more tea vicar?

youkrst wrote:sonoman you define a god and we'll tell you if we believe in it or not, your concept that is.

fair call?

Why would I care what you "believe" in or not about God if you're an atheist? That would be like asking a 350 lb. bricklayer his opinions on how to dance the Argentine tango.

and BTW why did you chicken out of going into your CTC thing? i was fully prepared to go the distance with you and you flunked.

I started a thread called Celestial Torah Christianity. It disappeared and your thread appeared in its place. I don't like the messing with poster's posts that goes on here. That's why I didn't accept your replacement. It's just another show by the powers that be here that a theist cannot post on equal terms with the gang of atheists running this joint.

and why the whiny resentment of atheists or whatever you think people are, why not just quietly go about the business of putting forward what you think.

See above.

it's like you have a persecution complex or something, it's as if you have a bruised ego, but surely the test of enlightenment is transcendence of ego?!?!

See above.

anyways i still love you and am willing to go toe to toe through the tulips of doctrinal wrangling anytime you ever feel like it.

If you really truly for sure did love me you'd help me tar and feather the monitors and owner of this forum and run 'em out of town on a rail for being no good stink pots attempting to thwart the almighty big mouth of God.

and may your god give you every assistance to stop feeling anything less than blissful.

My God is you and me and all of us put together, the whole works from the earliest hominid Og to the smartest Einstein, or even going back to the first slimy mudworm to crawl on land or before that the first molecules to combine together to self-replicate, and before that the Big Bang that set Creation in motion and before that "Us", "We", the Great Spirit of Humanity who in our far future created Creation to create God "unbegotten". We are Holy One. We are evolving towards eventually becoming what we call "God". We have embedded knowledge of this truth within the religious spiritual capacity of the human genome, actually within each and every atom. Some have been given the talent for revealing the embedded Knowledge of God. But that Knowledge is revealed piecemeal lest by knowing we lose the magic of discovery needed to propel us further forward. A satiated mind doesn't need to know more, doesn't want to look for more, but a naive mind, a child's mind of wonder, that is what is always needed which is why Jesus tells us to look to the children for the wisdom of God.

Now do you believe in my God?

Sonoman, you have a belief. I don't share that belief.

Theism is a belief. A-Theism is not a belief.

I'm also A-goblinist, and A-unicornist, and A-dragonist... the list is literally infinite.

None of these A-beliefs are a belief system. They are the lack of belief. They are NOT following a set of behaviors, observances, routines and philosophy. It doesn't indicate what i DO, only what i do not.

Your inability to understand this stems from a provincial mindset.

I'm also A-goblinist, and A-unicornist, and A-dragonist... the list is literally infinite.

This is really quite silly, Johnson, and is a stupid attempt at an analogous comparison between spiritual belief of any sort, and a belief in goblins, fairies, unicorns, etc, or disbelief.
This can only stem from a religiously bigoted view on all things related to religion. It is nothing more than trivializing. It is anti religious rhetoric.

Millions of people, past, present, and future (I'd safely predict) have had their lives greatly enriched by their religious convictions. It has been their guide through life. It has directly influenced their love, kindness, altruism, values, and societal behavior in general. It is a wonderful thing that people of faith assert their independent conscience. Independent conscience is something that those of a true liberal persuasion value most highly. It is something we respect and do not treat indifferently, or demean in any way. We defend a peaceful way of life, and yes, we speak out against it when it causes harm to others. You are not Liberal, Johnson. Your tone is that of a patronizing, relgious bigot.

Goblins and unicorns have not enriched peoples lives. Nor have goblins and unicorns shared, SHARED, JOHNSON, a historical partnership with science as have people of faith who were not AND ARE NOT at odds with science.

Stop camouflaging your adolescent mockery of religion with imbecile comparisons. It’s irrational.

ant wrote:

I'm also A-goblinist, and A-unicornist, and A-dragonist... the list is literally infinite.

This is really quite silly, Johnson, and is a stupid attempt at an analogous comparison between spiritual belief of any sort, and a belief in goblins, fairies, unicorns, etc, or disbelief.
This can only stem from a religiously bigoted view on all things related to religion. It is nothing more than trivializing. It is anti religious rhetoric.

Millions of people, past, present, and future (I'd safely predict) have had their lives greatly enriched by their religious convictions. It has been their guide through life. It has directly influenced their love, kindness, altruism, values, and societal behavior in general. It is a wonderful thing that people of faith assert their independent conscience. Independent conscience is something that those of a true liberal persuasion value most highly. It is something we respect and do not treat indifferently, or demean in any way. We defend a peaceful way of life, and yes, we speak out against it when it causes harm to others. You are not Liberal, Johnson. Your tone is that of a patronizing, relgious bigot.

Goblins and unicorns have not enriched peoples lives. Nor have goblins and unicorns shared, SHARED, JOHNSON, a historical partnership with science as have people of faith who were not AND ARE NOT at odds with science.

Stop camouflaging your adolescent mockery of religion with imbecile comparisons. It’s irrational.

Johnson is explaining the perspective of an atheist which is to not to jump on the bandwagon of belief without an appropriate amount of evidence. So to an atheist, a unicorn or fairy has the same level of plausibility--and lacking in evidence--as a god. This seems insulting to a believer, but it's true nonetheless.

This is just a different way of making Russell's teapot argument that illustrates that the philosophic burden of proof falls on the person making the claim. If you're going to assert that something exists without any evidence to show for it, prepare to have that belief lumped in with dragons, fairies, and unicorns. It's a bitch to live in the real world.

It's certainly true that people's lives are enriched by their religious beliefs. Granted, no one really believes in unicorns that I'm aware of, so it's not the best example. Let's use ghosts instead. I have always thought ghosts are the best analog to belief in god. People do believe in ghosts, and they're motivated not to question those beliefs because ultimately they want to believe in ghosts. There's something comforting about the idea of spirits. For one it lends credence to the notion that there's an afterlife.

It's also true that religious belief is more than just belief in supernatural entities. As you say, religious belief offers psychological comfort and helps to foster a sense of community. (Read Jung's theory of individuation). No one denies those benefits; and we can acknowledge those real, tangible benefits without bowing to belief in supernatural beings themselves. We'll never have an honest dialogue unless we can at least meet there.

This seems insulting to a believer, but it's true nonetheless.

Bullcrap.

You are not one to present empirical evidence that mankind is closer to truth as it relates to the nature of reality.
No one can make that claim.

This bullcrap unicorn/goblin comparison is strictly fashioned to trivialize religiosity.
Johnson, and like minded people are not being smart, or clever, or open minded. They are being deliberately condescending to elevate their worldview - and that's all it is - a worldview.

1) Provide evidence that we are closer to arriving at Truth.
2) Provide evidence that atheism is not a meme.
3) Provide evidence that millions of people guided by faith are delusional and you're not.
4) Provide evidence that atheism is more advantageous to our species than theism.

Sonoman, can you please stop referring to me as "the forum owner." My name is Chris. I'm not using my status in my posts so please don't keep mentioning it. I'm not sure what that is all about.

Right on cue, the forum owner demonstrates the atheist fundamentalist mindset...

Ant,

Why all the rage, man?

You charge us with overreacting to posts, then went on to call me a silly, patronizing, stupid bigot.

Remember just the other day you were calling for people to raise the standard of dialogue? What happened with that?

And what's going on here?

1) Provide evidence that we are closer to arriving at Truth.
2) Provide evidence that atheism is not a meme.
3) Provide evidence that millions of people guided by faith are delusional and you're not.
4) Provide evidence that atheism is more advantageous to our species than theism.

This reminds me of your challenge for me to empirically define the correct moral choice between two different fruit flavors...

This is really quite silly, Johnson, and is a stupid attempt at an analogous comparison between spiritual belief of any sort, and a belief in goblins, fairies, unicorns, etc, or disbelief

Indeed. Pardon my continued stupidity, but which sounds more silly?

Dragons, which may have been mis-identified fossils of real-world colloasal bones of extinct dinosaurs, colored by imagination.

Or

God, an invisible, intangible, undetectable, all powerful, wish-granting disembodied spirit. Who hears everything, sees everything, knows everything, is capable of creating or destroying literally everything in existence on a whim and without much effort. Who loves you so much he will torture you for eternity if you don't love him back, and who created all of the universe for people.

By comparison, i would bet on the fire-breathing dinosaur.

ant wrote:

This seems insulting to a believer, but it's true nonetheless.

Bullcrap.

You are not one to present empirical evidence that mankind is closer to truth as it relates to the nature of reality.
No one can make that claim.

This bullcrap unicorn/goblin comparison is strictly fashioned to trivialize religiosity.
Johnson, and like minded people are not being smart, or clever, or open minded. They are being deliberately condescending to elevate their worldview - and that's all it is - a worldview.

You quoted me out of context. I said: "Johnson is explaining the perspective of an atheist which is to not to jump on the bandwagon of belief without an appropriate amount of evidence. So to an atheist, a unicorn or fairy has the same level of plausibility--and lacking in evidence--as a god. This seems insulting to a believer, but it's true nonetheless.

I fully recognize that believers would rather not address or simply don't care about the lack of evidence. My point is to atheists, this does matter. Evidence is everything.

Atheism*/materialism/empiricism is a worldview, I agree. It's a worldview that places emphasis on evidence.

Evidence has given us a measure of objective truth about the physical world we live in. I have never doubted--and indeed, I acknowledge this all the time--that religious belief systems provide a subjective framework that helps people find personal meaning in their lives. That's not being debated.

But if you say there's an invisible dude who lives in the sky, I'll ask for evidence.

It's all about the evidence, Ant. And where there is no evidence, there's no room for meaningful and rational study. To an empiricist, god, leprechauns, and ghosts are on the same footing.

* I agree that atheism is just the absence of belief, but I lump it here with materialists/empiricists for the sake of argument.