by OnTheWayOut 87 Replies latest jw friends
Ah.....
Again you're assuming that atheism is an emotional reaction, rather than an intelligent decision...
I've never run across an atheist who became such, based on emotions...
There seems to have always been a moment of conscious intellectual awakening - a stunning realization based on factual evidence - that caused people to become atheist.
As opposed to the highly emotional feelings frequently behind so many religious conversions...
Why would an omniscient omnipotent omnibenevolent Creator make more than one skin for himself?
Zid, you are assuming I don't think you guys put thought into your beliefs about the existence or non existence of God. What is emotional about deciding there is no god?
There isn't any factual evidence of the non-existence of God. Evidence against God is circumstantial & philosophical at best. There is nothing that proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that there is no god. And I repeat, not all men and women of science are atheists.
I agree that some people have emotional experiences with their spirituality. That doesn't mean that those of us who believe don't put a lot of deep thought into the existence of God. "Evidence" says one thing to you and another to me. The funny thing is, Jehovah never seemed real to me. I didn't pray to him. I felt like he wasn't there. I am so glad to be done with those days.
I am very grateful that I was not raised in the cult.
That doesn't mean that those of us who believe don't put a lot of deep thought into the existence of God. "Evidence" says one thing to you and another to me.
Agreed.
Peace,
Tammy
"What is emotional about deciding there is no god?...." FHN
Most of the time, nothing....
On the other hand, a religious conversion is usually based on very strong emotions.....
"There isn't any factual evidence of the non-existence of God. ..." FHN
face/palm slap....
I've explained it before; I'll explain it again...
The Bronze-Age Middle-Eastern god that you learned to worship from a VERY early age, based SOLELY upon the words of the bible (after all, you weren't studying or being taught about the "holy writings" of the Q'ran or the Talmud or the sacred scrolls of Hinduism or of Buddhism, when you were a kid, were you???), has only been "around" - written about, spoken of, worshipped - for around 4,000 years. The oldest fragments of the bible known of, so far, are only around 3,500 years old, and giving another 500 years for oral tradition... Around 4,000 years, as of the information available today.
There are many "gods" and "goddesses" that were worshipped LONG before the bible's "gods" were "written" of - invented...
Again, that BIZARRE behavior that you - and others - have, of claiming that "somehow" this "god[s]" that was invented by Bronze-Age Middle-Eastern nomadic males, is the "oldest" deity - is frankly just plain nuts...
Also, as has been pointed out NUMEROUS times before, YOU WOULD NOT HAVE YOUR VERSION OF "god" IF YOU HAD NOT BEEN BORN AND RAISED IN THE WORSHIP OF THE BIBLE "god"...
"And I repeat, not all men and women of science are atheists. ..." FHN
Noooo, but the majority are.... And in the general public, the number of people who are becoming atheist - or at the very least, non-religious - is increasing with each coming generation... In the U.S. and first-world countries, that is...
" ..."Evidence" says one thing to you and another to me. .." FHN
The very fact that you put that into "quotes", indicates the lack of value that scientific data holds for you... And again, I point you back to the fact that the desert god that you were taught to worship, was not "in existence" until VERY late in human history - the last 3,500 to 4,000 years... As that is when the FACTS of evidence for "his" worship, first show up...
Zid
I am getting this for a tattoo soon. The gods of this temple are older than I AM by about 11000 years.
Noooo, but the majority are....
So says you.
I was always in advanced science classes from 8th grade on. My dad and his college friends, who later worked with him doing oceaneering were were scientists. Science is both interesting to me, as well as valuable. I also recognize that not all scientific "data" is fact. Enough of it is hypothesis, so that I look at it closely. I don't accept it on blind faith. I put the word evidence in quotes because you claim there is "evidence" proving there is no god. You cannot prove there is no god. Scientifically proven fact holds a lot of value. Proven things like the periodic table or the law of gravity or centrifugal force. We can see things at the microscopic level. We know how fast light travels. There are some things you can prove or disprove, making up scientific fact. The existence of God is one you cannot disprove.
"I also recognize that not all scientific "data" is fact. Enough of it is hypothesis, ...." FHN
Do you honestly expect me to believe that you really were in "advanced science classes", when you cannot distinguish between "data" - facts gathered by observation - and "hypothesis" - an explanation for the group of facts termed data??????
"data: factual information (as measurements or statistics) used as a basis for reasoning, discussion, or calculation..." Websters New Collegiate Dictionary
"hypothesis: a tentative assumption made in order to draw out and test its logical or empirical consequences..." Websters New Collegiate Dictionary
And as I've said numerous times, I can easily disprove the existence of the Bronze-Age Middle-Eastern male volcano "god" of the primitive, ignorant, superstitious, misogynistic nomads whose mythology comprises the bulk of the bible...
Which is THE source for YOUR idea of "god", because, as I pointed out before, it is painfully obvious that you were NOT indoctrinated into OTHER theologies, such as the "holy writings" of the Q'ran or the Talmud or the sacred scrolls of Hinduism or of Buddhism, or of Taoism, or of Shintoism, when you were a child.
The bible "god" is easily disproven... All one has to do, is look at the evolution of religion, to disprove that "god" - and the existence of every other "god" or "goddess", too...
You cannot disprove Him, Zid. If He could be disproven, then someone would have done so by now, and no one (okay probably some people still would) would believe in Him anymore. You can offer theories, and hypothesis of your own. You can offer data and evidence that you interpret to disprove him. But that is all you can do, and that is not the same thing as proving something... as in proving there is no God of Christ/and earlier, Israel. Even scientists of any order do not say they can prove there is no God. (not even the God and Father of Christ)
Peace,
Tammy
