Issuing a Challenge to Atheists and Unbelievers

by The wanderer 149 Replies latest jw friends

  • Beardo

    @ itsallCRAPnow

    We are animals who can speak and type and make things with opposable thumbs. That's about it.

    Blimey - welcome to the future ... here I come

  • trevor

    I am, as always coming into this debate late. I have been busy enjoying subjective experiences. You do not have to believe me, it I enough that for me that I was enjoying myself. If I feel joy and then the cause of my joy turns out to be due to a distortion or misinterpretation of events, the joy was still real.

    We are all experiencing the same reality, we just perceive it differently. We interpret our experiences in a way that allows them to fit in to the world we have built in our minds. But however we structure things we are all sharing the same underlying reality and all experience is of value because the purpose of life is to experience through us and our awareness.

    Experience will always be subjective and flavoured by who we believe ourselves to be. If all experience was totally objective it would be a very boring and pointless world. The problem occurs when we try to label our experiences and then convert them in to belief.

    Just defining the word God, in an objective way is an impossibility. God has to be experienced as the totality of all existence not arrived at through an objective study. You won't find God in a book. Go pick some flowers or enjoy a sunset.

  • greendawn

    It's one of those things, one person says I have never experienced anything paranormal another one says but I have defintely experienced it eg the action of the Holy Spirit on the human psyche. Is it real or is it an illusion?

    The atheists will either say it definitely is an illusion, or the more open minded ones will say it may be real but how can it be proved scientifically so as to become a certainty?

    I believe in the existence of God and Angels it's just that human science hasn't advanced enough to be able to detect their presence around us and their intense, never ending activity in our world. It's the mind boggling complexity of life and the whole set up of mankind that points to a higher origin of man but then what is self evident to one is totally beyond the perception of another eg why do humans have spiritual aspirations and tend towards a more moral and civilised way of life if they are nothing but animals that originated exclusively from the animal world?

  • LittleToe


    why are you always so mean to me, LT?

    It's coz I lurves ya


    This age of rational thought has lead us nowhere

    I disagree. It has taken us a huge distance, and will yet take us far.

    rational thought has its limits

    I agree on the grounds that it inclines many of its proponents to disengage the left side of their brain, leading to a very boring and stymied worldview indeed (IMHO, but it works for them, so who's to judge?).


    I wholeheartedly concur.

    Just defining the word God, in an objective way is an impossibility.

    And IMHO (aside from the occasional intolerance) that's the heart of so many of the "belief" disagreements around here. It usually takes 3 - 4 pages before you realise that one person is talking about a biblical tribal deity while another is talking about a panentheistic concept, etc.

  • Beardo
    God has to be experienced as the totality of all existence not arrived at through an objective study. You won't find God in a book. Go pick some flowers or enjoy a sunset.

    I think I agree with you trevor ... good comment.

  • Satanus

    I kin tall that that little toe fella hasn't really had those spirtchal experiences. How? Cuz spirtchal people neva use good engrish lak he use. Hees fake.


  • LittleToe

    ROFL - Darn - busted!!!

  • Beardo
    I disagree. It has taken us a huge distance, and will yet take us far.

    @ Mr Toe

    Possibly, and I agree in part, as being bound to superstition and seeing ancient myths as factual rather than allegorical for instance, can be a huge mistake.

    I recommend a series to you called 'Magical Egypt' ...

  • The wanderer
    The wanderer

    Dear itsallgoodnow:

    "LOL at this thread, esp. the wanderer. he asked for feedback then got very pissy when he got all sorts of different views back, kept harping on "KEEP AN OPEN MIND" but obviously he only wanted people to agree with his viewpoint, not have any views of their own."

    I asked individuals to keep an open mind because they would
    take a stand without ALLOWING for the possiblity for a higher
    being or creator.

    Basically, I am agnostic when it comes to God. However,
    I ALLOW for the possiblity that such a being COULD exist.

    That was the entire point of the thread in the first


    The Wanderer

    P.S. The debate boils down to whether or not a person can
    make such allowances and nothing more than that.

  • skeptic2

    Hi LittleToe. believe me I am not taking anything personally. I just cannot help but ask questions when I think I see logical inconsistencies or inconsistent arguments, the thought processes of others have always interested me.

    LittleToe said: Part of the problem here is the use of terminology.

    Yes, this is always an issue.

    While I have a belief in certain aspects of what some call the supernatural I am also acutely aware that there is no scientific evidence to support the notion. This is also the case with UFO sightings, wherein folks are convinced of what they saw but have no proof other than their own subjective experience, even where there's a corrulation between individuals. Likewise, I beleive in a Deity due to my own personal experiences, but regardless od how compelling my explanations I can't prove it to another individual.

    I wonder, if you cannot prove it to another individual, how you have proved it to yourself? This seems to imply that your standard of evidence for the phenomena you are referring is lower than that of other people? If I cannot prove something to other people (putting aside mundane explanations such as I lost the evidence), then I hold a similar disbelief for it myself.

    Basically it's not worth getting upset over. Your friends saw what they saw and you're all convinced of your interpretation of it. Let the scientists either catch up, ignore, or disprove it.

    The burden is not on all non-claimants to disprove a claim, but on the claimant to prove it.

Share this