It's called "FAITH" because it's not knowledge

I don't understand why atheists attack the absurd notion of the virgin birth, (when the word translated as virgin could also mean unmarried girl,) in an effort to disprove the existance of god.

Can't atheists understand that theism does not equal Christianity?

The majority of theistic beliefs are not Christian, and do not rely on belief in the cessation of the laws of nature.

Not all people who class themselves as good Christians are theists, some merely regard Christianity as going to church and behaving in a way they consider "Christian".

reply to post by awake_and_aware


I have tried to elucidate this point to you before, but ill try again. I can be as persistent as you "boxed"

The "evidence" you claim is only what has been observed and measured consistently by limited perspectives and biases. It does not describe the totality of that which it measures and is nothing more than a finger pointing at the moon. Accepting it as "Truth" takes faith in the idea that anything in the universe can even be comprehended or understood by what we can consistently observe and measure within an extremely limited timespan, and with extremely limited perspectives and biases.

reply to post by awake_and_aware


Why do i have to fit within a pre-defined box of your choosing? (getting tired of that question yet? i know i am )

Either way, i still suggest you educate yourself on the religions you constantly discuss

Originally posted by sinohptik
"The Force" is a different beliefs system than that of pantheism.

In pantheism, if God is the universe, then that means all things are included, and is not a separate entity from all that is. In other words, in pantheism, God is "The Force" and all things the force flows through. The alpha and omega, in the words of the bible.
. . .

There is a Hindu "grace" to meditate on before eating.

This food is Brahma.
This eater is Brahma.
This act of eating is Brahma.

I believe Jesus travelled to India, learned this, and taught this to his disciples at the last supper.
The church, later deciding to make a god of Jesus, and a political movement out of their new god, warped this teaching to make salvation something given out by the church in the ceremony of holy communion.

reply to post by Kailassa

I don't understand why atheists attack the absurd notion of the virgin birth, (when the word translated as virgin could also mean unmarried girl,) in an effort to disprove the existance of god.

"Immaculate Conception" - They believe that no man was involved in the birth of the healthy baby Jesus.

Atheists are even willing to grant them this "possibility", it still does not prove the metaphysical claims of Jesus were true, or that "GOD" even exists. They believe these miracles are evidence of God, when the miracles cannot even be confirmed themselves.

Can't atheists understand that theism does not equal Christianity?

Christianity is a form of Theism. It is a mono-theistic abrahamic religion.

Theism, in the broadest sense, is the belief that at least one deity exists.[1][2] In a more specific sense, theism refers to a doctrine concerning the nature of a monotheistic God and God's relationship to the universe.

The majority of theistic beliefs are not Christian, and do not rely on belief in the cessation of the laws of nature.

Not all people who class themselves as good Christians are theists, some merely regard Christianity as going to church and behaving in a way they consider "Christian".

There are some "Theists" with "Vague Faith". They believe some of the doctrine, are willing to cherry pick what they want out of their "Holy" doctrine, they ignore the bad moral preachings, and pretend that the good moral preachings could only be achieved by means of religion and faith and believing in a God.

reply to post by Kailassa


I agree. The idea is actually present in 99% (enjoy my made up statistics? ) of the religions out there. Its amazing how the corruption of mankind has distorted such things for the gain of a few greedy, power hungry individuals. Even more amazing that it controls the people who are against it just as effectively and predictably as the "followers." In some ways, its absolute genius, in a very disturbing way.

reply to post by sinohptik


No, it controls the people who believe in it, who give it money, who sing its praises. Giving out falsehope on irrational claims to hellfire and eternal damnaiton. Ok, to a few it provides happiness but its still false hope.

The people are against it because they feel it is irrational and is a direct threat to the stability and solidarity of out species.

for the people who are against it, it's not an irrational belief, it's because they can see the harm it causes and it's based on Faith, pretty irrational faith, the most overated human virtue. Evangelicalism even causes the ignorant to even regard faith higher than evidence (the earth is only 6,000 years old etc. etc.)

Honestly, i know i have posted videos but listen to what this man has to say, this is my viewpoint, again, if you think it is ignorant that i deteste something i consider to cause harm, then you are welcome to argue back. This man says the same, just words it different. But you don't listen to my point of view, or argue any of the points or respond to the questions i ask.

reply to post by awake_and_aware


Now how did you know you would reply like that

As far as the video, I already know Bill Mahers thoughts on the matter. I am not interested in your conceptualizations of his concepts, i want to know your perspective. It is one thing to say "This is similar to my viewpoint" but much different when one says of someone elses beliefs "This is my viewpoint."

reply to post by sinohptik


What's your beliefs?

Agnostic?
Pantheist?

or believe in a in a personal, anthropomorphic or creator god? (Deism?)

or in a personal, anthropomorphic or creator god and you believe you know his desires and thoughts? (Theism)

reply to post by awake_and_aware


My beliefs do not fit into a box of others defined concepts.

Yet, i do not believe in my own beliefs. That should sum it up, right?

In the end, my belief is that is beyond what any of us can comprehend. However, we are a part of it, and can understand limited shards through that experience. That is why i have use the "arm" allegory many times.

On another note, thank you for finally asking what someones personal beliefs are instead of making assumptions!

reply to post by sinohptik


This debate, as many others are, regarding Religion and God, and Philosophy and Metaphysics. I want to know your BELIEFS. Everyone has beliefs, religious and non-religious, i want to know what you believe and if you believe in it without evidence.

I'm not arrogant enough to make assumptions about someones religious views but i will respond to their rebuttals on my arguments against religion and irrationality and prejudice it can cause.

Thanks for making me appear that way though!


Again, Theist? Deist? Pantheist? Agnostic? which one these positions best fits your beliefs regarding the claim to "GOD"?

i'm wanting some specifics here, it's called debate and discussion.

"not believing in your own beliefs" - Priceless, made me giggle. So do you mean Agnosticism by this? That what you mean? Being scepical in things people tell you could potentially exist? i.e. MY POSITION that i have had all this time that you have been rebutting.

A&A.

reply to post by awake_and_aware


My belief is that so many people are pointing at the moon, and fervently proposing their pointing is "right," without realizing it is all part of the same solar system.

I actually suggest re-reading some of our discussions, i have repeatedly spoken my beliefs on the matter. It just was not when you were specifically asking for it You may have to actually look outside of your own perspective to really grasp what i am saying, and i have my doubts about that, since you think your brain will fall out

When i say "chair" what do you conjure up in your mind? I guarantee its different than what every other person is visualizing, but in the end, it will still likely be a device that is used to sit.

And i still dont understand why you are so adamant and obsessive about everyones beliefs fitting into a pre-defined box...

reply to post by sinohptik

When i say "chair" what do you conjure up in your mind? I guarantee its different than what every other person is visualizing, but in the end, it will still likely be a device that is used to sit.

So what's your point here? Yes i have different ideas that i could potentially conjure in my mind, today i might think of a stool, tommorow i might think of a wicker chair, What's your argument here?

And i still dont understand why you are so adamant and obsessive about everyones beliefs fitting into a pre-defined box

LOOK, for the last time, there is no pre-defined box, everything is possible in my eyes, but not everthing is probable, and if you don't provide evidence for a specific belief, or at least a valid reason then i will challenge that belief or at least ask for a rational reason as to why you believe it. That's all.

I'm not preaching opression of individualism, believe what you want, do what you want, but expect to be challenged and questioned, and asked why you believe something. Especially if you're joining in the debate.

"Magical spider monkeys exist that drink chocolate exist on the moon" - Just a belief right? or an irrational belief?

Please take this pre-defined box idea of out this thread and other threads. I'm OPEN-MINDED, willing to accept new ideas, but if they are irrational or i can see faulty logic in regards to how they were formed, i will challenge.

This is what it means to Agnostic, to be humble, to admit we don't know, to admit science does not have the answers to everything. I admit that, That absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, but this doesn't mean magical spagetti monsters exist, or a teapot exists on the rings of jupiter.

reply to post by sinohptik

When i say "chair" what do you conjure up in your mind? I guarantee its different than what every other person is visualizing, but in the end, it will still likely be a device that is used to sit.

So what's your point here? Yes i have different ideas that i could potentially conjure in my mind, today i might think of a stool, tommorow i might think of a wicker chair, What's your argument here?

And i still dont understand why you are so adamant and obsessive about everyones beliefs fitting into a pre-defined box

LOOK, for the last time, there is no pre-defined box, everything is possible in my eyes, but not everthing is probable, and if you don't provide evidence for a specific belief, or at least a valid reason then i will challenge that belief or at least ask for a rational reason as to why you believe it. That's all.

I'm not preaching opression of individualism, believe what you want, do what you want, but expect to be challenged and questioned, and asked why you believe something. Especially if you're joining in the debate.

"Magical spider monkeys exist that drink chocolate exist on the moon" - Just a belief right? or an irrational belief?

Please take this pre-defined box idea of out this thread and other threads. I'm OPEN-MINDED, willing to accept new ideas, but if they are irrational or i can see faulty logic in regards to how they were formed, i will challenge.

This is what it means to Agnostic, to be humble, to admit we don't know, to admit science does not have the answers to everything. I admit that, That absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, but this doesn't mean magical spagetti monsters exist, or a teapot exists on the rings of jupiter.

I'm just going to say this again;

LOOK, for the last time, there is no pre-defined box, everything is possible in my eyes, but not everything is probable, and if you don't provide evidence for a specific belief, or at least a valid reason then i will challenge that belief or at least ask for a rational reason as to why you believe it. That's all.

reply to post by awake_and_aware




So, ill stop talking about pre-defined boxes if you stop constantly asking which one i fit into. Its a deal

If you do not see the relevance of the chair analogy, i suggest you try much, much harder. There was no argument, no debate, just a concept. One that needs to be understood to have a productive conversation on this topic. In a very simple way, all it is doing is illustrating the limitations of language, and the role that plays in our lives. Do you understand it better from that perspective and the repercussions of such a concept?

reply to post by sinohptik


It's really quite a simple question that i'm asking. It's not a pre-defined box i'm asking you clearly what your belief is in regards to a supernatural deity being the causation (if any) of reality?

It's a simple proposition, say "I believe ...... about the causation/source of reality ...... because"

Based on your response, i will be able to tell whether you fall under the following approaches to the "GOD" question:-

Agnostic Athiesm
Agnosticism
Pantheism
Deism
Theism

The chair anology has no use or comparison from what i am asking here; what is your belief system regarding "GOD" Everyone might have a different idea, i could say "GOD" is a fruitcake, so what. God has no meaning unless it is defined. It's just an empty word in attempt to rationalise reality, however beautiful it may be.

I am willing to entertain everyone's descriptions of God but due to being agnostic i refuse to believe in God because God is a man made concept. Provide evidence that "GOD" exists and i will no longer be agnostic in regards to God, and if he matches Christian doctrine for example, i will renounce my Atheism.

Now what i'm asking you to do here is really quite simple.

I'll start

"I believe that no man can claim to have knowledge (currently) of the source/or creation of existence (if any) i therefore do not believe in any pre-defined Deity pledged by any religion. I do however, concede, that i cannot claim to say there is no God for definate."

Now please tell me what you "believe" and i'm not necassarily asking you to label yourself. but your belief system will affirm whether you are Deist, Theist, Agnostic etc.

Pre-defined boxes is exactly my concern, Religion is exactly what you describe, and yes everyone does have different imaginations of God, religion comes with a set of pre-determined beliefs. Agnosticism requires evidence to make a belief, but by this time the Agnostic has become Gnostic. No theologian, historian or scientist has ever demonstrated the existence of a supernatural deity, when they do, i will say i am a Deist!

Originally posted by awake_and_aware

The chair anology has no use or comparison from what i am asking here

yeah..

...Now what i'm asking you to do here is really quite simple.

I apologize, your concepts are beyond my understanding

Lets go ahead and do what we said a while back, and agree to disagree.

This is a waste of time for both of us.

reply to post by sinohptik


Think this is best to be honest. Besides, i'm tired of trying to construct cogent arguments only to be rebutted with vague anologies of chairs and subjectivity and that i'm trying to put everyone in pre-defined boxes when really i'm asking their position on 1 single question. This was explained above, but yeah, let's agree to to disagree. Best for this thread and for my fingers.

Peace

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
I'm just going to say this again;

LOOK, for the last time, there is no pre-defined box, everything is possible in my eyes, but not everything is probable, and if you don't provide evidence for a specific belief, or at least a valid reason then i will challenge that belief or at least ask for a rational reason as to why you believe it. That's all.

I love Zeitgeist BTW. It may not be perfect but certainly is a more positive vision then anything else.

Actually I believe everything is possible/probable. My pet peeve is "singularity" - - that there is only one answer - one reality.

I believe in both a "Spirit/Energy" world (or worlds) and physical worlds (and possibly something that hasn't even been thought of yet).

I believe everything is or comes from Energy. That Energy evolved consciousness - - that thought is energy creating. Maybe the Big Bang is an event that created our universe - - - but many others came before.

Just like our own physical world. There are billions of physical humans on earth (not to mention all other creatures). These billions of people have individual thought. They are of various skin color - cultures - beliefs - etc. There is no singularity.

Why would I think there is only One belief or One alien race or One spiritual realm beyond our current knowing?

Perhaps Jesus was from an advanced race of benevolent "watchers". Perhaps they had some involvement in the creation of Earth and Humans. Perhaps Mary was artificially inseminated by these evolved beings.

There are just so many possibilities from the unknown.

What makes someone cling to a specific belief (if they have the freedom to choose)? Maybe they are descendants from a specific alien race and were programmed to follow a certain teaching.

I can't say any One belief is right or wrong - - - because the possibility exists that there is a reason for all or each of them.

I do think each person needs to "feel" their belief - - - not follow orders or dogma - - because so much of religion is really man made political control.

So in my viewpoint - - - to have true faith - - put the books away - - don't listen to anyone - - go to a quiet room or place in nature - - meditate - - clear your mind - - listen and feel - - what is right for you.

I was raised Christian - - but when I stepped out of the "religion box" - - and asked myself Why? I had no answer. As I thought about it - - it was something that made no sense to me and never did - - it was just something other people had told me. I was told Jesus and God existed. It was not something I thought or felt for myself.

All I can say is I believe everything is Energy. I have a little problem calling it "Faith" - - - but I fully 100% have no real knowledge - nor can I prove anything.