That's ok. I also aired a similar cynicism in my first post to this thread.Sorry I didn't realise Musika was participating. It now has the potential to be a good thread.
Jan.
What does God want?
- Thread starter James R
- Start date
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
vs....God's unconditional existence? Who says?
I don't see this as "fumbling" at all. Darwinian Evolution and Natural Selection ARE the tools by which Nature itself unfolds. This probabilistic process already starts at the elementary level with chemical interactions, i.e. "chelation" to name one.
Earth alone has undergone some "3 trillion, quadrillion, quadrillion, quadrillion" chemical interactions during its lifetime, all without any intentional interference from anything.
The problem is that people see the evolution of life as only two possibilities. Inevitable or Intentionally created, but it's a matter of probability, a range of possibilities which lie in between.
Given enough time and spatial dimensions the combinatory richness of planets make certain evolutionary processes inevitable which may lead or not lead to life. The concept of an intentional God is NOT a necessary part of the equation. And then we arrive at Ockham's razor.
Last edited:
Seattle
Valued Senior Member
No, it could serve vanity. It could seek to serve as a role model but then that would require a more "outgoing" nature than anyone has observed to date.
Who says God's existence is unconditional? I think it would be more pertinent to ask who says His existence is not. If you have a God that is not beyond conditions, then (on account of not being the cause and controller of them) you have a God that doesn't occupy a different ontological position than a regular living entity ... an idea which is of course attractive to a particular class of person.
You might describe such processes as elegant, but existing at the mercy of them is distressing, hence the inevitable fumbling ensues in the ensuing battle to maintain the status quo.
Last edited:
Vanity tends to arise more from an absence (or the acquisition of something that threatens to become absent) .... as opposed to (absolute) acquisition.
What purpose would there be in serving as a role model?
(I'm not saying there is no purpose ... I'm suggesting that you have missed a step)
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
I'll only agree that humans are the fumblers and not very successful at that.
By "we", you just mean you, of course. But you felt it necessary to tell us all, rather than just staying out.
I realise this is just another cover because you either don't have a good answer, or you are reticent to post what you really think. I understand.
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
It's possible he has an advisory board.......
Xelasnave.1947
Valued Senior Member
I really believe an atheist understands the God condition better than a believer who clearly loses all objectivity even when they dont even understand what objectivity actually means☺
An athiest will often learn more about religion than those following a particular religion.
Few believers realise joy and happiness are independant to their belief in God.
Believers fail to recognise that many atheists were at one point believers who have experienced the God delussion and certainly that ateist knows of and has experienced the feeling the believer thinks belongs to him exclusively.
And so often the atheist has actually read the bible along with other religious texts from cover to cover whereas the believer is often ignorant of passages outside those read put at church on the Sunday social get together.
But what I never get is how the believer can be so dishonest with both themselves and with others.
I know that is a wide generalisation but certainly its not only Jan that has this evasive approach nor is such evasivness or selective reasoning limited to this place.
When in business when I worked out that I was dealing with a christian I made sure I made diary notes and would not work for them until the contract or agency agreement was signed...they shared this commonality of moving the goal posts...I guess I only met bad ones☺
But it must be terrible to live like that and needing to be evasive rather than being up front and honest.
Alex
An athiest will often learn more about religion than those following a particular religion.
Few believers realise joy and happiness are independant to their belief in God.
Believers fail to recognise that many atheists were at one point believers who have experienced the God delussion and certainly that ateist knows of and has experienced the feeling the believer thinks belongs to him exclusively.
And so often the atheist has actually read the bible along with other religious texts from cover to cover whereas the believer is often ignorant of passages outside those read put at church on the Sunday social get together.
But what I never get is how the believer can be so dishonest with both themselves and with others.
I know that is a wide generalisation but certainly its not only Jan that has this evasive approach nor is such evasivness or selective reasoning limited to this place.
When in business when I worked out that I was dealing with a christian I made sure I made diary notes and would not work for them until the contract or agency agreement was signed...they shared this commonality of moving the goal posts...I guess I only met bad ones☺
But it must be terrible to live like that and needing to be evasive rather than being up front and honest.
Alex
.
Hope so. It will help him when spins the "I used to be a theist" routine.
Jan.
I see definitely one theist, and maybe Sculptor, or Bowser (not sure)
The rest of the posts are the usual rabble, desperately trying to justify their world view.
Do you though?
Jan.
Last edited:
I believe that you believe it.
Yes because an atheist is the greatest, in his own head.
Sorry the atheist doesn't have a head. An atheist, is the head.
Few deniers, realise.
They believed in the god they now deny and reject, you know, the one made out of straw.
What does reading the Bible, have to do with believing in God?
Have you stopped pooping in your neighbours garden?
It seems like evasion to the atheist, because the atheist only sees it from his own point of view. Just like you.
Next time you decide to take a dump in your neighbours garden, bring a doggy-poop bag.
Jan.
That's a faulty generalization. It doesn't apply to all atheists and it also doesn't apply to only atheists.
Write4U
Valued Senior Member
However it does apply to all "believers".
Atheists who believe that are simply unphilosophical dullards. You can't have a world view without values.
Granted, one can talk about a certain world view being broader or superior than another .... but establishing it as such certainly requires more than bluster.
DaveC426913
Valued Senior Member
Dude that is seriously bigoted. You have crossed a line here.
Admitting that you alter your behavior - in a business context - based on someone's faith is reprehensible.
That's how skinheads talk about Jews.