Religious proofs are nonsensical

Discussion in 'Religion' started by Dinosaur, Mar 24, 2018.

  1. Baldeee Valued Senior Member

    As already explained: lack of evidence that it is not.
    Until something is shown to be impossible it surely remains a possibility.
    One is a position on what possibly exists, the latter is a belief that it doesn't.
    I accept the first but do not go as far as the second.
    Far from it, Jan.
    Just because you can't grasp it doesn't make it lip-service.
    No, your intention to insult or not is irrelevant as to whether you actually did insult or not.
    You did insult, even if you didn't intend.
    You telling an atheist what there is or not for them?
    You crack me up, Jan.
    There is me telling you my position, and presumably because it doesn't fit your notion of what an atheist is you claim I'm wrong and that as an atheist this is what my position is.
    You're a joke, Jan.
    The thing we all have in common is a lack of belief that God exists.
    But you don't grasp even that.
    That's an argument?
    So now you're blind?
    I know what you meant, but what I offered was a clear explanation to you that your conclusion is but one that can be reached from the same starting point, an alternative conclusion that you refuse to acknowledge.
    If you think that that is obfuscation then I suggest you wipe the layers of dishonesty from your eyes.
    Red herring, Jan.
    And as such ignored.
    Just one that people could reach.
    I.e. you reach one conclusion, someone else reaches another etc.
    Surely it's not too difficult to comprehend???
    So the earth didn't exist before there was life on the planet??
    Or would you accept that the existence of things is actually independent of whether one is aware of something or not.
    Disagree that the alternative is a valid viewpoint?
    Or simply disagree with the viewpoint (i.e. while someone may hold the alternative, you wouldn't)?
    Yes, they would lack belief that unicorns exist.
    But they also would not hold belief that unicorns do not exist.
    They would simply not have belief one way or the other.
    We can choose some things, yes.
    I'm sure you would.
    But, as said, some people might say that because they are not yet aware of them, and because they have not explored the entirety of the universe, they can not say that they believe unicorns do not exist.
    They neither believe unicorns do exist, nor do they believe unicorns do not exist.
    For some reason you are incapable of understanding and appreciating this position.
    To you it is either belief that they exist or belief that they do not exist.
    I don't see how this comment is relevant to what I posted.
    Please can you explain?
    FFS, Jan!
    This is why you are considered to be utterly dishonest in discussions.
    In post #116 you said: "I am not aware of any unicorns existing on this planet, and because of that, I don't believe they exist, in this planet.
    That's my position.
    " (bolding is mine).
    So for Pete's sake just accept what you have written!
    It is a jump, whether you feel you have no ability to stop yourself taking it or not.
    Other people, as explained, do not take the jump you do, whether you want to consider it a choice or not.
    Then view it not as a choice but as a subconscious imperative to hold a position.
    The issue remains: yours is but one possible position that could be held by people.
    You seem to be incapable of understanding or even acknowledging this, instead insisting that they do not hold the views they hold but the views you want them to hold.

    Please only respond if you're actually going to take this seriously, Jan.
    If all you intend is to nosedive the discussion as you have done to so many then let me know up front so I can put you on ignore.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. Dinosaur Rational Skeptic Valued Senior Member

    From Jan Ardena Post 116
    Above was directed to Baldee.

    I cannot answer for him.

    I am an atheist & would reply as follows
    BTW: I liked some of the Greek concepts like a goddess of wisdom (Athena) & other gods, each with some special purpose or area of interest.

    The concept of some other cultures seem unappealing. For example: some of the ancient Egyptian gods seemed demonic.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    Hi Dinosaur, thanks for an intelligent response. Do you think that God is possible?

    What do you like about them?

    Do you think that God (upper-case G), is simply one more god (lower-case g), or do you recognise a distinction apart from Lowe, or upper-case differences?

    Last edited: Apr 7, 2018
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. Dinosaur Rational Skeptic Valued Senior Member

    From Jan Ardena Post 123
    I am an atheist & consider the Christian, Jewish, & Islamic gods to be myths, no more real than any of the other thousands of gods both historically & currently believed in.

    BTW: I was born into a Quaker (Society of Friends) family & my family often attended Quaker services. Quakers are very behavior oriented. Though known to be an atheist, no Quaker ever tried to convert me to a belief in god.

    My father was probably an atheist although he never claimed to be one. He seldom discussed religion. The only remark of his that I remember on the subject was
    Also from Ardena Post 123
    Above in response to my following remark
    The Judeo-Christian god, Allah, & others seem distant & inaccessible. The Greek gods are described as available for personal conversations with mortals.

    Examples: Athena, the god to consult for intellectual issues; Aphrodite, the god responsible for emotional issues.

    Note the story of Athena, Aphrodite, & Hera asking Paris (a mortal) to decide which of the three should be awarded (I think) a golden apple.​
  8. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    Why do you automatically assume I am referring to any religious notion of God.
    Even if you are atheist, you must realise that God is not religious, nor the leader of any religious organisation.

    There are considered to be thousands of gods, because gods are described as the limbs, and torso of God. They are instructed to maintain every aspect of the universe. They are, of course very powerful compared to human beings, and can (or at least could) interact with them. Humans worshiped and sacrificed to these gods, in the hope of gaining rewards.

    For example, in India the god, Ganesha, is worshiped by people in business, and to procure a nice husband. Nobody worships Gransha like they would worship Vishnu (God).

    None of these gods are worshiped as though they are God. They themselves are subserviant to God. Every so often one becomes rebellious deciding, in a fit of delusion, they are as, or more powerful than God, and end up getting caned. Only to realise they were being stupid all along.

    Now, I'm not saying that its true, so please let's not go there. But there is a lot more to God, and god's than you seem to think.

    I wouldn't do that, but I would try and convert you to accept God, as opposed to reject God. From there you can come to the platform of belief, or lack of belief, based on proper evaluation of the information. The first quote of yours that I posted in this response, shows me that you currently have a poor comprehension regarding this subject.
    It is little wonder you erect barriers to safeguard you from what you think God is.

    You're dad sounds like a wise man. I would be surprised if he didn't believe in God.

    Ultimately, religion is an education system to raise people to the level of goodness, so they can be in the right position to know God. I have heard it said that it is there to bring people to the platform of a human being.

    The end of religious training marks the begining of one's spiritial journey.
    Religion is necessary to elicit ethical behavior from those who have no sense of fair play or concern for the welfare of others. becoming a spiritual person. A person eligible to worship God's feet.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    If you're lucky.

    People do say God is Great, but how Great is God? The best way to start that enquiry, is read scriptures where God describes Himself, or God's devotees describe Him.

    At least then your conclusion on the matter will be properly informed.

    The gods are more accessible because they are materially created, mortal beings, whereas God isn't. The process required to communicate with gods is different to communicating with God.

    It would be a lot easier to contact the Presidents receptionist, than the President.

    Last edited: Apr 7, 2018
  9. Musika Last in Space Valued Senior Member

    Given that its only logically tenable for maybe 30% of wiki to be accurate (at least in terms of housing mutually exclusive world views), the question how do you arrive at "the correct" 30%?
  10. Baldeee Valued Senior Member

    I'm not sure where you've plucked the 30% from, but then they do say that 88% of all statistics are made up.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Note that wiki can detail any number of mutually exclusive world views and not necessarily be inaccurate in its explanation of any of them.
    As far as I am aware Wiki makes no claim as to the accuracy of worldviews as far as its reflection of reality.
  11. Dinosaur Rational Skeptic Valued Senior Member

    From Jan Ardena Post 125
    How would you describe your notion of god? If not a religious concept, in what category do you place your notion of god?

    I assume you consider him to be supernatural & real as opposed to supernatural & mythical as for vampires, Zeus, Apollo, & others accepted as god(s) by various cultures.

    I do not think any religious person views god as the leader of a religious organization. Leaders of religious organizations are folks like ministers, priests, rabbis rather than some god.

    As an atheist I consider the Christian god as well as all other so-called gods to be mythical rather than real.

    Also fro Jan Post 125
    My relgious training is better than that of most folks. I attended Quaker Sunday school for grades 1-8. While at George School (also a Quaker school) for grades 9-12, I attended a Quaker meeting every Sunday. By the end of grade 12, I had either read the bible from cover to cover or listened to it being read. While attending Haverford College (also a Quaker institution) I opted to take a course titled “Comparative Religion which discussed & compared quite a few religions (Christian as well as non-Christian).
  12. gmilam Valued Senior Member

    I would think any concepts of god that include omniscience, omnipotence, compassion and/or redemption and salvation are religious based. Don't know how anyone could arrive at those qualities any other way.
  13. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    When you defeat the quoting feature like that, the software can't tell that Jan is on my Iggy List, and I have to read his drivel.

    Bad Dinosaur. No cookie.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  14. Musika Last in Space Valued Senior Member

    I did say maybe.

    Only for as long as one is entertaining the "world of ideas" as a world unto itself.

    To say less would be extremely absurd ... even by sciforums standards.
    The question remains on what basis you (or anyone) gives their hats and coats to the "correct 30%".
  15. Baldeee Valued Senior Member

    The basis is not the issue, but the permanence with which one expects to give them.
  16. Musika Last in Space Valued Senior Member

    Is certainly is, because it would be logically impossible to "enter into the 30%" based purely on a tentative outlook.
  17. Baldeee Valued Senior Member

    Then I look forward to you demonstrating it to be logically impossible.

Share This Page