outer-theism for servants, inner-theism for leaders

What logical sense would there be for an "atheist" to post in a thread for which the sole purpose is to discuss inner and outer "theism". Unless such an individual is questioning their beliefs. If so there are other appropriate threads for such seeking. There is a verse in the Bible that says " To every man is given a measure of faith". I only use this verse because I believe it is a truth that is self-evident due to the fact that all men believe in things for which they have no proof. Some men use their faith to believe in a God or a Creator and some men use their faith to believe in mindless processes to bring the world and it's contents into existence. For anyone to deny faith is for that one to claim to have "proof" for how and why our world came into existence. Since we all readily admit that we do not have "proof" for how or why our world came into being then we must accept that we are choosing to exercise our faith according to our own will. As we know...a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still. As a result .....imo, it is fruitless and unprofitable for "atheists" and "theists" to discuss matters of faith as there beliefs are not able to be reconciled and it only hinders both parties in their pursuit of truth along their chosen paths.

reply to post by HarryJoy


Atheists are allowed to join in the discussion too.

Many Atheists have studied theism in depth in order to arrive at their position. Many others don't need to do so in order to form their position. Others just like to be against the majority, to be a contrarian - often they have little argument or reason to attain the position, they just like the social rebellion, probably oonsidered "cool" or "hip"

reply to post by awake_and_aware


First of all judging from your responses I believe you are a sincere individual and that you have genuine convictions regarding your beliefs. Also you have conducted yourself in a respectful manner and I have absolutely nothing against you as an individual. But certainly you can see the futility of an "atheist" discussing the differences between inner and outer "theism".....it is an oxymoron!! There are most likely threads that debate the validity of Theism and Atheism. The paths of theism and atheism both arrive at a void....a void between emperical evidence and the conclusive answer to the how and why of life. That void can only be crossed by "faith" the theist exercises his faith to believe in an intelligent life-form as the answer and the atheist exercises his to believe in a non-thinking process as the answer. That is as close as we can get to one another...until the answer is made evident. I say this with great respect unto your choice of belief.

reply to post by HarryJoy


Yes this is my perpspective also. what a waste of bandwith! I might as well go onto a soccer thread and start expounding on my legendary dislike of the stupid sport. The only justification that I could have is that I am an evangelical about my dislike.

Of course atheists hotly deny that "evangelical atheism exists". I say they are disingenuous. By their deeds they will be known!

reply to post by HarryJoy


Thanks for the kind comments.

The paths of theism and atheism both arrive at a void....

Atheism doesn't intend to arrive anywhere, it's simpy a lack of belief. It's the opposite to the positive assertion of the theist. An atheist may be agnostic or gnostic, most rational and/or reasonable Atheists are "agnostic" - No one knows the cause of the universe, so lets suspend our belief and judgement until evidence is put forward.

Whilst i do not agree with Theism, i believe i can discuss and debate with people about improving certain religions and ideology. I don't have a problem with belief in a God (Deism), it's freedom of expression, I have no problem living along side people with this belief.... but when organised religion or ideological dogma causes prejudice and harm, i feel i will stand up and argue that it is not great.

I believe most mono-theistic abrahamic religions promiote exclusivity and separation (togetherness for those with the same belief) Ideas of heaven and hell, are enough to cause a religious person to have prejudice over someone with non-belief.

If we can't get rid of a belief wtihout evidence, at least lets work together to improve it's value and moral and ethical messages.

reply to post by awake_and_aware


Intent or not....the results are the same. To believe that something does not exist is still to believe and that belief is based on faith. Aside from that... I do agree with you on many of the points that you are making there are many distortions of the truth that are supported and perpetuated by organized religion. And likewise many distortions perpetrated by the non-religious. Imo, righteousness lies somewhere inbetween the two sides of this coin. The balance between stifling conformity and restriction as resulting from organized religion and the unbridled and destructive chaos that can result from a world with no boundaries.

reply to post by HarryJoy


It might be a belief but its based on 0 evidence, i don't have any logical or empirical evidence to assert a belief in the first place. So i ask, how was the theory formed in the first place? A guess?

For the same reason, i have a BELIEF that there is NO teapot on pluto (out of range our telescopes) Of course that will remain a LACK OF belief (which you consider a belief), unless our best telescopes demonstrate it so.

Argument from ignorance - "You can't prove it DOESN'T exist, therefore that stands in favour of it's truth"

"Argument from ignorance"

"Russell's Teapot"

Someone's probably going to reply with "Personal experience" - They "experience" "GOD" - No help in debate, merely a subjective account of an experience. Intellectually bankrupt.

Laters,

reply to post by awake_and_aware


My convictions are based on overwhelming circumstantial evidence. The fact that the planet I live on is filled with complex and orderly systems many of which are irreducibly complex not to mention the other factors of our existence that evolution makes no provision for....such as the human appreciation for music, and asthetic beauty as well as the fact that humans have a sense of justice and equality that evolution cannot account for....I would say it's about as safe a bet as you can get that there is an intelligent force behind it. Really....have you stepped back and looked at the world you live in lately? The only way I can see for anyone to deny the existence of a creator is for that individual to have been traumatized by religion at some point in their life. Or that individual is just stubbornly resisting common sense.

reply to post by HarryJoy


What you're talking about is concsioussness itself. Evolution or science may not be able to account for this (yet)

But even without a belief in God, the beauty of a piece of music, the creativeness of a piece of art is still something that i can appreciate and understand as a conscious being.

The cause or "reason" for consciousness is even something that evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins is puzzled by, he wants to know the answers to the questions. I think it's best to suspend judgement rather than to commit to faith. I feel one position is more open-minded than the other.

All you can do to answer the questions, is seek them. Science has a great track record of this. Religious dogma and superstition; not so much.

Originally posted by krzyspmac
And for the record - there tons of buddist who do not belive in reincarnation. The great thing about buddism, as Budda said himself, that you *do not believe in anything*. You test it. If you cannot - then for you - it does not exist.

For you and everyone else talking about Buddhism... Buddhism is spelled Buddhism. Buddha is spelled Buddha.
.
Where exactly are the "tons" of Buddhists that don't believe in Reincarnation?

Thus far, not many of ewe seem to understand much about Karma and Reincarnation, or Buddhism for that matter, and maybe better to not write about things you don't understand... it makes you "experts" look stupider than normal.

Obviously Buddhism is an Esoteric (inner) teaching, or learning, and well worth intelligent investigation.

everyone here me. I am spirit. What tone do you hear?

The tone inside your skull, the voice. Well? Hand it over to the spirit, now. Say it out loud if you wish.

I'm the voice of spirit. Why am I not the voice of your ego? Because I and the ego that is with me is not your names ego. I've made the ego, and the ego has made what you all here are sharing with each other concerning that which IS.

I am the voice you will hear next. Shortly, you will be in a room, of experience with another female. And she will be the one you long for. And you will let go and see her as the daughter I have made. And you will feel small. And you will love her, because she has always loved what I have put inside of you. She longs for you as I have made her to long for you. And you will remember love, and then for a short time, you will forget us after.

This is spirit speaking. I desire and knock not for your soul. But for you now. I know best for us and have made it this way. Because I love you.

You must see everything. Return. To yourself, and to her, and let her speak. She will speak. So go.

How would a man come to accept inner theism if he were blinded to such a thing? How can a mortal accept that he is anything other than what he can know of himself? Can he see strength where only weakness exists? Or can he make love exist in the face of fear? But if ones eyes were opened then all things would be made manifest. Is there a salve that he might purchase? ........ that he should see. He sacrificed his eyes unto her long ago at the hands of the Philistines? And unto this seventh time hath she lead him into Hell.