable, given all the s0-called "miracles".

2) There have been thousands upon thousands of different religious beliefs, most of which contradict each other.


Merry Andrew - you expressed my view - so EXACTLY - it's like you were reading my mind.

0 Replies
 
rydinearth
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Mar, 2009 05:32 pm
@real life,
Quote:
How did you prove God doesn't exist? Are you omniscient?

Have you proven that Unicorns don't exist? How about fairies? Pink elephants?How about the teapot orbiting Mars? Have you proven that none of these things exist? I doubt it. But I bet you don't believe in them. If we believed in every concept that was ever introduced until we had proven beyond a doubt that it doesn't exist, we would live in a perpetual state of psychosis.
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Mar, 2009 05:40 pm
I am god.............prove I'm not.
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Mar, 2009 05:42 pm
@rydinearth,
rydinearth wrote:

Quote:
How did you prove God doesn't exist? Are you omniscient?

Have you proven that Unicorns don't exist? How about fairies? Pink elephants?How about the teapot orbiting Mars? Have you proven that none of these things exist? I doubt it. But I bet you don't believe in them. If we believed in every concept that was ever introduced until we had proven beyond a doubt that it doesn't exist, we would live in a perpetual state of psychosis.


If you spend too much time trying to reason with that **********, you'll end up as fucked up as he is. That guy is the single most pathetic loser who's ever posted on a forum.
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Mar, 2009 10:39 am
@Chumly,
Chumly wrote:

I am god.............prove I'm not.
If you are god, please deposit some money in my Starbucks account. I'll pay it back. I promise.
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Fri 13 Mar, 2009 11:18 am
@neologist,
I wouldn't trust you, Boss . . . i'd suspect your promise to pay would refer to the afterlife you believe in . . .
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Mar, 2009 11:24 am
@Setanta,
Yeah, well, I had to put my own money into my Starbucks account, thanks to you guys. . .
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

700 Inconsistencies in the Bible - Discussion by onevoice
Why do we deliberately fool ourselves? - Discussion by coincidence
Spirituality - Question by Miller
Oneness vs. Trinity - Discussion by Arella Mae
give you chills - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence for Evolution! - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence of God! - Discussion by Bartikus
One World Order?! - Discussion by Bartikus
God loves us all....!? - Discussion by Bartikus
The Preambles to Our States - Discussion by Charli
 
  1. Forums
  2. » I'm an aethist....
  3. » Page 18
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 09/27/2022 at 05:28:22