Are you an atheist?

[Alisa]

First, religion does tend to be dogmatic by design. It is an unwavering belief in something. Second, that is religion you are addressing, not a belief in God. For example, Intelligent Design is a theory put forth by those that believe in God. It begins with the idea that God created the Universe. However, it concedes that the world is ever changing and has evolved.

Yes, the creators of the intelligent design "theory" did their best to make their dogma look reasonable, but as you said, it is still dogmatic.

At times I think that (some) atheists are not always people who dismiss the idea that God exists and are truly set against religion. Taking the position that you dismiss theism does not make it your job to destroy or denounce it. When you go to that level, you are taking a position and spreading a belief. To merely reject the idea of God would mean that you have nothing at stake and could care less what others believe.

Why is it that those who believe are entitled to spread their beliefs, but those who don't are supposed to shut up and stay out of it? I don't believe that anybody has the right to tell anybody else what to believe. In fact that is the main reason that I feel so strongly that religion is a force for evil in this world - because it's most basic purpose is to tell people what to believe. Once you can make people believe what you tell them to believe, they will also do what you tell them to do, which is very dangerous. Power corrupts, and all that.

I would like all of you who insist on taking the counter position to me to remove me from the religion argument. I have not once promoted religion as the end-all-be-all. My position is merely that I believe in God and the possibility of His existence exists as well. I believe that he does exist, but I only argue that the possibility is there.

I also agree that the possibility is there, but that the possibility is so small as to be not worth worrying about.

So, I'm not dogmatic in that sense. You are placing all the stereotypes of religion on my shoulder. In fact, you are stereotyping religion in general.

Why do you take everything so personally? I haven't seen a single post on this forum were you were personally attacked, or where anybody steroetyped you, or held you responsible for all religion.

 

[Alc]

Originally Posted by fire2ice
I believe there's a rock over here I could have the same conversation with.

..the reasonable people here who have opposite views (admittedly the majority of people here are reasonable) have made up their minds and don't personally attack colleagues because they have an opposing view.

Isn't implying that someone's got the conversational abilities of a rock a 'personal attack'?

 

[fire2ice]

I hope you didn't pull something with that stretch.

I am alluding to the fact that there is the idea of hell. It is not necessarily that fear that brings them to church every Sunday. However, it is in their mind. That is why they try so hard to convert people. Not so that they will believe what they believe, but so that they will not be left behind.

Most people go to church to share ideas and be part of a community. Some churches are more brimstone and fire than others. Some are more cult-like than others. However, they are typically far from it.

By the way, being part of a cult because you fear they may harm you child is not the same as going to church in order to avoid eternal damnation. You don't have to believe in the cult to continue going; you just need to fear the harm. Church always remains a choice.

Quit trying to find justification for your position in my words. In addition, stop picking and chosing what you will and won't address. In debate, any point not countered is automatically conceded. Thus, by my account, you agree with a lot of what I've said. It is easy to nit-pick anything someone says, especially if you pick and choose what you address.

You are aluding to the fact that many go to church for fear of hell in the after life. Seems to me that religion in general is quite similar to a cult - fear (whether it is fear of consequences in this life or fear of hell) is the motivation either way.

 

[fire2ice]

I didn't want to get caught up in this either. Perhaps I'm just looking for others to show they are reasonable as well. I certainly am not looking for Alisa to change her mind. What I'm hoping for is that someone will say: "That makes sense. It isn't what I personally believe, but it's not crazy witch talk either."

I'm glad to see that a reasonable mind pops up here and there. Atheism isn't an evil and I'm not out to eradicate it. In fact, my younger brother is an atheist and he actually can form well thought out ideas that make me think about what he is saying as opposed to just telling me why I'm wrong. Of course, it is a personal choice for us all and God bless everyone for the choices they make.

I can't believe I've been sucked into this hell-hole of a thread again.

Your statements are the exact sentiment I had which caused me to abandon it before. It is truly pointless to argue with people who just want you to be wrong. And the reasonable people here who have opposite views (admittedly the majority of people here are reasonable) have made up their minds and don't personally attack colleagues because they have an opposing view.

Just use ignore on the unreasonable (aka personally abusive) ones (or one) and everything else just falls in place.

 

[Alisa]

I am alluding to the fact that there is the idea of hell. It is not necessarily that fear that brings them to church every Sunday. However, it is in their mind. That is why they try so hard to convert people. Not so that they will believe what they believe, but so that they will not be left behind.

This of it this way. Say you wanted to convince a lot of people to believe what you are telling them to believe. What would be an effective method for convincing them, given that what you want them to believe doesn't make any sense. Hmmm, I know, Fear! Imagine the worst scariest place imaginable, then describe it in gory detail, then tell people that if they don't believe what you tell them, they are going to spend ETERNITY there. Makes sense to me.

By the way, being part of a cult because you fear they may harm you child is not the same as going to church in order to avoid eternal damnation. You don't have to believe in the cult to continue going; you just need to fear the harm. Church always remains a choice.

What is the difference? Fear is fear. Fear is a very good method of controlling people, that is why torture is so effective - fear of pain.
If you tell a young child, a child that wants nothing more than to please adults and imitate adults, that he is going to burn in hell unless he believes what you are telling him, how is that a choice? I personally know people that have left the mormon and catholic churches after DECADES because that is how long it took them to realize that hell was just a control mechanism. However, the trauma inflicted upon these people as children was so severe that to this day they have to fight off their fear of hell. It ought to be a crime, just as cults are.

Quit trying to find justification for your position in my words. In addition, stop picking and chosing what you will and won't address. In debate, any point not countered is automatically conceded. Thus, by my account, you agree with a lot of what I've said. It is easy to nit-pick anything someone says, especially if you pick and choose what you address.

So you concede that the possibility that god exists is so small that it is not worth worrying about?

 

[Alisa]

What I'm hoping for is that someone will say: "That makes sense. It isn't what I personally believe, but it's not crazy witch talk either."

Wouldn't be much of a discussion, would it?

 

[fire2ice]

This is one of your standard, demeaning replies. "That's cute" is about as dismissive and ignorant as you can get.

Thats cute. Could you define unscientific evidence for me please?

Unscientific evidence is evidence that is not supported scientifically. See, that's a demeaning, dismissive response. Someone can have a personal experience and it can't be scientifically proven. Science can't take measurements and is unable to recreate the event. Thus, it cannot be supported scientifically. However, science cannot prove that the experience never occurred either.

By the way, God is a personal experience, so that is the only way His presence will ever be known. He's not going to take out a billboard sign or show up to the next Hollywood premiere and stand next to Jessica Alba (who by the way proves there is a God...LOL).

All I have ever said is that 1. There is no proof that god exists and 2. It is extremely unlikely that he exists. I have never said there is no possibility that he exists.

If you haven't said those words specifically (I'm not going to check), then the implication has been in bold (non-existent) letters. This is a strong statement on my part as I have put out from day one that I'm arguing the possibility of God AND stating my belief in Him. You have been arguing with me vigorously that I am wrong to even think that God exists!

The door is not closed in my mind either, but given the two options, I choose the one that is plausible, while you choose the one that is fantastical. You are not wrong for thinking the way you do, I just don't agree, which is why we are having this discussion.

This is where I get upset with the discussion. By definition, you are stating that my belief has no plausibility. Why is it that so many choose the charged words such as fantastical, magical, mythical, and such? People that have been arrested are said to have allegedly committed a crime so as not to outright call them guilty. However, time and time again people choose these words to demean those that have a belief is something greater than themselves.

We don't believe in fairies or the Easter Bunny. It is a belief that we are here for a reason, not just randomly existing. Please try to show a little more tact in the future. I know that if I started saying things like that I would be faced by a pack of rabid posters telling me how wrong I am for behaving so.

Wow, did god create magical talking rocks that don't believe in him too? I've never seen one of those before.

Yes. Magical talking rocks were created by God and then after being stepped on for all of these years they lost faith in Him. My, I do so enjoy these intellectual jaunts.

 

[Rich]

Man may create many atrocities, often due to religious differences, but he cannot control the weather, he cannot control Tsunami, whereas we are told that Jesus walked on water and stilled the waves, so why is God credited with all the good things but none of the bad?

Brian

Yes, and God said to Abraham kill me a son
Abe said, God where do you want this killing done,
God said, that way down on highway 61

 

[fire2ice]

It was a sarcastic statement implying that the conversation has the same effect as talking to a rock.

Of course, sarcasm and humor only have meaning when the masses agree with you. Right?

Originally Posted by fire2ice
I believe there's a rock over here I could have the same conversation with.

Isn't implying that someone's got the conversational abilities of a rock a 'personal attack'?

 

[Rich]

Faith in the existence of God.

Well make up your mind, one minute you want to give god credit and the next you state he has nothing to do with it............

 

[Alisa]

This is one of your standard, demeaning replies. "That's cute" is about as dismissive and ignorant as you can get.

So I should have called you a rock instead?

Unscientific evidence is evidence that is not supported scientifically. See, that's a demeaning, dismissive response. Someone can have a personal experience and it can't be scientifically proven. Science can't take measurements and is unable to recreate the event. Thus, it cannot be supported scientifically. However, science cannot prove that the experience never occurred either. By the way, God is a personal experience, so that is the only way His presence will ever be known. He's not going to take out a billboard sign or show up to the next Hollywood premiere and stand next to Jessica Alba (who by the way proves there is a God...LOL

Someone CAN have a personal experience that can't be proven, absolutely. That is why there are people who have been abducted by aliens, who see ghosts, who talk to dead people, etc., etc., meanwhile, most people think those people are crazy, deluded, and/or confused. The only difference between those people and religious people is that there are so many people who share a single delusion that it has become unacceptable to question their "experience".

If you want to say that god is a personal experience, then you are essentially saying that god is in your head, which I agree is the most likely place for him to exist.

But that has nothing to do with whether or not he actually exists in the world outside your head.

This is where I get upset with the discussion. By definition, you are stating that my belief has no plausibility.

You hit the nail on the head. I believe the existence of god is implausible.

Why is it that so many choose the charged words such as fantastical, magical, mythical, and such?

Are you also opposed to the characterization of the tooth fairy as a magical creature?

We don't believe in fairies or the Easter Bunny. It is a belief that we are here for a reason, not just randomly existing.

I don't think we are "just randomly existing". I think it was a great stroke of luck that the right conditions existed and lightning struck or however it happened and life was created. I think it is wonderous that all life on earth then proceeded to evolve in all its beauty and complexity, and I appreciate it every day.

Please try to show a little more tact in the future. I know that if I started saying things like that I would be faced by a pack of rabid posters telling me how wrong I am for behaving so

 

[fire2ice]

Okay. I've been wrong all along. There is no God and I'm such a fool. You win. Yay for you!!!!! (Please note the sarcasm for those of you still having difficulty grasping the idea).

I'm done. It's like talking to a teenager. Pointless. There may be something worthwhile, but overall, pointless.

Besides, this thread is not much of a discussion when 90% of the posts are from atheists and the cherry-picking of ideas runs rampant. I could make many valid points and few would ever be acknowledged as the idea here is to tell me how I'm wrong in every way and not to concede that there is even a hint of possibility in anything I say. I might as well go pound sand. In fact, it sounds a lot more interesting.

Have fun bickering amongst yourselves. Hopefully you'll solve all of the world's problems while you're at it since it seems that all of the great minds are here.

 

[dan-cat]

I've noted a lack of any evidence and so have been unable to weigh that non-existent evidence against anything. I haven't done nothing, I have been unable to do anything.


I wasn't talking about that subject. I was referring to my way of thinking about anything. At present, in order for me to believe something's true, I need to see some evidence of it. Belief in god would require me to change that way of thinking.

I'm a little concerned with this requirement of yours. Surely you don't have to require proof of everything before you believe in the possibility of it. Where would ingenuity come from otherwise?

The idea of a magical being creating everything is so far-fetched to me that it doesn't need any detailed thinking about.

Then don't worry about it. Sit back and enjoy the ride. To be honest I think I'm going to join you in a bit.

 

[Alisa]

Okay. I've been wrong all along. There is no God and I'm such a fool. You win. Yay for you!!!!! (Please note the sarcasm for those of you still having difficulty grasping the idea).

I'm done. It's like talking to a teenager. Pointless. There may be something worthwhile, but overall, pointless.

Besides, this thread is not much of a discussion when 90% of the posts are from atheists and the cherry-picking of ideas runs rampant. I could make many valid points and few would ever be acknowledged as the idea here is to tell me how I'm wrong in every way and not to concede that there is even a hint of possibility in anything I say. I might as well go pound sand. In fact, it sounds a lot more interesting.

Have fun bickering amongst yourselves. Hopefully you'll solve all of the world's problems while you're at it since it seems that all of the great minds are here.

Anytime you want to come back and actually respond to the points I and others have made, you are welcome to, although I get the feeling that discussion boards aren't really for you. Anyway, it's been fun.

 

[Alc]

Okay. I've been wrong all along. There is no God and I'm such a fool. You win. Yay for you!!!!! (Please note the sarcasm for those of you still having difficulty grasping the idea).

I'm done. It's like talking to a teenager. Pointless. There may be something worthwhile, but overall, pointless.

Besides, this thread is not much of a discussion when 90% of the posts are from atheists and the cherry-picking of ideas runs rampant. I could make many valid points and few would ever be acknowledged as the idea here is to tell me how I'm wrong in every way and not to concede that there is even a hint of possibility in anything I say. I might as well go pound sand. In fact, it sounds a lot more interesting.

Have fun bickering amongst yourselves. Hopefully you'll solve all of the world's problems while you're at it since it seems that all of the great minds are here.

...and with that I'm taking my ball and going home. If you won't play my way, I'm not going to play at all.

 

[Alisa]

I'm a little concerned with this requirement of yours. Surely you don't have to require proof of everything before you believe in the possibility of it. Where would ingenuity come from otherwise?

I don't know about Alc, but I don't require proof of everything before I believe it is possible, but I do require at least a smidgen of evidence before I believe something is plausible or probable. Like I said before, there could very well be a flying spaghetti monster out there RIGHT NOW. Doesn't mean I spend my time worrying about pleasing him.

 

[dan-cat]

Have fun bickering amongst yourselves. Hopefully you'll solve all of the world's problems while you're at it since it seems that all of the great minds are here.

You'll be back ...

 

[Alisa]

You'll be back ...

There should be an Access Forums anonymous counseling group or something for those of us that can't seem resist the lure of anonymous arguing.

 

[dan-cat]

There should be an Access Forums anonymous counseling group or something for those of us that can't seem resist the lure of anonymous arguing.

One drawback of atheism that you can't deny is that you'll never get to say "I told you so"

 

[Alc]

I'm a little concerned with this requirement of yours. Surely you don't have to require proof of everything before you believe in the possibility of it. Where would ingenuity come from otherwise?

Not at all.

As the rest of that post explained, some things I take for granted as being true/false. I've never tried flying unaided, but I'm quite happy to assume that if I jumped off my roof, I'd regret it (perhaps briefly).

I do require that something be at least plausible before I believe in it e.g. I don't discount the posibility of extraterrestrial life. God, to my mind, is so far outside the realm of plausibility that we may as well be talking unicorns, ghosts, and the like.