Religious Dogma is Speculation. Discuss

reply to post by Seed76

I understand your point very clear my friend. But instead of investing energy to fuel hatred, we should invest our energy in helping other people in need. We should start respecting each other and treat each other as a human being.

My brother, i DO respect my fellow humans, i seek for the emancipation for my brothers and sisters.

My frustration does not lead to irrational prejuduce. I have a difficulty with religious ideology. Like opposing Hitler, i am hear to express my reasons for my frustrations.

This is not about illogical hatred, its not the same as sexism, racism, homophobia. It's not as simple as name calling or zelousy or patriotism. I have a reason, i have defined my enemy. This does not mean i will act in an inpolite way, i won't ever demean your intelligence or resort to name calling. I won't ever bomb a church in the name of Atheism.

I hate religion, as i hate the indoctrination techniques of the Nazi agenda and the hitler youth.

This does not mean i hate you individually. Like i said it's about the ideology and how i deem it as a direct threat the stability of our civilisation.

I have watched the video friend. And i understand your frustration friend. But to be frustrated is not a good thing. Frustration leads to prejudice and prejudice leads to hatred.

Understand my words above, my frustration does not lead to prejuduce. I don't see someone on the street and assume they are evil people just because of what they wear or their sexuality. THAT is prejudce. My anger is fueled by logic and clear reasoning and history of tension, conflict and bloodshed, especially in the name of "GOD"

Please understand this and that i mean no intention to hurt your feelings.

This is merely my side of the coin, my worldview that i am bringing to the table of discussion here.

It's been a pleasure discussing ideas with you too.

"We're not so different, you and i"

reply to post by awake_and_aware

"We're not so different, you and i"

Of course we are not different my friend. Just take a look at my signature.

"All ideologies are idiotic whether religious or political for it is conceptual thinking the conceptual word which has so unfortunately divided man." Jiddu Krishnamurti

Peace

reply to post by truthiron

This I know is all "greek" to you and is to all unbelievers and always will be.

No.

Many "unbelievers" used to be believers. I for one used to be Christian and would have, at one time, given testimony similar to yours.

The Prophecy properly interpreted is the evidence

That is the main issue with prophecy, it is vague and the interpretations vary. Unless a prediction is specific it is pretty useless. Biblical prophecy is no exception. Even as a Christian I found it exceedingly vague and unconvincing.

I've presented it many times and it is not recieved but denied.

Present it here.

My guess is that what you call evidence is some personal experience, something subjective, some personal testimony. Such things are not good evidence in the same way an alien abduction report isn't. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and while personal experience might be valid to the person experiencing it holds no truth value outside of that person.

I may have more basis for what I believe than you do

Atheism isn't a belief, its a lack of belief, it requires no basis.

reply to post by Seed76


I see and undersatnd what you say, but again,

If any ideology is so idiotic then what we you call the opposition to the Nazi agenda. Is this idiotic? "Anazism" or "Anti-Nazi" for the sake of discussion.

We are all driven by ideology, the ideology of freedom, of freedom of speech, an ideology of peace. Well, some of us are.

reply to post by Titen-Sxull


I appreciate your words here, I read them closely, Read mine and you will see that you are beside me in this War. I hope you have clearly defined your enemy and are willing to fight in the most peaceful, intelligent battle of all time; The Battle for Reason and Evidence. Welcome.

reply to post by awake_and_aware


The word or the idea of having 'faith' seems to imply speculation in itself.

reply to post by RSF77


Faith is the most overated human "virtue"

It's more of a hinderance than a help to mankind.

Faith - "because evidence is not critical to assert a belief"

I posted this in another thread, and was invited to come to this one. Other one seemed good enough, but what do i know anyway? I am also, in general, a fan of efficient workflows such as copy and paste, since i have had the same questions for quite a long time now (added a few from the other post). This is directed towards "atheists"

I am inquiring about what i perceive to be your religion and belief system, despite what you may personally categorize them as, this is how i see it, with my eyes. No offense meant to you or any others. You religious people are always so serious about these things (in context its funny, dont deny it

All kidding aside, im curious how everyone else sees the world, as well as how i experience it. I have asked a lot of questions to you, none answered. Of interest, that is one anomaly i see. Those that you despise are much more open to discussion about these matters, or at least seem to be. All i see from "your kind" (made me chuckle, had to use it myself!) is thoughts on those thoughts. Id like to see you think for yourself, or at the very least, just speak for yourself. I am not interested so much in your beliefs based off of doubt of others beliefs, or arguing perspective. i want to know how you see the world, more specifically its mysteries, and not defined by others beliefs.

I have some questions for the "atheists" in general as awake and aware hasnt been open to them (which is a trend i have noticed in my experience)... Or just thinks im some tool who doesnt know how to use words Either way, or both ways, same result: questions i am curious about not answered! (pun? ).

From me, there will be no arguments, no debate, no commentary, nothing other than a "thank you for sharing your perspective."

Are there things we dont know?
Do you truly feel you have no beliefs? Would someone be willing to expand on that?
What is the outlook then? Meaning, do you "know" everything you "know," instead of "believing" everything you "know?" And then when you "know" that you "dont know," you change?
If the above is the case, how does one "know" they "know" in the first place?
If i were to say that "Not making a decision is still making a decision," how would one apply such idealogy to atheism?
Could God exist? i dont know why this one is so avoided/ignored...
What personal searching for "god" have you done?
Who/what told you what god is or is not? Why did you believe them/it?
How i see it, without evidence, saying "There is no God" is exactly the same as saying "There is a God." Two sides of the same coin. How does the atheist feel he/she are more correct in their "conclusion without evidence" than the "religious" person they so despise?
When an atheist says "they," who are they actually referring to?
Why is perspective such a grounds for lack of respect?
In a world where we are quite limited by human perspective, what could constitute as quantitative proof of the "ultimate truth," or God?
How would one go about proving any evidence does not simply exist in our collective perception, or is just massively misunderstood due to human limitation/knowledge on the subject?
Does the atheist believe, err.. "whatever atheist do instead of believe" the human perspective is indeed capable of being omniscient?
How would one go about proving that All That Is quantitatively exists from an unbiased perspective outside of All That Is?

Once again, from me there will be no debate, arguments, or even clarification. Just a "thank you for your perspective," if that. I obviously do not speak for others though

reply to post by awake_and_aware


Yea, whoever first decided to call it faith should have really picked a better word, its self defeating.

reply to post by RSF77


Yeah i agree, i have faith in my mother for example, but that's based on a history of conviction of realiability and support.

To have faith in God, is to not question the contradictions, To believe blindly. The essense of a totalitarian edict, a totalitarian dictatorship, exactly like North Korea.

People believe because of subjective experiences that they have. It is flawed and unscientific, but I am willing to admit that I am not perfectly rational in every situation or about every opinion that I have, either. I'm willing to accept that perhaps being a tad loopy in one category does not automatically make them unworthy of life or complete morons. I guess I'm just funny like that.

reply to post by gnosticquasar


No i completely i agree. And in some areas of our own ideology the WANT to believe over-rides the reason to believe. The necessary evidence to believe.

You're not weird, you're human.

Originally posted by sinohptik

I could sit and write a book about how you are completely wrong in the first three paragraphs, but for now I'll just (try to) politely answer your questions. I will say though the reason your questions probably haven't been answered is because of the offensive way in which you ask them and the fact that about half of them are just poorly thought out questions, but here you go:

Are there things we dont know?

Of course. That's a ridiculous question.

Do you truly feel you have no beliefs? Would someone be willing to expand on that?

No, I believe plenty of things, grass is green, my dog is friendly, etc. However, I don't believe in things that are obvious fabrications to serve someones self interests in a previous time. Any given thing in my mind that I choose to believe in will not be something that I have doubts about, such as magical powers.

What is the outlook then? Meaning, do you "know" everything you "know," instead of "believing" everything you "know?" And then when you "know" that you "dont know," you change?

You are, in fact, over thinking your own existence. I exist, therefore I am. (

Originally posted by v01i0
reply to post by thegoodearth

 

Well that can be explained scientifically very easily.

One word: Psychology.

They most likely experienced indoctrinated religious visions. For example, Krishnamurti reported (in his autobiography) that he experienced visions of Brahmic religion during his childhood. After he was adopted to the Theosophical Society, he experienced visions of their ilk.. Some people are just capable of "seeing thoughts", as reported by C.G. Jung...

You refer to Carl Jung like his work is accepted as fact by academia, which it's not. That seems like a faith-based belief to me.

Jung is cool and all, and he and his family's experience with the occult is a fascinating read. The following article from The Fortean Times might interest you:

The Occult World of CG Jung

And CG Jung expresses a firm belief in God in this BBC vid:

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
reply to post by Seed76

 

I see and undersatnd what you say

I am glad that you agree friend.

If any ideology is so idiotic then what we you call the opposition to the Nazi agenda. Is this idiotic? "Anazism" or "Anti-Nazi" for the sake of discussion.

The meaning of the quote is deep, and it´s not on topic an in depth discussion. I will try to explain it simply. It means that when a person understands that the problem is not the other persons beliefs, but your self. Then you can realize that all the ideologies politic or religious are idiotic. But to answer your question i will simply say that we should learn from the history, so that we should not repeat the same mistakes. But it seems that we still haven´t learned our lesson. In fact history repeats it self.

We are all driven by ideology, the ideology of freedom, of freedom of speech, an ideology of peace. Well, some of us are.

Well freedom,speech,peace is something that all humans have in common. These are not ideologies. The problem is that when a person with ideology A, tries to impose his Ideology to another person with ideology B and vice versa. If one of them understands how useless that is by measuring our actions through the course of history, only then we are going to have truly peace. That´s why if we want to change the world that we are living, each one of us must change from with in first.

Peace

PS: "Sorry for my English, but i hope you can understand what i am saying. Since English is not my native language."

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
reply to post by truthiron

 

Personal experience is not evidence in my eyes, it's evidence in yours and is completely subjective unless you can conclusively confirm your findnigs, irrrefutably for everyone else to see.

Only if a time comes we collectively experience the reality of God will the evidence be there for all to see. Until then, we each just have to muddle along with our subjectivity. And that's cool.

reply to post by RSF77


How combative... remember, that post was originally in another thread, and was actually lighthearted ahh, cant help just a little commentary as you didnt answer some questions! With the "over thinking" comments and "i exist, therefore i am" you tarry quite close to the line with which many atheists stand on; not forcing beliefs on others, no?

Thank you for your perspective, friend

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
reply to post by Seed76

 

Do you respect Astrologists?

Man only just found out that the Earth orbitted the Sun, why should we trust ANCIENT man that he understands and knows the causation of the universe, and that it is "GOD" (a intervening supernatural being) that has rules to follow?

The Ancient Maya understanding of the Universe far surpassed our own. The 'prophesies' they've given are not arbitary 'predictions', they are records of the calculated ebb and flow of the Universe. It was their 'science'.

reply to post by sinohptik

Are there things we dont know?

Of course. In fact, I think we know far, far less than we don't know

Do you truly feel you have no beliefs?

I definitely have beliefs, but they are typically heavily based on either what I have directly perceived or explored with a critical eye.

What is the outlook then? Meaning, do you "know" everything you "know," instead of "believing"
everything you "know?" And then when you "know" that you "dont know," you change?

I claim to “know” very little. I do have beliefs that I will readily change when presented with enough evidence that leads me to a different conclusion.

If the above is the case, how does one "know" they "know" in the first place?

I think most folks claiming to “know” have been brainwashed into a state of refusing to consider other alternatives. Whatever the topic may be.

If i were to say that "Not making a decision is still making a decision," how would one apply such idealogy to atheism?

Not sure what your point is here...

Could God exist? i dont know why this one is so avoided/ignored...

What is your definition of God?

What personal searching for "god" have you done?
Who/what told you what god is or is not? Why did you believe them/it?

Lots of exposure to many religious ceremonies, reading, talking with a variety of people, personal introspection, etc. etc. Probably far more than most who do claim to follow a religion. The conclusion that I have reached – my belief - is that organized religion was created by man to explain what was unexplainable and used by those in power to keep control of the masses.

How i see it, without evidence, saying "There is no God" is exactly the same as saying "There is a God." Two sides of the same coin. How does the atheist feel he/she are more correct in their "conclusion without evidence" than the "religious" person they so despise?

I don't despise anyone, nor have I heard anyone say they despise religious people, but that aside, I mostly agree that stating that there isn't a god is about as provable as stating that there is one. Normally one tries to prove that something does exist than doesn't. I can't prove that there are no unicorns either.

When an atheist says "they," who are they actually referring to? Why is perspective such a grounds for lack of respect?

Need more context here...?

In a world where we are quite limited by human perspective, what could constitute as quantitative proof of the "ultimate truth," or God?

God “showing” himself as he supposedly did so many times in the past according to the stories in the Bible, Qu’ran, Greek and Roman myths, etc., etc….

How would one go about proving any evidence does not simply exist in our collective perception, or is just massively misunderstood due to human limitation/knowledge on the subject?

If that's the case, then I don’t think you can, but to form a belief based on the assumption that the evidence is there but it just can’t be understood or perceived seems strange to me.

Does the atheist believe, err.. "whatever atheist do instead of believe" the human perspective is indeed capable of being omniscient?
How would one go about proving that All That Is quantitatively exists from an unbiased perspective outside of All That Is?

Not sure what you're asking.

reply to post by teapot


The universe works perfectly well without invoking the idea of a supernatural deity. I think if we were to ever experience "GOD" we would have surely experienced him by now.

And if he was so intelligent and had a special plan for us homo-sapiens down here, he wouldn't have set the andromeda gallaxy on a collision course with the milky way.

And there comes some time when our Sun will eventually burn out and life and civlisation will be no more in our solar system.

I ask you, what kind of designer is your God? What is this God? Define him, define it. You assume causation, thus your God created existence, then who created God? and on which plane of reality does he exist if he has not yet created reality?

No one knows! I don't claim to know, you can't claim to know, any homo-sapien who says they can explain the supernatural should be treated with suspicion.

If there is a God (an intelligent deity) is still doesn't automatically assume he owns me, and he still doesn't deserve my respect, respect is gained, not commanded (that's totalitarianism) for what about the disease, the famine, the destruction of solar systems? Does he watch with indifference? I thought your guy was "omnipotent"?

This really is a simple case of;

The invisible and the non-existent appearing very alike.

To conjure a set of absolute moral values without knowing the source of one's existence is a similar trick that Mediums play on there victims. It's by the same unfalsifiable nature that Astrologer's seek the gullabilities of people to believe that the relation of stars at the time of your birth to determ future events and your personality in one small paragraph. It's nonsense.