--- A Question for ALL Atheistic ex-Dubs----

by gordon d 145 Replies latest jw friends

  • Abaddon
    Abaddon

    gordon

    You don't even know where my buttons are . I do believe in spirited debate, one where people get what they give.

    Funny how someone convinced they have a truth for us poor unenlightend ones evades answering simple questions.

    As you have already been using Christian terminology in describing your beliefs, the fact (as pointed out) you are assembling a religion-u-like on a smorgasboard basis doesn't mean that you have a god I haven't heard of yet. All the 'god' you are peddling is is a composite assembled in your head.

    Likewise, I ask you to show you have some knowledge of evolution; I don't care where it is from as if you know something, you know something, whether you learnt under your own steam or in HE. All you do is avoid answering. Funny how you rail about atheists acting as they they know it all when you reject science out-of-hand as though you knew it all and could tell us poor unenlighteded ones where it is wrong.

    If you are an atheist... what is your hope?

    Look, I know it is inconvenient that we are not the tame and easy to answer internal interlocutors you probably reherse these 'probing' questions on in your head. But it is a fact. Your question presupposes there IS a hope for life after death. You are begging the question; look it up, it's fallacious logic.

    And you have been answered, you just ignore the answers as they don't fit into the little pre-conceived slots that would allow you to come up with more trite questions. I mean this is a nice way, by the way. Look back over the answers people have given for you; how on Earth do you think Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs and the idea of a legacy as a hope got mentioned if it wasn't in answer to this question?

    A perfectly satisfactory answer implies an arrogance on the part of a proponent of a particular viewpoint...

    No it implies sticking to such tools as the scientific method and if neccesary things like Occam's Razor. You are adding a layer of complexity that modern scientific theories don't require, and have no evidence to support the addition other than your say so. That is arrogant in its own way.

    Are you saying that there is no debate between persons with far more knowledge than us on these "Facts"?

    The facts I mentioned were;

    • if there is a god why is there no evidence for god exisitng, and
    • why is there always a perfectly satisfacoty (or at least as satisfactory) naturalistic explanation for all the things some people claim god did

    Please show me a debate between any persons you would class as having "far more knowledge than us" that desputes the fact

    • there is no evidence (I've given definitions of evidence in my first response to you)
    • things people claim god did (and can actually prove happened I should add) always have a perfectly satisfacoty (or at least as satisfactory) naturalistic explanation

    Please don't just trot out tired old ID hacks or some such; their arguments have been widely rebutted even if they still keep on using them.

    I broke the egg to open it.... All I can show you is what was inside... If you really want to see, c'mon over.

    Admit your little analogy fails miserably. You have no egg. You can't even show me what was inside as you have no evidence, just claimed experience. What you say is just a big yolk.

    Wow.. those people have some pissed off eggs! Glad I didn't get one of those! .... Oh wait, I do remember getting one of those eggs, lot's of people did, but I threw mine back.

    Could you actually answer me this; why should we believe you when other people make similar but incompatable claims about 'eggs' they have found? What differentiates your claims from some Imam, Shaman or Sadduh?

    I don't think I'm gonna try and use any more analogies here.

    Something we can agree on, although it is fun flying through the holes; it makes a nice wooshing noise...

    The point was not about testing God by scientific methods that are developed by our "Amazingly Vast Intellect" It was a statement about the openmindedness of people have haven't been handed the results of years of research.... Again: Do YOU beleive in life on other planets? (NOTE to READER--- This Question is NOT about life on other planets.. It's about YOU!!!)

    Belief is a really inappropriate term. I know that the sun will rise tomorrow as given the evidence there is no reason to suppose otherwise; belief is too weedy a word. I know that the theory of evolution fits the available evidence around us and the addition of another layer 'above' this with no rational explanation of origin is scientifically unsound. I know that it is extremely likely given what we know that life has arrisen elsewhere in the Universe and would not be surprised if this is proven in my lifetime.

    And please don't over-play the open minded stichk. Maybe I am as or am far more open minded than you but have higher standards of evidnece and reject more things after examination than you. Maybe I am as open minded as you but you are more credulous...

    Smarter than you... who know's? More open-minded than you... who knows? More gullible than you... who knows? Maybe we'll get some answers if we keep looking.

    Wishy-washy. What, no response to the fact you are acting as if you know it all because of something you claim happened in your head? Respond to THIS question and to the above question about differentiation between you and similar claimants and then we can maybe have an interesting discussion as your argument will have some meat on its bones.

    You've implied that you are more knowledgable about theories of evolution.... you're probably right, it is not really a subject that fascinates me.

    If I have implied that I know more about God than you.... maybe that is a fair statement too?

    I can prove I know more about evolutionary theory than you. There is an external corpus of knowledge to compare what I say with. All we have is your say-so that you know more about god than me or my cat. There is no external corpus against which to verify your claims.

    This is technically termed a 'big difference'.

    Why are you so sure you are not mentally ill? Hell, I've lost count of the number of god-whispers and Jesus we get through here. Some Islamic terrorists would describe a personal religious experience not unlike yours that lead them to kill people. There is NOTHING to differentiate the validity of your claims from theirs.

    I'm not ruling anything out... I'm just looking at the results of this current "condition"... fortunately, there have been no signs of destructive behaviour.

    So believing the 'voices' in your head ISN'T destrutive behaviour? What if it leads you to complacancy and inaction in this life 'cause you belong to god's heaven club... and there is no heaven club? Micturating away your sole go at being is pretty destructive bahviour amigo. What if you commit the same folly many insnared in organsied religion commit, even though you are trying to avoid it?

    Please, don't assume we haven't thought about this topic at great length and discussed it eventually. It's very arrogant to assume you are claiming ANYTHING new that someone hasn't claimed before, and that by the use of hacknied and unoriginal arguments we're suddenly going to say "gosh, there must be a god after all".

    Perhaps... Just perhaps... This isn't about you! The first line of this thread was directed elswhere.. the statements that I've made since have been in response to someone else's questions. I hope i haven't ignored any of yours.

    I am using the plural. There's a whole load of smart people here and your sloppy assumptions and re-hashed 'arguments' are as old to them as they are to me.

    If none of the non-evidental arguments for god haven't worked in the past they won't work now just because it is YOU typing them.

    You're probably right.....

    I know that.

    Why is it so difficult to realize that THEY LIED ABOUT GOD TOO!!!

    Why is it so difficult to realise that as you agree people are used to being lied to (deliberately or by the misled), it is natural to suppose you are same old same old, even if you are sincere in your beliefs?

    It is highly speculative, highly irrational, but just as viable as anyone else's opinion...

    Yes... and the key word is OPINION. You have no external facts on which for us to base our opinion. You have internal facts, but they are your-say-so.

    Thus it shouldn't come as a surprise, as you agree you have no facts for us and are saying what sounds like lots of other people have said, and that the overall experience of many with religion and claimants to special contact with god is that of deceit, that your claims are not considered credible.

    Doesn't mean you're not a nice guy though.

  • KW13
    KW13

    At the moment Gordon i am kinda neutral about the whole God thing, i'm just starting to reach out in terms of stepping outside what i am comfortable with.

    Firstly, immediately after i left the Witnesses i gave up on God - then i started Church and i believed i had found him again. What i discovered was however is that organized religion is flawed, extremely so!

    Second part of my journey was to stop Church and maintain my own belief because i don't know of one spotless religion on earth that this 'great God' would like so true to my ex-dub like form, i decided to remain outside of any structure.

    Now i dont know if i believe in God but while some might accuse me of allowing my faith to 'weaken' i can also see that religion as a whole is one big mess. Its caused and given excuse for war, its divided familys, nations and even the globe. It affects everything.

    Athiests are in a literal sense enjoying REAL freedom, whether that is right at the moment i'm not sure but i can only respect them as they go about their lives without some kind of REWARD and without someone to lean on when things do go wrong, they are forced to accept responsibility. Pretty big if you ask me.

  • dorayakii
    dorayakii
    A litmnus test for these may very well be an ingrained sensibilty to some people... but it also may require being "plugged-in" to spiritual matters.... either way, self examination can help to develop a discerning eye towards these abilities, in believer and even non-beleivers.

    I think your choice of words was very apt here: "plugged in to spiritual matters". Although i respect the right for anyone to believe what they want, i liken belief in God/gods to belief in the material reality of "the Matrix". You have to be plugged-in to fully appreciate that it "IS" reality. In fact, it looks so much like reality, that people are willing to spend their whole lives in it, and argue that it is in fact real. Like the character Cypher, they find life outside the Matrix so meaningless and empty that they have to be given an illusion to make their lives worth living.

    The other main characters though, even though they don't have the comforts of the Matrix, are more interested in the real world and how to make it a better place, instead of putting their hopes on a utopian fantasy world...

    The key question which defines the difference between materialistn {a more positive and unladen term for "atheist"} and theist beliefs is: "Are you interested more in truth, or comfort?" Whichever one an individual choses is up to them, and doesn't necessarily make them a bad person, people have different goals in life. Theists search for beliefs which offer hope and comfort in a heavenly father-figure, materialists search for beliefs which conform to the material world which they experience.

    No one has anwered my question: (first define hope-less-ness)... the claim again was: If you are an atheist... what is your hope? If there is one, then I was mistaken in implying that there was not.

    Theists often make a fundamental error in their thinking. {sorry my emotions got in the way there. Lets start that again}... Theists often view the world in a different way. Because its good, it must be true. Because it offers "hope" it must be true... so, because the paradise will eliminate wickedness off the earth forever, it MUST be true... and because we will go to heaven and drink milk and honey forever, it MUST be true... and because materialism has no HOPES for the afterlife, it must be false.

    However, you cannot base the veracity of a belief system merely on what hopes it offers you.

    "Hope-less-ness" means the state of having a lack of hope. Hope is "the general feeling that some desire will be fulfilled". First of all then, hope is a *feeling* and is not always necessarily based in reality. Feelings alone do not necessarily make wishes/hopes come true {although i do esteem the value of positive-thinking}.

    The question is, how high do we value reality. Or is a sence of unreality actually what human existance is all about. What is real?

    On the other hand, although not always based in reality, hope is not necessarily a bad thing. Materialists are able to have hope in things that occur in THIS LIFE {or even *after* they are dead: eg. hope that their children will live in a better world}, therefore their beliefs are not "hope-less". They may not share the same mass-hopes and mass-dreams as theists do, but as individuals, their "atheist" beliefs do not make them hopeless. In addition, they can have the "hope", that when they die, they will not be tormented nor rewarded eternally, but will simply enter into a peaceful state of non-existance, deeper than sleep {"nirvana" / "moksha" but without having to work for it}.

  • kid-A
    kid-A

    Athiests are in a literal sense enjoying REAL freedom, whether that is right at the moment i'm not sure but i can only respect them as they go about their lives without some kind of REWARD and without someone to lean on when things do go wrong, they are forced to accept responsibility. Pretty big if you ask me.

    Thank you KW, that was brilliantly expressed! Gordon, you have a lot to learn from this young man.

    KW brings up a central point. For most atheists, the rejection of the god hypothesis entails giving up a certain form of psychological anaesthesia. Instead of relying upon an empty sky for answers when our lives become difficult, we rely on our loved ones, fellow human beings for all the comfort or support we need. All of the atheists I know have a deep respect and love for HUMANITY.

    Finally Gordon, let me tell you what my hope, as an atheist is: It is my hope that the human race will awaken from the blinding stupor of superstitious ignorance and accept the full potential of HUMAN life and freedom. While the religionists will continue to hide behind the apron strings of their fictional sky-deity, dreaming of some hypothetical "after-life" whilst avoiding the reality of THIS life (which is, in fact, all there ever is), I will continue to fully actualize my human life, expanding my intellectual and psychological potential, basking in the infinite wonder of the natural world around me and savouring each precious moment of this ephemeral existence. Eternity is stagnation and decay.....Eternity is for those too weak or frightened to live NOW........Eternity is the reward for a wasted human life.......only the strong can live for the moment and build a future that will gratefully house their accomplishments and legacies. Only the strong can die with courage and satisfaction after a life of true, self-actualization. Question your beliefs Gordon. You will quickly realize, if you can do this honestly, that your only motivation for god-belief is mortal "fear and trembling" to borrow a line from Kierkegaard. Lose fear, and you will lose god.

  • done4good
    done4good
    but please, don’t pull anyone else down into your hopelessness with you!

    I haven't had time to read this whole thread yet, so my apologies if this statement has been clarified, but I'M ANYTHING BUT HOPELESS!

    Jason V.

  • gordon d
    gordon d

    Damn... went to sleep and the opposition moved the big artillery into firing range!
    Fantastic points.... everyone! KW13 is really 18????? ...........Holy crap!
    Please tell me again how any of you were ever witnesses?

    I have to handle some business needs this morning, I also have to finalize preparations for the granite installers and I've yet to finish the woodwork or gas lines.... I should be able to respond to everyone's question/comments before the end of the day.

    One more point. We keep bringing up the matter of tangible proof, emperical data, etc.... We've already established that this cannot be the appropriate measuring stick for the proof of God to openminded people. There are too many other feasible explanations.

    Maybe it would be wise to establish a base for this debate by seeing if we all have the ability to discuss something more familiar within the parameters of a strictly emperical platform. I suggest love. Not agape love but something that far more people have experienced, eros.
    The question is: Does eros love exist? Please confine your position, solely, to emperical data.


    Hi Abaddon,
    You said:
    *****You don't even know where my buttons are*****

    Sorry to burst your bubble...
    The "button" that I referred too was a literal one, on my keyboard, that prematurely ended my response and then submitted a blank post. I then had to make a third post to complete the response If you want to believe that it was about you, that's your right.... but the data simply doesn't support it

  • daniel-p
    daniel-p
    No one has anwered my question: (first define hope-less-ness)... the claim again was: If you are an atheist... what is your hope?

    "Hope" is a very dangerous thing in the wrong hands. As for myself, I have no hope of life after death (if that's what you're implying), since that merely distracts from the life I know I have been given and what I know I need to do in order to enjoy that life.

  • Caedes
    Caedes

    Gordon

    The thing about personal testimony is that how believable it is depends on the likelihood of the claim. If I claim something highly unlikely, that my missing brother (to use your example) is a multimillionaire playboy with a garage full of posh cars, and is having an affair with liz hurley then you are unlikely to believe me. You would expect to see some evidence to back up a highly unlikely claim. The same goes for claims of gods, fairies and unicorns. You have to have some empirical evidence to back up your claims and there is none.

    As for the example of love, nobody needs empirical data because we are all aware of the reality of emotional states through our interactions with other people. Is it a highly unlikely claim? No, so we can go with the evidence of our personal experiences. Of course you could investigate love empirically and do brain scans of people interacting with loved ones and see what the differences are between them and people interacting with strangers and aquaintances. I would be interested to see your results!

    So in short you have to have strong empirical evidence to back up unlikely claims.

    On another point you raised regarding the galaxy that is vying for position of the furthest (or oldest depending on how you wish to look at it) object we can see, the jury is still out on that one but any light coming from that galaxy is now 13billion years old and the point of origin of that light has been moving in that 13billion years, if it still exists that point is now over 70billion light years away! Just pop size of the universe in google and like me be astounded that anyone actually understands this stuff!

  • gordon d
    gordon d

    Hi Caedes,
    I'm on a very short computer break... second coat of paint coming up.
    Loved your point... BUT... You didn't play the game.

    Please site any emperical proof of eros love and let me counter with seperate emperical explanation.

    I truly beleive that I can establish the point that (based solely on tangible evidence) erotic love cannot be a scientific fact.

    You obviously know where I'm going with this... I want the admission of (uncertainty that has been demanded of me) returned by my opponents. The ultimate effect of this will hopefully be that it shows the arrogance of any persons who feel justified in belittling the dreams of others. Regardless of their position....

  • gordon d
    gordon d

    C'mon... YOU CHICKENS!

    I've been subjected to questioning, ridicule, stereotyping, and even a small bit of hostility. My statements have been scrutinized, my analogies have been dismantled and given to new metaphors. The critic of my points keep crying the same tired song... "We want proof"

    The gauntlet was cast and it is obvious that some people will NOT believe in even the remotest possibility of something that have not seen, read about in some other person's book, or that cannot be grasped by their vast intelligence. These challengers are not stupid... I never thought they were... so I shouldn't be surprised that they will avoid the picking up of their gauntlet and attempting to support their views.

    It's just a little exercise.... don't let me win this debate by default!



Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit