~why johnny (atheist) can't beleive ~ and the cure~

Then perhaps you'd like to estimate the chances that you'll ever develop the habit of inhaling chlorine, and find yourself choking on oxygen.

 

I would say a tiny bit more likely than a women 2000 years ago was inseminated by a God, or that some bloke died and was resurrected 3 days later, why?
Now what are the chances you will have a heart attack whilst replying to my post?

 

There is a difference between things that do not exist and things not yet discovered.

 

"Why" indeed.

Zero. Now are you going to provide the estimate I asked for or not?

 

I don't agree with your first statement, or maybe we misunderstood each other? I can choose to believe or reject anything that is represented as fact or a probability. I am getting excited because I think I am seeing something, a pathology for lack of a better word. That pathology may be why you chose atheism over everything else. Hmm'

You mean you could not change being an atheist with the available current information evidence or lack of evidence you possess? If you received information or evidence that made the existence of God almost a given you would most likely become a God fearing Christian brother* of mine (God fearing means God respecting) ?

*Currently, with all due respect you are a atheist 'brother' of mine. Science theory tells us we have a common ancestor etc etc so the worlds kink is incest, freaky,...lol.

Yes indeed! I have noticed that many atheists are comfortable with not knowing some aspects of science for example. They choose that instead of what they see as fabricating or invoking a fantasy creator or ID etc. In other words they (I am speaking in generalities) would rather be sure of a correct answer than choosing an answer that can not be proven by empirical means. That is where I take my atheist debate partners to task by pointing out even the empirical methods of science are at best an informed guess! (do I hear teeth grinding?). Science is can not be counted upon to provide a much more accurate answer than a theism can! Now its teeth grinding and growling). I am taking philosophical license on those statements so calm down...lol. The reason I say science and theism have about same level of accuracy is something called 'time' . If enough time passes science has a problem with accuracy etc. A thousand years is just a blip on mans timeline. Want another? We all know science theory must be falsifiable, and that means that if an entire theory is incorrect, well no sweat!

Yes and that would drive me nuts! The first half of your sentence. The second half I would be deeply saddened if conclusive proof emerged that there is no supreme ID or no divine being at all. More than deeply saddened. However I am sure I would adapt, dying is too permanent, especially if there is no afterlife to retire at.

That is possible, and there is raging debate about that. However, I believe in free will but guided free will. (its complicated and even my theist peers threaten me when we argue it) So, you see my atheist friend I believe God would have chosen me even if I were born in down town Teheran, lol. Thanks for your post, good stuff and good luck to you.

reva

ps I wasn't born in the USA , or North America. But I understand what you are saying.

 

I provided you with an estimate, if you want a numerical answer work out what the chances are for the estimate I gave you and take away a tiny bit. Indeed is a poor answer, and if you cannot do better than that, I might decide your not worth answering. On the other hand it could be that whilst we have different opinions there is a chance you might not bore me.

No Zero is an incorrect answer try again.

 

I have read similar material. Would you suggest a good book by him that is about that subject?

What if they fell through a wormhole or a mini black hole?

Personally speaking it took much less internal strength to be an atheist than a Christian. As an atheist I had zero laws to abide by. I had zero responsibility to minister to others. I did not have to pray continually, there was no stress as an atheist if I screwed up big time...no worry of losing ones soul and the gift of eternal life, the list goes on. I doubt if I would of had the empathy to become an christian humanitarian mission owner (think soup kitchen free pantry and assistance filling out entitlement forms). I did so primarily because of the teachings of Jesus. Don't get me wrong as an atheist I was almost the same person. Not a bad guy but not the same person as I am today. So I do not understand your feelings about Christianity being for the weak, lol its quite the opposite, and that hold true for most of my Christan peers, friends and for Bogie the basset.

reva

 

Can I ask why you lost your faith if you had it as a child?

Yes those NDE's have a profound effect on many of us! I remember talking to you in another thread. God bless you and yours. One more thing if its too personal just ignore it. Your age? I would check your profile but my browser is wreaking havoc, this page is herkey jerky and freezes every other second, time for a scan!

reva

 

I argue that we are born atheist and at some point choose to accept or reject theology. When I see that most Americans are Christian, most Japanese are Buddhist, most Egyptians are Muslim, most who live in India are Hindus... I do not see irony... I see indoctrination. In general we humans want to fit in with out community... doors open more easily to those who practice the the religion of the majority of their culture. Our being told what to believe starts at an early age and this peer pressure will continue on through our entire life. I to this day am from time to time still pressured to go to Church and conform to Christian doctrine even though I have rejected Christian dogma pending any new evidence of its validity.

As a Deist I came to believe in God when in desperation I fell to my knees and called out to whatever God was out there to take away my drug addiction. I had tried to quit on a number of occasions but the cravings were irresistible and I would inevitably go back to drugs. So long story short, I passed out (my humorous way of saying "went to bed" back then) and "came to" in the morning... and when I woke up I had absolutely no craving for drugs, and as the days went on I had no withdrawal... and for this reason I believe that something stronger than I intervened in my life.

Now an atheist could make a very effective argument that I had just had enough... hit a breaking point and any change came from within me and not some nebulous theological intangible. I would tend to agree with this reasoning except that I cannot logically explain why it is that I had no cravings, not withdrawals... I should have yet I did not. I had withdrawals and insufferable cravings in prior attempts.

For the better part of the next decade I tirelessly worked to help the still suffering. One many occasions I would man a chair next to the bed of a detoxing man who was ravaged by withdraw and cravings and I thanked God that I was spared such suffering as I was not strong enough to endure such suffering... and sadly neither were the overwhelming majority of men whose bedsides I sat watch over. Events like this change you... I have seen so many fail and was left wondering why I was able to succeed where so many others have failed.... the only answer I have is God... right or wrong it is what I believe.

 

So you're hoping I'm dumb enough to try to do what you obviously can't do yourself. Thanks for nothing.

Actually it's way better than the question, which was utterly incoherent.

OTOH, the chances you are not going to end up boring me are looking slimmer with your every response.

Actually it was perfectly accurate. I can't prove that; but I can certainly attest to its truth, seeing if I'd had anything like a heart attack in the interval between post #29 and this one I'd surely have known it.

 

Where have you looked for an ‘rational argument for the Existence of a God’? Not trying to be hostile or confrontational my friend. There are many rational logical arguments for the existence of God. There is even a category in philosophy and metaphysics and other course studies that exist just for those type of arguments. And there are several formal terms for the types of arguments for gods existence. One argument, unfortunately for you, is defined as an LOGICAL ARGUMENT for the existence of god and is called a cosmological argument . FROM ENCARTA;
A logical argument that tries to prove the existence of God from empirical information about the universe . Another (also with excerpts from Encarta is called an Ontological Argument and is used to prove the existence of God: an argument made by St. Anselm and others to prove the existence of God by pointing to God’s essence as a perfect, necessary being.

Of course the arguments (above) are modified for a modern readership. William Craig PhD ThD uses a form of the KCA which is a cosmological argument as the basis of his teachings and books. Ok Hows that for starter examples and sources ? There are many, many more. If you are interested read about Kurt Gödel who many say was Einstein’s equal intellectually. He was Big Albert’s walking bud at Princeton and they developed time dilation theories together.

Oh there are definitions of God as well, where should I begin? Lol ....

Thanks for your input….

View attachment 30014


reva

 

Can I ask you if the substances you were withdrawing from had physical withdrawal symptoms or psychological withdrawal symptoms. Obviously the former would be more difficult to explain rationally.

 

Yes there is, but how does that apply to what I wrote? The telephone wasn't 'always there, just not discovered. (one example of the countless other things that 'weren't discovered'. They were 'invented'. Non existent before their invention. 'After someone thought about them'. (in their non-existent state of non- being)

 

Actually I was rather hoping you would come to the point!

You asked me "Then perhaps you'd like to estimate the chances that you'll ever develop the habit of inhaling chlorine, and find yourself choking on oxygen."I asked you why? Now assuming that you are not really interested in the answer of some obscure breathing possibility, I made the assumption there was another reason. The point I keep asking you to make!

Your answer indicates you do not understand chance.

 

Both. I did almost any drug that I could get my hands on but I never used a needle... fear of AIDS. Alcohol abuse alone can cause horrible physical and psychological addiction and add onto that a variety of other drugs and you have one big monkey on your back. To this day I have what had been diagnosed as benign neuropathy attributed to the drugs that I did.

The physical went hand in hand with the psychological craving... its something hard to put into words and impossible to relate with unless you have experienced it yourself.

 

Small Gods. A wickedly funny satirical deconstruction of the religion business (You OWN a soup kitchen?) without being heavy-handed.

spoilers in the link.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_Gods

 

You are correct. Should have used the term proofs instead of arguements.

But I would appreciate what you consider a good definition of "God" as a starting point for thought.

 

For the last four years I have had to use Morphine daily for pain relief (legally). Its not nice running out! I cannot explain how you got through without physical withdrawal symptoms nor would I try, if faith worked for you then I think that is good. I hope you understand why I sought clarification.

 

"Small Gods" but you will NOT enjoy it. As the Colonel points out - it is wickedly satirical

 

If you don't use "reply with quote" in your response to this, consider the conversation terminated.

No such question could be discerned from what you posted initially. The challenge was, of course, intended to illustrate the absurdity of your claim that everything but death is purely chance.

Be that as it may, it's irrelevant to my answer. I knew I wouldn't have a heart attack between the time I read that question and the time I hit the send button. I was conscious of that knowledge and the ensuing events proved me correct. Deal.

 

Thanks for the reference. Many of Terry Pratchett's books in the series are on youtube including "Small Gods".

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Terry+Pratchett

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQwumMytac8

 

It doesn't matter what you agree with (or believe maybe), lack of active choice is a fundamental element of belief in this context.

You could easily demonstrate otherwise of course. You'd just have to choose not to believe in God, entirely and unconditionally, just for a short period. I'd suggest you simply couldn't any more than I could simply choose to believe.

Again, I couldn't actively change my belief but yes, it's a consequence of my knowledge, experience and the make-up of my mind (as it is in everyone). Changes to an of those things could lead to a change in my beliefs.

Whether a change in belief would lead to me following any particular religious path or practice is an entirely different question. As I said, that does involve an element of choice.

The first statement here is perfectly fine to me (no grinding of teeth at all). The second is factionally untrue. Theism means the belief in god or gods, nothing more or less. That in itself has nothing to do with answering any universal questions. Philosophy can, and that can incorporate theism but not unconditionally and entirely.

Maybe you should be considering how much of your beliefs are based on open assessments of the evidence and how much based on emotion and wishful thinking.

 

What I was being told in church and what I knew to be real did not make sense. Examples: Firm evidence the world billions of years old versus being told it was created in 6 days 6000 years ago. The many incongruities in the Bible like who did Cabel marry and flood engulfing the entire planet then draining away.

If a person is proved to be lying to you, how can you trust them to be telling the truth elsewhere. It was only later that I realized men are fallible and so is the Bible. Like other ancient texts of wisdom, it has many truths in it, but it must be taken as a guide book not a science book.

Lastly, God created the Universe and, therefore, all the laws within it. God created us, one way or another, and we have brains. The expectation, IMO, is that God wants us to use our brains. Those who deny God's laws such as the Doppler Effect, the Law of Gravity and such then tell us we need to take as Gospel the writings of a desert nomad over our own perceptions is what killed religion for me. I think it's also killing religion in others when it should be helping people find God through greater spiritual awareness. God can't be found by closing one's mind or by dictating to others that there is only one way to God

 

PS, I'm 58

 

"spiritual" being the key word. Religion (organized religion) is a business. Spirituality isn't their product. They use it as a 'buzz' word.