CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
GENEVA (Reuters) - Atheists and other religious skeptics suffer persecution or discrimination in many parts of the world and in at least seven nations can be executed if their beliefs become known, according to a report issued on Monday. The study, from the International Humanist and Ethical Union (IHEU), showed that "unbelievers" in Islamic countries face the most severe - sometimes brutal - treatment at the hands of the state and adherents of the official religion. ...
Islam is extremely intolerant it's against everything, Human rights, freedom of speech,music, science, education, women, any other religion... Atheists are just one of many things that bugs them.
Maybe Atheists should just create their own religion. They could make Atheism their religion. Or..., if it's too hard to create your own religion, they should just pick an existing religion and be done with it. Then all this persecution will go away ;)
The minimum length for an argument is 50 characters. The purpose of this restriction is to cut down on the amount of dumb jokes, so we can keep the quality of debate and discourse as high as possible
At one time, these things were pretty rational. It wasn't like people sat around and tried to be irrational. They lacked the perspectives that we enjoy today. And we lack the perspectives of the future.
Magic? I love magic. Magic must be believed. And if you have ever had a magic moment, you won't trade it for all the rationality in the world. Christmas can be magic. Love can be magic. Magic is when more then what you expected happens. You can explain it away as luck or coincidence, but magic makes it so much more cool.
Dogma? There are "objects" in our reality that aren't "physical." Marriage, for example. It's not a real thing. It is an imaginary thing. Kindness, in spite of personal feelings, isn't natural. But if we ripped the face of someone every time we wanted to. . . . we would live a faceless world. Dogma is the hammering home of certain unnatural principles that provide a benefit to the community. The alphabet is dogma. The dictionary is dogma. Dogma is ideas and principles that man has discovered and want to pass down.
Granted, some methods are a little out dated, but the idea is still there. Not that long ago, the majority of people couldn't read or write. They only had what was called the "Oral Tradition." Some Native American still use this method. It's actually quite effective. They talk about the Spanish invasion as a recent event. "Priests" are chosen as young children and dedicated to the rehearsing and reciting of the Oral History. They become the "living history book."
Talking Animals? Animals have language. Some people claim that they can understand them. The Dog Whisper can pretty much understand exactly what a dog is a saying. So if he told me, "the dog is telling me that you're a mean and cruel person, I would be believe him. I have a grand daughter who randomly has the ability to hear animals. One day her mother was feeding the dog and he looked at and barked. If freaked my grand daughter out, because she literally heard him saying, "I want the squishy food." It sounds like what a dog would say. I believe her.
Why can't the Bible and Quran have mistakes. They are written by humans with the understanding and technology of the day. The idea that the world was flat in almost every book that mentions the shape of earth before 1490. Evidence has been found much later that there were people that knew that it was round. But those people were not in the lime light of the day.
A contract is an object. It can be taken to court, even if just verbally. Alphabet is dogma. It is no different then the bible. It is a set of symbols accepted and embraced to communicate ideas and belief.
Dogs do talk. Maybe not English, or French, but at least Russian. Poodle can understand up to 160 signals. They can also communicate with barking, growls, licking, jumping, whining, whimpering, paw gestures, tail wagging, sitting, belly exposure, scratching, pooping, pissing, refusal, dominating, leg humping, and many others, depending up the situation. And you could say that it isn't talking, but then sign language really isn't talking, nor are Internet Packets really considered communication.
Oral histories, were at one time, awesome. People don't put the effort into them as they once did. And as I said, anthropologists studying some Southern American Indians were super impressed with their ability to relate history. They new many about history that we failed to capture.
You can call me a liar or idiot, but if you don't know which, maybe you don't know as much as you think you do.
If you can debunk me. . . . do it. So far you have just throw shallow cliches at me. You haven't really thought about it. You haven't even challenged me yet.
Basically, I'm saying that there are tangible and intangible objects. A marriage is an intangible object. I'm not sure if you are agreeing with me or arguing with me. I said that a marriage IS AN OBJECT that could be taken to court. I know about the business around it.
Oral History was awesome. Just because something written on paper doesn't make it more true, nor that the person who "rewrote" did it right.
Words sent by Internet Packets are intangible. The packets are sort of tangible, as they can be measured, but the words are broken down into forms that make them intangible until they come back out the other side.
In spite of what the followers of the Bible might think, they were written by men and maybe women. The Bible states that the Kingdom of God is within. I understand what this means. But I also understand that what was written on the papers also come from with the person. If the person writing the book didn't have a basic understanding of physics, then it wouldn't necessarily be in the book.
God is the All Knowing Consciousness that exists deep within the human consciousness, (and all consciousness) but that doesn't a prophet can reach that far down. I have deep and seen some cool stuff, but I would never claim to have information directly from God.
However, I have been HIGH in the sense of mediation where I was floating over the world, so to speak, but I'm never down drugs.
So, until you take the time to read and comprehend what I am at least TRYING to say . . . . try to be nice.
---"Words sent by Internet Packets are intangible. The packets are sort of tangible, as they can be measured, but the words are broken down into forms that make them intangible until they come back out the other side."---
According to that logic talking is not a form of communication because words are made from letters and then are made from meaningless sounds.
---"God is the All Knowing Consciousness that exists deep within the human consciousness, (and all consciousness) but that doesn't a prophet can reach that far down. I have deep and seen some cool stuff, but I would never claim to have information directly from God."---
Simply means nothing.
As I said before, you do not argue, just blabbing.
The world isn't round. It only seems round. If you step in up and couple of notches into higher math and dimensions, it's actually some sort of crazy figure 8 shape, and that if we knew how, we could step from here China in a single step. Three dimensions is taken for granted for most humans. But there are a few people who can only see in two dimensions. Science is taking that a possible forth dimension that is a right here with us but we cannot see it.
I am aware of about 12 dimensions, but Eisenstein says that there about 25. I don't know about those.
But anyway, how we see that world now is no different then how the people saw the world 1000 years ago. They are saw it as flat, we see it as round. We are wrong.
Good. In spite of many Atheists claiming that they do not believe and even claim that "believing" isn't real, they are wrong.
Before you can "know something" you have to believe something. You can decide not believe in God and more or less not care, but when exposed to the concept of God, you must decided your position.
Your position is based on what you believe. The concept of God cannot be proved or disproved. God is an invisible creator. To some people, the word "invisible" pretty much ties it up. You might as well believe in invisible dragons or unicorns (I do) which to Atheists isn't true. They might like them for art and such but they don't believe in them.
To me, if it has influence, it is a real. Even if unicorns and dragons are not real, their symbols and image have great influence. Their image and spirit (invisible power) influence people everywhere. Same with Santa Claus. Saint Nick might have died long ago, but his spirit is one of the powerful influences in the world.
My point is: Atheism is a faith. It's a belief that defies our belief in God and other invisible powers. If there wasn't a faith in God, Atheism would disappear, too. Atheism can only exist, because God Believers exist.
Almost every religion on the planet has gone through a period where it was unpopular and unaccepted. Persecution challenged their claims and made them define their reasons for their belief or disbelief. Or at least, harden their faith.
I'm OK with this. I come from an unpopular faith. Persecution helped make us strong. I know that Atheists are persecuted and often the innocent are hurt. In one example here in the US, back before God was taken out of the school, a 2nd grader atheist was made to stand up and give the opening prayer. The teacher forced the child to do it but the kid was just crying. He he didn't know how and couldn't imagine what he was praying to and felt totally humiliated and violated.
Of course, stories like this is what go God kicked out of school.
Anyway, I say persecute them. No one should be allowed to have beliefs that don't get challenged. That is a why a lot of people hide their beliefs. For example: Saying that I believe in dragons and unicorns usually gets a lot of people on my case. But I can take it. I can defend my position better them most of them.
Belief is an absolute. Sort of like absolute numbers. [-1] = 1
I sat here a couple of minutes trying to think of something that I "don't believe." I can't. Purple elephants flying space on a skate boards. I don't believe it. Even though that is the first time I every considered that idea, I now believe that such a thing is impossible. I cannot really prove it, but from what I know and believe, it is a impossible.
Disbelief in the existence of a supreme beings can be reworded to say. A belief that supreme beings do not exist.
Disbelief is not the opposite of belief. Disbelief exists in two forms. a) The belief that the stated belief is wrong. b) The response to an event the defying what was one believed.
You cannot "disbelieve" someone. You can believe that it is wrong, but that position comes from your other beliefs. You can believe that there is a no God, but that is because you have based your beliefs on what you see and experience. Just like everyone else.
When something happens and you are "shocked with disbelief" this really just surprise. Maybe you came in and found your cat walking on the ceiling and you simply never thought that was possible, with gravity and all. You can call it "disbelief." Or could call it "wonder." Or you could call it, "what the hell?"
But in this case, you are disbelieving because it conflicts with your other beliefs. You believe that cats should only walk on walls and floors. So see the opposite, might cause a moment of "disbelief" but you would then either have to deny, or believe.
Denial isn't exactly the same of unbelief. Many things are true, that we choose to deny.
If belief in a premise is [1], lack of belief in said premise is 0. It is only [-1] if you claim the premise is definitively or demonstrably false. Belief may be an absolute, but lack of belief is not. If I were called to a jury and told to follow to "innocent until proven guilty" principle, I have only 2 options to choose from (guilty or not guilty) but 3 actual decisions I can make based on the evidence: a) guilty, b) not guilty, c) as of now I do not have enough evidence to assign guilt. Because there is not an option for c), I am forced to side with b) since a) is a positive claim who's burden of proof has not been met to my satisfaction.
So when given a bipartite spectrum of theist (belief) or atheist (lack of belief), I have to answer atheist, but it my case it is not because I claim that I know God does not exist, but because I have never seen the burden of proof properly satisfied.
I understand what you are saying. . . . to some degree. Maybe you are just to smarter for me.
As I said (I think in the previous post) that disbelief is a temporary situation. We are sometimes exposed to situations that challenge what we think. But once exposed, we must process the information and take a position. In your option c) this is happening. You don't have enough evidence to decide, but at some point, you automatically begin to decide. Even if you cannot come to a final conclusion, you use what evidence you have and develop a bias.
No belief cannot really exist. In my effort to make my point, please follow me.
Let's say that I think that Tree Bark is the One True God but you don't know that. In this case, you don't believe that Tree Bark is the One True God because you have never been confronted with that idea. But your lack of belief isn't a choice, it's simply that you haven't thought it or had to make a decision about it. So you might have "no belief" in this matter, but your lack of belief is "nothing." It doesn't exist.
However, say that I now claim that Tree Bark is the One True God. You read my statement, and say, "Bull Shit." Your "lack of belief" is now a "thing." You have processed the information and decided to "not believe." But that lack of belief isn't a "nothing" anymore. It's a something.
When you were unaware of the thing, you didn't have any belief one way or the other. But now you do.
If I found a feral child that was raised by the wolves, I could honestly believe that he/she had no belief in God. He/She had never been exposed to the idea.
But in our case. God is the question, belief or disbelief is the answer. Either way, the answer is believed, and since it cannot be proved one way or another, the answer must remain a belief.
the inability or refusal to believe or to accept something as true.
You will notice there are multiple interpretations from both sources. For instance, in Merriam-Webster's definition one can withhold OR reject belief, whereas dictionary.com says inability OR refusal to accept something as true. Neither source identifies disbelief requiring a strong antagonistic stance (neither say that disbelief of x automatically makes y true). Again, being unconvinced of the truth of God does not automatically require me to believe that God is definitely false. Fact is, neither side has provided suitable evidence for me to personally make a truth claim one way or the other, and I refuse to make a truth claim that I cannot defend.
Am I biased towards God not existing? Not really, but even if I were, a bias wouldn't guarantee a negative stance. I am biased towards sushi, but just because I generally like sushi very much, does not mean I will like every piece of sushi I put in my mouth, or every restaurant I eat sushi in.
However, I believe "non-existent" thing doesn't exist.
Sure, things that don't exist....well, they don't exist. My point is that failure to believe in something's existence does not imply that you are certain it does not exist. It simply means you are not convinced at this time. I think it is more logical and wise to withhold judgement until certainty can be assigned, at least if you have the choice.
I'm not sure exactly how to say this. . . . but I am going to try anyway.
To be WITHOUT BELIEF rather then BELIEVE THE OPPOSITE sort of changing the picture.
Say that an Atheist is WITHOUT belief in God. This is a sort of like saying that an Atheist is a person without an leg. That is he/she is somehow broken or lacking.
To say that an Atheist is a person that a has an OPPOSITE belief, that there is in fact no God, this make the person more whole.
To simply say that he is without a belief, makes it sound that a belief in God in the normal that an Atheist missing it.
I'm weird, I know. But when someone says something that I don't believe, I usually have a reason why. I believe that somewhere out there in the universe is intelligent life. But when someone tells they were kidnapped by aliens I don't believe it. But it's not that I am simply without believe. I believe that if an alien race could make it across all that space, why would they want to study us?
I remember the movie Sign with Mel Gibson. A alien race came across space to eat us, but water was is poisonous to them? We are 80% water. So I don't just disbelieve I believe the opposite. How did an alien race develop a taste for humanity?
My point is: I don't see Atheism as being "without" rather to holding a opposing view. But I submit to Webster and accept my defeat on this point.
To be WITHOUT BELIEF rather then BELIEVE THE OPPOSITE sort of changing the picture.
Well, yeah, I am trying to change your picture about this. This is a debate site after all :)
Say that an Atheist is WITHOUT belief in God. This is a sort of like saying that an Atheist is a person without an leg. That is he/she is somehow broken or lacking.
I disagree, I think it is more like saying somebody is without a cell phone, or a computer, or a car. See, legs are something that virtually all of us are born with. Its in our DNA, it is part of the definition of what it means to be human. A belief in God is not something that we are born with. Most of us are given it at some point in upbringing, but whether we maintain it throughout our lives comes from within us. It is an addition that some have and some don't. So more like a phone or anything else we may acquire. Also, legs don't grow back, but faith and religiosity might.
To simply say that he is without a belief, makes it sound that a belief in God in the normal that an Atheist missing it.
Not to me. It is the default position. Plus it is made cognitively, so its not like how a chronically depressed person is missing serotonin.
As far as your alien comparison, particularly in the case of "Signs", your thought process is pretty similar to mine, until we draw different epistemological conclusions. Based on what you know, it seems highly unlikely that a form of life could evolve for which water is poisonous, so it is hard for you to imagine something like that as being anything but fiction. The thing is though, we are so far only familiar with life on our planet and how it developed here. If there are other life forms on planets with radically different environments who evolved vastly different biologies as a result, it could potentially be possible that somewhere in the vastness of space is a life form that can't handle water. I agree with you that it is unlikely, unrealistic...but until it could be demonstrated to me that it would be downright impossible for life to form without water, I wouldn't rule it out entirely. But if someone wanted me to believe it, they would have to demonstrate it beyond a shadow of a doubt.
I can see what you are saying about the cell phone or car. Not that I would really want to be without either.
My position is a really to difficult to defend in the presents of should wisdom. I still have my reasons for believing what I do. But since the basic of God cannot be proven or dis-proven it's sort of pointless to go the rounds on this.
The original issues persecution. I guess I say go for it. Even if they are without faith, it's part of the human experience.
But since the basic of God cannot be proven or dis-proven
Which is pretty much why I don't have a belief on either side. For me, I mostly just try to challenge faulty thinking or incorrect facts, and all of the evidence for God I have ever encountered fits into those categories. But I'm not opposed to challenging the logic of those who claim there is definitely no God either.
The original issues persecution. I guess I say go for it. Even if they are without faith, it's part of the human experience.
Yeah. I don't really think anybody should be persecuted (at least in regards to their position on God or religion), but every group is or has been at some point. Like you said, its part of the human experience, and as long as it doesn't lead to fatality, it might make one stronger.
Before you can "know something" you have to believe something. You can decide not believe in God and more or less not care, but when exposed to the concept of God, you must decided your position.
Religion is the belief, Atheism is the disbelief.
We are not born to think about God in our default settings. He is an idea that is added on later.
We are created/born with a sense of wonder. Because many of the things we see we don't understand, even if you erased God from the culture, it would return.
IMHO, Atheists and Believers alike make a common mistake. They ask the question, "Does God Exist?" There isn't evidence of this either way. I ask the question, "Why does God exist?" This is sort of like asking, "Why does Santa Claus exist?" We all know the story about Ole Saint Nick and how he became of the icon as the Jolly Big Man. We can trace the events and history as to why Santa Claus is what he is today.
We can sort of do the same with God. There is evidence that God started around the idea of Death. As humans grew more aware, they began to wonder what happened to their loved ones. So they started to make up stories about where their mother and father went.
Scientists have concluded from the evidence that religion started this way. However, there is one thing that many anthropologists haven't considered, (at least in my mind) and that is the Near Death Experience (NDE). I had a NDE when I was young. I was dead for a little while in a car crash. My sister didn't come back. While I was "out of body" I saw and did many amazing and crazy things. I won't get into that.
NDE's are not unique. There are very many consistent elements in them. They happen in all cultures, and I don't suppose that it is a new phenomenon. When I was "out" I saw things that changed me forever, made me question things in a whole new way.
Evidence is only as good as the question it tries to solve. I believe in God because I ask different questions, not because I'm stupid and accept weak evidence.
People have poo-pooed and tried to explain them as a "dying brain" event. Because of my question, this evidence has not been an acceptable answer.
People often say, "Man created God." I say, "I agree, but who created Man?"
I know that God is an creation of Man. However, God is also man's effort to understand the invisible powers of the universe.
Math and science are striving to do the same thing but remove that idea that somehow perfect and ultimate truth is somehow conscious. Many of those that have NDE return with an impression that there is life after mortality and that somehow it's even more important then life here.
One of the fundamental results of NDE's is that what you believe has a MAJOR effect on your reality in the next step of life. NDE's become one of the major backbones or common threads between all religions. Be kind, be honorable, do the best you can, etc.
I could get into this stuff way to deep. My point is, even though God is not part of the "Normal" human experience, it does become part of the adventure of being human. You don't have to believe in God. But I find it totally exciting.
But as I've said before, God is an idea that is added on later...
When you are born with a blank mind, God is not included in that blankness.
We all know the story about Ole Saint Nick and how he became of the icon as the Jolly Big Man. We can trace the events and history as to why Santa Claus is what he is today.
But he is a story, added on later into a Child's mind.
We can sort of do the same with God. There is evidence that God started around the idea of Death. As humans grew more aware, they began to wonder what happened to their loved ones. So they started to make up stories about where their mother and father went.
But they had to create ideas in the first place about what happened, which could lead to flawed mythological beliefs.
While I was "out of body" I saw and did many amazing and crazy things. I won't get into that.
NDE's are not unique. There are very many consistent elements in them. They happen in all cultures, and I don't suppose that it is a new phenomenon. When I was "out" I saw things that changed me forever, made me question things in a whole new way.
I'm sorry but it's not possible to logically debate personal experiences, but what I can say is, people who experience this, see things that preference their own lives and beliefs. The same way dreams do.
Evidence is only as good as the question it tries to solve. I believe in God because I ask different questions, not because I'm stupid and accept weak evidence.
Which God? You better pray it's not the Christian/Islamic God, because they can be decimated by their own scriptures.
People often say, "Man created God." I say, "I agree, but who created Man?"
"Man created God" was said way after the question "who created Man?"
Of course, this statement leans more towards the Christian God, but I don't see why you see many people say it when most of the world is religious.
Man was 'created' from the cells of early life. (I suggest reading into Biology/Evolution.)
These cells are made of non-living elemental particles, that can come from no where else but from the stars and their super novas. They forge elemental particles with the heat inside of them, and disperse them around the universe. This is what planets use to form, and is the same way how the Earth formed. How these cells learned how to consume, excrete, move and duplicate is still in speculation, but a God teaching a cell how to poop seems odd.
Here's a question for your question; who created God?
I know that God is an creation of Man. However, God is also man's effort to understand the invisible powers of the universe.
So is mythology. But we can't trust these man-made ideologies.
Are you Agnostic?
I could get into this stuff way to deep. My point is, even though God is not part of the "Normal" human experience, it does become part of the adventure of being human. You don't have to believe in God. But I find it totally exciting.
I stay open minded for a creator, but not one that would fit the image of any ideologies today. It's not human, but not alien. It is ultra-neutral. Basically it's some kind of energy.
Since all matter is but super-condensed energy, It kinda makes sense to me that it is.
Or maybe the real God is the law of existence. Gravity, things having opposites so they don't contradict existence and such.
I'm sort of Mormon. I grew up in the FLDS Mormon Cult.
I would be burned at the stake by now if it were the good ole days.
My God, simply stated. Father God is a Pure Mathematical Truth that lives in the Void outside of the Universe. Mother God is the Consciousness that is created by Truth. Father God cannot change, for truth is truth. Mother God can chose to follow the truth or ignore the truth. The Only Begotten Sun of God is the creation made by Mother God when she chose to ignore some parts of the truth.
To me, the universe is a purely consciousness based and relies upon conscious relationships, thus making all things relative. God somehow divided the zero and created matter and anti-matter.
Truth is truth, no matter where you go, nor how small you go, or how big you go, or what dimension you go to. It is my belief that somehow the mathematical truth creates consciousness down to the infinitely small, because truth does not take up space.
But because God is without form, the only way to manifest the truth is to create things that can "follow the truth." So for example: Without matter, the Law of Gravity could never be manifested. But God is also consciousness and so to manifest the many complexities of consciousness God is developing and creating form in matter that is capable of expressing that consciousness.
They manifest in beings. However, the metaphor is also part of the magic.
Again, I am a religious being.
I believe in universes without end and a being great enough to know them all.
I do not believe that matter is infinite, unto it's self.
The only thing can be both eternal and infinite is a consciousness based on perfect mathematical truth that exist everywhere, always, and forever.
In a sense, God Consciousness is like stem cells. In the beginning, it can be anything and everything. But once set down a path of manifestation, it's options become more and more limited as it takes solid form.
The consciousness seeks to recreate it's self in matter. An infinitely aware being cannot experience certain things, such as the fear of death, romantic love, a child's love for its mother, etc.
The metaphors are real beings, in the sense that they mathematical realities, even if they don't have form. In my belief, consciousness does not have to be in form. It can exist in pure mathematical form
No one is really born with a blank mind. There is a lot of genetic knowledge. Instincts and such.
Stories are important. Without stories, we are just bald apes. Stories give us depth, spirit, passion, and things to look up to.
Even if God wasn't real, (which I really don't care either way) I find great joy in my pursuit of him.
Why does a man dig in the dirt for bones of the past?
Why do we keep the stories of heroes alive?
We are multidimensional beings, we reach into the past and into the future, and we are all of it. We reach into the ethers for spirits to inspire us that could be metaphorical or living beings. If we are stimulated by things that are not real, are we not still stimulated? And does not belief make something more stimulating?
I believe that my soul is a destroying angel, in the form of a dragon, from a planet with mountains of emerald. While doing past life regression, I saw myself as King Arthur.
Do I really believe that shit. . . . not really, but I keep the imagines in my mind. It say something about who I am. Do I think that I was really King Arthur, of course not. But he represents a part of who I am, who I strive to be.
Why do I need to trust anything, really? If there isn't a God, what do I have to lose?
I don't believe God is neutral, as someone here said.
Truth is functional. Pure mathematical reality only gets more and more functional. Good and Evil are illusions that man has made up.
We are all good. Evil is merely our denial. The personality is merely the Soul's attempt to get what it needs and wants. There are good and bad methods to obtain things. For example: If the soul wants love and sets out to get it, depending on events and challenges can make good or bad decisions. If it hurts someone, the great consciousness that we are all a part of will make sure it is felt by the one causes it. However, the personality will try to deny this. However, the lesson will eventually be learned and the soul returned to the path of goodness.
Anyway, the stories of Hercules, Horus, Osiris, and Jesus who where sons of God that entered the world of the dead and returned for the sake of love are important to us. Does it matter to me if they are real? Not really. The stories, if embraced grant spiritual power to take control over your fear and challenge life like a hero.
And the fear we must face . . . . isn't exactly like playing chicken with a 800lbs man eating tiger. It's the kind that threatens our very identity. The idea that we are really just a part of a larger living organism, more or less like scum on a swamp. The adventure of discovering who we really are . . . . to me is the pursuit of God.
No one is really born with a blank mind. There is a lot of genetic knowledge. Instincts and such.
It's what parents place into a child's mind that becomes what they usually believe. An atheist family would most likely raise an atheist child as much as a religious family would most likely raise a religious child.
(which I really don't care either way) I find great joy in my pursuit of him.
Don't these statements contradict each other?
We are multidimensional beings, we reach into the past and into the future, and we are all of it.
Define "reach".
If we are stimulated by things that are not real, are we not still stimulated? And does not belief make something more stimulating?
Our brain is a wonderful thing. But it is easy to prioritize imagination over reality. Just a simple walk through a mental institute would be enough to demonstrate that. What we see in our imagination is but a byproduct from our advanced brains. Each of our imaginations would contradict each other if placed in a logical realm.
Why do I need to trust anything, really? If there isn't a God, what do I have to lose?
We're all animals, and our purpose is just as unclear as the next dog or bird we come by. The only clear goal we have is to live life, and not waste it, because as any dead animal, it would suck really bad.
I don't believe God is neutral, as someone here said.
Truth is functional. Pure mathematical reality only gets more and more functional. Good and Evil are illusions that man has made up.
If you disagree with him being neutral, why say Good and Evil are illusions? If God isn't neutral, he would have to be Good or Evil or somewhere in between.
I don't believe God is neutral, as someone here said.
If he isn't neutral, why does he make possible for a child to die of a parasitical infection?
I believe he should not be a being, well, just not human, because that would be quite biased to extraterrestrial life. Actually, he shouldn't be anything, he shouldn't even be a he or she, taking into the broad possibility that there could be aliens out there that have 3 different genders to procreate with; or more. If he is a being, then he would have to look like something. But then that would cause all kinds of problems. If he is just a concept of all truths, why add in the detail that he is a being.
Actually, if this creator was a being of benevolence, why make evil things to begin with?
I think I'm straying away from your actual beliefs, but your beliefs just confuse me, since you say you believe that God is the living concept of truth, but is a benevolent thing that must be pursued? Truth is neutral, it doesn't have a holding in morality. It's just a concept without opinion.
We are all good. Evil is merely our denial. The personality is merely the Soul's attempt to get what it needs and wants. There are good and bad methods to obtain things. For example: If the soul wants love and sets out to get it, depending on events and challenges can make good or bad decisions. If it hurts someone, the great consciousness that we are all a part of will make sure it is felt by the one causes it. However, the personality will try to deny this. However, the lesson will eventually be learned and the soul returned to the path of goodness.
I agree, but before you said good and evil were illusions? Although I also agree with that statement, it does confuse with what we do find good and evil.
Good and evil are just intuitions in our brain that tell us what helps our race progress faster, as much as any animal would look after their young because it is "good" or not eat their young because it is "bad".
Anyway, the stories of Hercules, Horus, Osiris, and Jesus who where sons of God that entered the world of the dead and returned for the sake of love are important to us. Does it matter to me if they are real? Not really. The stories, if embraced grant spiritual power to take control over your fear and challenge life like a hero.
Stories are a reflection of life and the lessons we learn from living. We are just following the words "Live and love" but in a dressed up way with magical creatures and powerful demons to capture people's imaginations and possibly scare them to obey. It follows logic all along. Imagination just compels us to dress it up to inspire other people through their imagination.
And the fear we must face . . . . isn't exactly like playing chicken with a 800lbs man eating tiger. It's the kind that threatens our very identity. The idea that we are really just a part of a larger living organism, more or less like scum on a swamp. The adventure of discovering who we really are . . . . to me is the pursuit of God.
Scum on a swamp is life, nonetheless. We originated from it, and our brains just happened to become a much higher order. Although animals such as dolphins, elephants and apes near our highly comprehensive brain, we are still similar to them with the fact that we are animals. We decorate our 'creator' too much as if it was a quest to find him.
"Before you can "know something" you have to believe something." That is so wrong. Religion is belief without evidence. Which is just stupid. Atheism is merely not believing in fairy tales just because somebody told you too.
There is a lot of truth in fairy tales. That is why we use them. You can teach very real lessons with fairy tales, such as love, courage, hope, faithfulness, loyalty, generosity, etc. Just because a story is not based in fact doesn't mean that doesn't have truth in it.
I love fairy tales. Many have awesome lessons in them.
Years ago, people knew fairy tales for what they were. They knew that they were not to be believed as "fact." It has only been more recently that religious crazy folk began to interpret the Bible stories a "literal."
For example: Adam was 930 years old. But if you look at the history, when Adam was alive they were using a lunar calendar. Take 930 years and divide it by 12 and you get 77.5 years. This is believable.
Faith is important. It's worth believing fairy tales to obtain it.
One of the issues that I have with Atheism is that they THINK that they don't believe in fairy tales. History shows us that pretty much no matter what we believe, in 200-300 years it will be silly and wrong. I embrace that and would rather imagine life to be the way I want it to be then submit to some "reality" that somebody decides for me.
Fairy tales are logical statements, dressed up with fairies and demons. You could easily substitute the characters, and the complication of the plot with real life people and issues, it's just that less people would be interested in reading it, since their restless imaginations want to read more things that deviate from the boring reality they face and live in every day.
One of the issues that I have with Atheism is that they THINK that they don't believe in fairy tales. History shows us that pretty much no matter what we believe, in 200-300 years it will be silly and wrong. I embrace that and would rather imagine life to be the way I want it to be then submit to some "reality" that somebody decides for me.
The mistake you have made is that Atheism is not a belief. It's a disbelief. Atheists generally follow what is logically proven.
I don't know how the hell people would find logically proven stuff silly and wrong in the next 300 years...
Good. In spite of many Atheists claiming that they do not believe and even claim that "believing" isn't real, they are wrong.
Before you can "know something" you have to believe something. You can decide not believe in God and more or less not care, but when exposed to the concept of God, you must decided your position.
Your position is based on what you believe. The concept of God cannot be proved or disproved. God is an invisible creator. To some people, the word "invisible" pretty much ties it up. You might as well believe in invisible dragons or unicorns (I do) which to Atheists isn't true. They might like them for art and such but they don't believe in them.
To me, if it has influence, it is a real. Even if unicorns and dragons are not real, their symbols and image have great influence. Their image and spirit (invisible power) influence people everywhere. Same with Santa Claus. Saint Nick might have died long ago, but his spirit is one of the powerful influences in the world.
My point is: Atheism is a faith. It's a belief that defies our belief in God and other invisible powers. If there wasn't a faith in God, Atheism would disappear, too. Atheism can only exist, because God Believers exist.
Almost every religion on the planet has gone through a period where it was unpopular and unaccepted. Persecution challenged their claims and made them define their reasons for their belief or disbelief. Or at least, harden their faith.
I'm OK with this. I come from an unpopular faith. Persecution helped make us strong. I know that Atheists are persecuted and often the innocent are hurt. In one example here in the US, back before God was taken out of the school, a 2nd grader atheist was made to stand up and give the opening prayer. The teacher forced the child to do it but the kid was just crying. He he didn't know how and couldn't imagine what he was praying to and felt totally humiliated and violated.
Of course, stories like this is what go God kicked out of school.
Anyway, I say persecute them. No one should be allowed to have beliefs that don't get challenged. That is a why a lot of people hide their beliefs. For example: Saying that I believe in dragons and unicorns usually gets a lot of people on my case. But I can take it. I can defend my position better them most of them.
There is basically one purpose in life: To get what you want. While this simple statement can be eternally complex, I believe it to be true.
Say that you wake in the morning and want a drink of water. In your mind, you know the path to the drink.
If you are human maybe the path is to the kitchen.
If you are animal maybe the path is to the watering hole, where the lions are waiting for you.
Faith is the belief and knowledge of how to obtain the things you desire. You don't KNOW that kitchen is there (unless you slept in it.) It could have burned up over night. You partner could have taken everything. You could also die of a heart attack on your way there.
But you get up anyway and go to the kitchen to get a drink. That is a faith. You do things that you did in the past to get what you want.
If you want something that you have never had before, you make a plan and set out to make it real. Again, this is faith. Faith is evidence of things not seen.
Everyday, we go to work to prepare for the next day. We need money to buy food, warm the house, etc. At any time, it could all end. Life is dangerous. We put our faith in things that we believe will keep us safe and help us get what we want.
Atheism is no different. It is a direction or redirection of faith to achieve what you want. Many people believe that faith in God will get them what they want. Atheist are saying, "not so." But it's a still a belief.
Some of us "sensitive types" perceive some worlds as real that others do not acknowledge.
For example: The Realm of Possibility.
The Realm of Possibility isn't a physical world, but it is real.
There is only one purpose for evidence which is a help consciousness to make a decision about the "possibilities of truth." Truth can only be truth if consciousness perceives it as so. Consciousness needs "evidence" to perceive or judge something as true. However, evidence is limited to the question. When we look a fire, there might 15 billion things that are true about that fire, however, our only question is: Is it hot?
We seek the evidence, find it, and answer our question. That doesn't mean that we understand all things true about fire.
The "Actuality" of any situation is a what it is. However, how we perceive it is a personal process.
Say that we are starting out on an adventure, the likes of which we have never done before. We have not evidence or proof that we will survive. For consciousness to set out on a quest with no hope of survival or success is just plan stupid.
So our minds enter the Realm of Possibility and we start crunching numbers, experiences, facts, fears, etc, and we come with a "possibility." It isn't real, per-say, and definitely isn't a promise but it is evidence that your chances of survival are pretty good.
This is "evidence of things unseen." You make a decision based upon that evidence. Some people require more solid evidence, or a least think that they do. Everyone makes decisions based on unseen evidence.
If you are going to success in life, you must have faith. Every win or success requires effort based on unseen evidence. I call it "unseen" because the win or success hasn't yet manifested. You hope it will, therefore you put forth the effort. But if you did not have the hope, or the faith, you would not make any effort to create anything.
Just babbling? Seriously, sir, if I was offendable I would be offended. Of course, I am babbling. Aren't we all?
That you require solid evidence just makes your experience . . . . a little more limited.
Ok. When the Wright Brother were working on the their flight machine. Where was their evidence that it would work? There wasn't any. They worked from the evidence they had dreamed up from the Realm of Possibility.
When Edison made a light bulb, where was his evidence? There wasn't any, he also had to work from the realm of possibility. He had to pull a lot of crap out there before he got some to work.
But aside from that. . . . I really don't have to prove anything to you. My point was that I work from "evidence" that is less solid then you. I follow foot prints that you will never see.
Are you more alive then I am? Is you reality any better then mine? Can your evidence override mine? I know about your evidence and find it lacking for the type of questions I ask. If it answers your questions. . . . great.
I ask lot of questions. If the lack of God answered them, I would have gone down that path. But because of my NDE, many of my questions are about the invisible worlds. I am gaining some evidence that might allow my beliefs to cross over into the "non-believer realm" but I don't really care. People can do what they want. But if people have questions. . . . I love to give "my opinion."
My point is: Atheism is a faith. It's a belief that defies our belief in God and other invisible powers. If there wasn't a faith in God, Atheism would disappear, too. Atheism can only exist, because God Believers exist.
Without theists there couldn't really be atheists; without believers there couldn't be unbelievers. That part of your post makes sense. But this doesn't mean that atheists are also believers. Doctors need a constant stream of sick and injured people in order to stay employed; this doesn't mean the doctor is sick or injured.
No atheism is NOT a faith. Please go back to school and try to stay awake this time. Atheism is to religion what baldness is to hair color. Faith is belief without any proof. Atheism is refusing to believe in a fairy tale due to lack of evidence.
That depends on your conception of atheism. Some people refer to all people without god in their lives as atheists; for some, it means actively denying gods existence. There is no universal definition. Personally I think agnosticism king of covers people who don't believe one way or another, and atheism specifically refers to someone who denies the existence of god. So in that context, atheism does require faith (admittedly not as much as religion, but still some) that god doesn't exist because there is no empirical evidence disproving his existence. You don't need that kind of faith to live a godless life; you do need it to make the statement: god doesn't exist.
We are, but so what? Pretty much every group gets persecuted, especially when religion gets to take the mic. Persecution just happens to be something humans are good at.
