If you consider a religion to be an organised set of beliefs, doctrines, actions etc, then yes - you simply have to believe in God but not follow a religion. No, an atheist is a lack of belief in God, so to believe in God, even if you are not religious, means you are not an atheist. If you believe in God you are a theist. If you don't agree with the principle of religion then you are irreligious, and perhaps more accurately (although I don't know the detail of your beliefs) you may be a deist.
The subject is the car and the attribute , or the adjective is the color , I am not sure if I will go along with your comparison. Sorry !
I'm an agnostic atheist (gnostic means "knowledge"). I don't have knowledge that God doesn't exist, that would require total knowledge of the universe (or deconstruction of the idea of God as logically coherent). But I don't believe that God exists, since it seems unlikely, and I've seen no evidence of such a thing.
The same can say a believer he have some experience of the presence of God. Let say there are 2 groups of people Scientist and farmers or tradesmen. Astronomers say there is an indication of dark mater and their evidence : is there is something that holds the galaxy together and other . This evidence is accepted in the scientific community. Why would a veterinary, a chemist or an engineer believe such thing . They are not involved in astronomy, but the probably will believe because they believe on the astronomists education and experience . They don't have any experience nor evidence. The same os with the other group . Farmer , tradesmen . They probable believe in the bible and have some experience of God's presence in their life , some evidence of biblical prophecy fulfilled. This assures them of existence of God in their life. An atheist will ask show me your God . The believer can ask show me the dark matter
An atheist only asks for evidence of God (any evidence). The scientist will show you all of the evidence for dark matter. The believer can only show you his faith (hope) that there is a God.
This is a fantastic question. The difference has to do with what these groups consider reliable evidence. Scientists are aware of phenomenon like optical and audio illusions, mass hysteria, mental illness, delusion, and personal bias, so they don't consider a personal experience to be valid evidence in most cases. If the sample size is very large and the experience is trivial, then it might be OK to use a personal experience in a psychological test (i.e., do you feel a shock now, does this look red to you). But for the most part, even if personal experience is used as testimony in a trial, it's not scientifically valid. There are many reasons to doubt an experience by itself as evidence for something. The most obvious is the existence of an imagination, dream states, altered states of consciousness, disassociation, and our split brain which should make us have serious doubts in the reality of any experience not associated with external events. I would ask, as I have of Jen, how do you know that what you think of as an experience of god was actually a god? How do scientists know that their experience of physical evidence is real? They do the test more than once. They publish their papers so that they are subject to criticism, and everyone can see the evidence. Everyone can follow the train of logic from basic premises to conclusions. Other scientists perform the same experiment. Even if people do trust scientific conclusions based on authority, they shouldn't. The proof that the scientific method is sound is that it produces results. The technology that has come out of such discoveries are obvious everywhere. We know more and more about the universe every day from scientists. What do we learn from theologians? Nothing new, and in fact many older teachings have been shown to be false. Technology is the proof that science works. Dark matter hasn't been detected yet, it's only an hypothesis. No one should believe that it exists, only that it's existence would explain some observed phenomenon. If dark matter were detected, we don't have to trust in the experience of a scientist, only the observation of an inanimate instrument which has no personal bias. Science is accessible to everyone, regardless of their personal beliefs, while god is allegedly only accessible to people that hold certain beliefs. It has been shown that one's beliefs can alter one's perceptions. In other words, if you believe in ghosts, you will interpret bumps in the night as proof of ghosts. Science is a process of eliminating such errors.
I believe in what you are saying. The less learned group not necessary believes the scientists because they have their own spiritual experiences which science does not accepts their experience as evidence . We have to accept, science deals with physical matter and not spiritual . It is like to say Science attempts to explain what could have happen after the Big Bang . Science will not attempt to explain what was before the Big Bang.
More to the point, why do they accept their spiritual experience as evidence? An experience of god isn't necessarily from god. Without valid evidence, why think there is a spiritual realm at all?
Well there are millions of people that have such experience , should I not believe them ? that is more then several thousands of astronomers. Should I not believe the Jewish survival is spiritual ? Should I not believe since Jeremia up to 1947 and then after 1948 first time . Israel become an independent nation , and not, a vassal state. That was prophesied by Isaiah . Pardon for bring quotation . I don't think is fair , to deny spirituality , by denying this evidence.
I believe that they have had experiences but there is no evidence that the experience has anything to do with a God. I will not believe an astronomer if he does not backup what he states without evidence. No, you should not. That is not evidence.
Because on the one hand you have millions of Christians having one kind of spiritual experience, and on the other hand we have millions of Muslims having a different experience, then millions of Hindus having a different experience again, and so on and so forth. They can't all be right, because the claims of these religions are mutually contradictory.
I looked at god this way: I looked many years ago as the Universe being inside the brain of a god or a being which I perfer. And this being gets information from this beings without; hence what this Universe is made from the information that this being gathers and absorbs from its without. So this being is learning at the sametime as we are. This being is trying to understand its without as we are. Our Human full potential is part of this beings full potential ; by understanding our without. So my atheism was brought on by in the end ; that there is not a god that knows everything but a being that is learning as we are.
Argument 1. Lots of people have spiritual experiences. I totally believe people are having spiritual experiences. Atheists have spiritual experiences, I have. But is this indication of something other than their own minds? If that is the claim, how do we know? Argument 2. Prophecy is true, evidenced by the coming about of the Jewish state. Where's the Messiah? It was 2,000 years after Jesus said he would come back, and a bunch of atheist militant Jews ignored scripture and established Israel anyway. This wasn't exactly extraordinary, states are established all the time. We have a new Islamic State, does that mean God is a Muslim? Also, if you depend on the Old Testament prophecies, you have a lot of other shit to account for, like God wanting slavery to exist, and the death penalty for kids who disrespect their parents. You do know that the New Testament writers told falsehoods just to make it seem like Jesus fulfilled prophecies? He wasn't born in Bethlehem, for instance, he was born in Nazareth. And most of those prophecies were adapted from previous cultural traditions.
I am not sure about contradictory. They all believe in God as a creator and He give life. I believe it is because organization they separate themselves . I believe within every segment ( Religious organization ) there are people who experience close manifestation of God. Take the example of Pentecostals many of them have the gift of speaking in other language. Since it was mentioned a verification is necessary . I can bring some study dome and MIR was taken in different subject. If a physicist will say they obtained Htggs (God particle ) , I can ask , can you see the particle . You don't , but you will tell me it can manifest itself at 125 xxx in energy value . and it was shown , did all physicists agree? at the big day ( don't remember the date ) Not all were in agreement . So I believe there is some parallelism.
1 ) God is God > He is no jew, christian , muslim ,hindu or others. About Bethlehem it is not important , there is an other Bethlehem in Galilei . The point is that he initiated a believe , a spiritual believe not a religion. it become a religion once intellectuals stepped in then organized the believers and wala you have a new religion and the spirituality went into decline . Hey pal . we are hijacking the the post . Pardon I will step down. At some point we will continue.
You are using scripture to justify belief in god, and then you are dismissing scripture as unimportant.
SORRY I am not a theologian , just a simple believer. Organization and hierarchy does not get well with me .
Nor does being logically coherent, apparently. Surely the existence of Israel wasn't the thing that caused you to believe, was it?
You are right . There are many things in science or nature make me a believer. You as a Jew ask yourself a question ? Way Jews have not vanished from this earth. They have been persecuted trough all their existence and have not disappeared and lately have become even more visible in all form of life . ( that invisible energy keeps them alive ) . And they are ready for building the third temple. Friend there are more things to say but this is not the place
You could say the same thing about all sorts of cultures. Native Americans have been around 10,000 years, Australian aborigines have been around perhaps 5 times as long. Compared to them, Jews are newbies.
