I Converted A Catholic To Atheism

reply to post by AfterInfinity

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by BenReclused

 

Now that I am on an actual computer, I will kindly answer your questions:

Would you, kindly, explain why/how a God,THAT DOESN'T EXIST, could/would, possibly want something, or EVEN BE "in a position to procure it in any way that amuses them"?

Oh, I'm taking my cues from a work of relative fiction known as the Bible. Again, just as one would refer to Harry Potter, so I refer to "God"...but not with nearly so much reverence and respect. I rather wish the god of the Bible were based on Harry Potter's character profile. I see more humility and compassion in Harry than I ever saw in Yahuwah.

Try again!

Your "answer" didn't explain how a non existent "entity" could possibly want something, or even be in a position to procure it. That's ALL that my question was about.

Perhaps a better question would be:
Why are you assigning REAL blame, to what you feel is someone else's "imaginary friend"?

See ya,
Milt

reply to post by BenReclused

Try again!

Your "answer" didn't explain how a non existent "entity" could possibly want something, or even be in a position to procure it. That's ALL that my question was about.

Ah. Gotcha. Well, to put it simply: there's millions of people who believe in a deity. What this deity wants, they want, because they're so in love with this deity. What they want, affects how they understand, approach, and interact with reality in general. So the nature of this deity, whether it exists or not, still influences the people who believe in it.

Perhaps a better question would be:
Why are you assigning REAL blame, to what you feel is someone else's "imaginary friend"?

See ya,
Milt

I'm not assigning blame. I'm making observations.

reply to post by wildtimes

If people want to accept a pre-packaged religion, that's their choice and decision based on their unique experience and needs.

so it has nothing to do with their "limited intellect, creative thinking and philosophical ability"???
I actually remember a quote by Imam Ghazali.

“Men have such a good opinion of
themselves, of their mental
superiority and intellectual depth;
they believe themselves so skilled in
discerning the true from the false, the
path of safety from those of error, that they should be forbidden as
much as possible the perusal of
philosophic writings.”
― Abu Hamid al-Ghazali

Many of them see things they NEVER
expected to see.

the subconcious mind registers and remembers much more than we can consciously be aware of. Seeing something that was never expected should be easy to explain by that. It EVEN happens in dreams.

Right back at you, bro. Right back at
you.

so you admit that we both have equal possibility of being wrong but you lose much more if you are wrong?

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by logical7

 

You know what? Dammit, logical7, why can't you be consistent?? We are conversing on several different threads - in one you tell me you agree with me and that I'm a good person, and in another you accuse me of being judgmental and claiming I am "superior"?

Pick a stance, and stick with it across the board (pun intended). You think I'm full of crap and wrong? Or you think I have sound ideas and morals? Which is it???? Does it just depend on which shirt you're wearing on any given day?
What mood you're in?

Or do you just want me to repeat myself over and over for the benefit of others who you hope to 'teach' Islam to, so THEY will reject me?

I don't know what game this is you're playing, but I'm tired of you changing the rules that you just make up as you go along.

edit on 24-6-2013 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)

do i have to agree with you on everything if i agree on some topic?

I don't get why are you surprised? Did you assume that you have FINALLY "enlightened" me?
and feel frustated when i still don't agree with you on many topics?

I don't see the disagreements as a frustating thing. Why do you?
My stand is pretty clear, "I am a Muslim"
do you expect me to agree with you on everything to make you feel accepted? I know you don't.

So whats the problem?

reply to post by AfterInfinity

And by those standards, how do you feel about the topic material?

In other words, stay on topic? Ok. I was just venting a bit.

I used to be a big time long time Christian. I broke out for reasons similar to your friend, "pre-set damnation for some people".

Luckily for me, I read a lot of fiction, therefore I'm familiar with putting myself in the protagonists shoes. As I was reading the Exodus story for the 11th time, it suddenly hit me how horrifying it all really was. No way in hell would I have survived such a thing. I would have taken the first opportunity to desert. No doubt some tongue of flame would reach out and destroy me anyway.

But I pressed on, got to the part where the inhabitants of the land were to be utterly destroyed. So I put myself in the place of the inhabitants. Obviously, the god of armies had nothing good to offer me.

That's pretty much the way I read the rest of the Bible through. When I finally got to Revelation, and saw the dogs left out of the city, that's when I decided "Well if someone is called a dog, or evil, or unrighteous, then that's where I'll be too." And so I became a heathen, of a very polytheistic brand of primitive shamanism.

I still have to remind myself from time to time that the Old Testament god character has nothing good to offer me. And insofar as the New Testament god is identified as the Old Testament god, he doesn't either. And so I am a crypto neo Marcionite of the third splinter sect and a heathen polytheist. What a mess!

reply to post by logical7

so you admit that we both have equal possibility of being wrong but you lose much more if you are wrong?

Are you threatening me with the 'fear of hell'? Sorry, not biting.

If I'm wrong it will be the end of my consciousness. So I won't know it.

If "Hell" turns out to be real? I'm not worried that I'm going there, so that is a moot point. "Know thyself."

As for your "quote" by some whoseywutzit guy from god knows when:
That is ridiculous.

Plato and the Philosopher Kings ring a bell?? Socrates?

"The Republic"?
Look it up. The only people who SHOULD be leading are philosophers. The very ones who are LEAST LIKELY to want power are the MOST QUALIFIED, by virtue of being philosophers.
Predates your whoever guy. By a long, long time.
Led to civilization as we know it in the West. Western Civilization was required for us in college. We HAD to learn the history of "Western Civ" as freshmen and sophomores (1st and 2nd year college kids) before we could even CLAIM a major.

This is why the Liberal Arts and Humanities course-work MUST BE returned to AND PART OF the curriculum of EVERY place of higher learning in the world. EVERY ONE OF THEM. Even if you "hate" and "revile" Western Civilization, you still need to KNOW IT in order to make YOUR judgments about the 'corrupt West' and worldview broad enough to be valid judgments. Which is why I have studied the history of ALL of the major religions and civilizations except Hindu. I need to learn more about the pre-Soviet world history as well - I was ad adult by the time the USSR dissolved. It's next.

Since I don't feel I have adequate background knowledge in ALL civilizations, or in ALL religions YET - I don't take a stand. I'm still open-minded.

You and I started talking because I asked a question on ATS to Muslims to help me learn about Islam. I have learned a lot since then. And all that accumulated learning over this "semester" of "Islamic Studies" has not changed my mind about it. I've asked every question I can think of - I've looked everywhere I could find to look - I've talked to you until my fingertips (and bum) are numb --
I've listened to several other Muslims and given them the same regard as I've given you,
I participate in EVERY thread on the subject --
AND I STILL DON'T THINK IT'S THE TRUTH.

Either way, my being "wrong" is not something to fear.

reply to post by pthena


Could you explain in more detail how you came to your current position the matter?

reply to post by pthena

That's because they are firmly grounded in what is obvious. We are here in this World. Things are necessary for survival. No hypothetical higher anything detracts from that.

being grounded in the obvious does make living easy in some way but it also raises some BIG questions that demand answers, "why we have a sense of justice in an obvious unjust world?" "why empathy when/if it does not matter in the end?" etc

Two people can have the
same creed, same holy book, same ritual, and yet be at different ends of
the spectrum.

Exactly!
My stand is that religion has guidance but not everyone who is following that religion is guided as people just interpret the religion in a way to justify fulfilling their desires. These people no way represent the religion but the fault of the agnostics and the deists is that they reject a religion by observing actions of the above mentioned people, thats not sound reasoning at all!

reply to post by AfterInfinity


Hey, AI, sorry for letting logical "lead me into temptation" to be off-topic .
(Cut it out, logical7! )

reply to post by pthena

Do I know everything? Absolutely not! But I do know that some religions(as personal, not purely ritualistic) tend to promote humanity, whereas others degrade. Two people can have the same creed, same holy book, same ritual, and yet be at different ends of the spectrum.

Hear, hear!!!

*steps sideways closer to pthena*

reply to post by wildtimes

*steps sideways closer to pthena*

You! Come on now. I'm a happily celibate man. And you've distracted me from the topic!

Sorry AfterInfinity. You let her in here!

reply to post by logical7

I don't see the disagreements as a frustating thing. Why do you?
My stand is pretty clear, "I am a Muslim"
do you expect me to agree with you on everything to make you feel accepted? I know you don't.

Thanks for not making me explain it again.

So whats the problem?

The PROBLEM is that you CONTINUE to misunderstand Western Civilization and condemn it, and fail to provide actual, tangible, believable sources or answers for the very valid concerns that non-Muslims have.

Now get back on topic - Atheist was A Catholic. Now he's not.

My on-topic premise is that RELIGION IS NOT REQUIRED. Neither for MORALS, nor for HAPPINESS, and that it's fine if some phantom anthonycooper wants to explore life outside of it. That's his birth-right. And no one else gets to judge him -- or shame him, or pity him, or condemn him -- for that. It's HIS DECISION.

reply to post by pthena


Only a guy would take that as a "sexual advance."
:shk: *facepalm*
It was "sides" silly. Grouping closer to a friend and away from a foe....ya know.....

reply to post by AfterInfinity

I'm not upset apparently you are seeing things that aren't there.

Well, I CAN, most certainly, show otherwise. Should I do so?

You wouldn't be religious by any chance?

I'll be more than happy to answer that, but I want to see YOUR answer, FIRST.

See ya,
Milt

reply to post by AfterInfinity

Could you explain in more detail how you came to your current position the matter?

That's a fairly wide open field there. Are you sure that you don't want to be more specific?

Some people mean by duality something totally different from what other people mean by it. Opportunity for confusion right there unless there's a definition provided. For this post I will go with the "us vs them" usage.

From early childhood in church the "righteous" and the "wicked" were often juxtaposed in sentences such as: "and the righteous held fast to faith, while the wicked came at them with guns. And the Lord sent angels to guard the righteous, and the guns of the wicked turned to straw." This is a quote from a prophecy concerning some future event.

The automatic assumption was that the listeners of such stories would identify themselves as among the righteous. Once I began to question what all was involved in being "the righteous" it just appeared more and more to be an unfounded assumption, and an unfounded distinction once I got exposure to other people with differing viewpoints.

Edit to add: Hint: the "wicked" in the prophecy story were Christians not of the same "righteous" sect of Christians. Scary stuff!

reply to post by pthena


How was such righteousness unfounded?

reply to post by BenReclused


If you can prove it then go for it.

reply to post by AfterInfinity

How was such righteousness unfounded?

To be specific, it was very much tied to a historic "event", and how a person viewed that particular historic "event".

Just to make it clear, it took years for me to challenge the assumption, not overnight.

The event was "the return of Christ in 1844". The righteous were the ones who believed that it would happen, and when it didn't happen, the righteous continued to believe that they were right to believe it was going to happen.

And all those "wicked" people were the ones who either never believed it in the first place or those who believed it was going to happen but then subsequently concluded that they had suffered delusion.

After a few generations have passed, such distinctions are just plain ludicrous. Yet still, it took years for me to "get it".

I know that that's a very limited explanation when it comes to more general questions of "who are the righteous", but the specific does tend to shine some light on the general, even if just a flicker.

reply to post by AfterInfinity

But it still doesn't prove God exists. It only proves the uncertainties of absolute truth. And considering that God is considered absolute truth, wouldn't that prove the uncertainties of God as well?

As an atheist, you can't, legitimately, refer to God as a basis for any of your beliefs, or thoughts. Therefore, I will remove all of your references to God:

It only proves the uncertainties of absolute truth.

Hell! I've known that since my early childhood!

That's one of the reasons I take issue with YOUR proclamation of "absolute truth"; God doesn't exist.

See ya,
Milt

reply to post by shells4u

Originally posted by shells4u
reply to post by AfterInfinity

 

Are you boasting about your persuasive skills? If so its like boasting about how you turned your lover gay.

Can't turn somebody "gay". Either you are attracted to people of your same gender or you aren't. When someone "turns gays" they are just admitting sexual attractions already there or opening their repressed feelings.

Likewise it makes sense that someone who was already "doubting" can be "turned" into an Atheist.

reply to post by AfterInfinity

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
This morning, he declared: "I feel like a new man! A gnostic atheist!" I questioned him on the gnostic part, and he voiced his opinion that it can be proven that there is no god. While I hesitate at the use of the word 'proven', I am proud of his new-found confidence and self-esteem.

It depends on the definition of "God". If we are talking about The Christian-Jewish God, then it makes that he is not the true creator of the universe since The Bible has inaccurate information such as Genesis where it says plant life existed on Earth without a sun. The Sun had to be here since the Earth orbits it and most like needs the sun.

What is "proof" that God doesn't exist? Thermal-dynamics. The second law states that Energy cannot be created or destroyed therefore there is no "creator", since everything is made up of energy.

By the way, absolute certainty exists. I am 100% certain that I exist. How do I know? Because if I didn't exist there would be no me to doubt my existence.