Atheists and Agnostics don't believe in God but want spread their nothing word

a reply to: DeadSeraph

We don't know that.

By definition, the Universe is all of existence. Your proposing that there's a place that doesn't exist, and you call my beliefs illogical!

I personally don't believe you HAVE TO believe in a god. I would just prefer you remain honest about how you define your beliefs if you do (in whatever context that might be).

I am being honest. It's all semantics. Everyone can believe in a God, so long as they get to define what "God" is. It's a word that's wide open for any interpretation whatsoever.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Annee

I rely heavily each day on my intuition and empathy, which are two less fabulous descriptions of what many call 'psychic' powers.

Are you ever amazed at how the wildest heretics inevitably become the eventual enforcers for orthodoxy?

I am.

But there is a difference between local intuition and non-local intuition. The former is based on information gathered from mundane senses. Sight, hearing, touch, smell. The latter is based on information gathered via psi, or spiritual faculties.

The vast majority of atheists would reject the latter. Do you?

👣

originally posted by: DeadSeraph
a reply to: Kukri

I consider myself an Atheist. Not because I don't believe in God or a divine being but simply because I don't know what to believe. When and if I experience some sort of enlightenment I'll change my opinion.

Then you should reconsider how you define your beliefs.

Why would I do that? Is it because my beliefs don't align with yours?

Until I have proof one way or the other I refuse to commit to anothers' beliefs solely on faith.

a reply to: windword

By definition, the Universe is all of existence. Your proposing that there's a place that doesn't exist, and you call my beliefs illogical!

Talk to the scientists that propose a multiverse, I guess. Your beef is with them, not me. I was simply stating a fact. We do not know if the universe is all there is.

I am being honest. It's all semantics. Everyone can believe in a God, so long as they get to define what "God" is. It's a word that's wide open for any interpretation whatsoever.

I'm totally fine with that. I take contention with people who claim they are atheists yet believe in an eternal soul or an afterlife. How can one be an atheist and yet believe in metaphysical concepts such as the soul, given what we know about the observable universe? I think I have demonstrated clearly why there is a logical disconnect between the two concepts.

I really don't care if people have other views on how God works or what it is, whether that is some amorphous collective universal conscious or some sky wizard in the clouds. I don't even care if people are materialists and consider the whole argument nonsense, just as long as they are honest about their own beliefs.

Why would I do that? Is it because my beliefs don't align with yours?

Until I have proof one way or the other I refuse to commit to anothers' beliefs solely on faith.

No. It's because your views align with the position of agnosticism, and not atheism. But that's ok. Misrepresent yourself if you like. Just don't expect me to take you seriously.

a reply to: DeadSeraph

In order of your comments:

I asked you questions.

I didn't say anything about "eternal" nor "purely materialist universe." Define your terms.

You tell me what the "soul" you're referring is composed of and I'll see if I can make further logical statements about it.

There's the "eternal" word again. Define your term.

Also. at what level does "the soul" exist when the body is alive? Where is that "level" vis-a-vis what we can all agree upon as existence?

I asked you questions. I didn't address reincarnation.

You have been throwing about "the soul" so one could reasonably assume you know what you mean by it.

If "the soul" exists now (does it?) what would stop it's existence? How does "the soul" exist?

And then ... you jump off the logical deep end. A "universe devoid of an author" is ... utterly separate from what we're discussing, and you know that.

Did you mention intellectual honesty?

a reply to: DeadSeraph

Hence we can argue 3 things:

1) If the soul exists, it must have a source

The Universe is the source. It's a giant oversoul, then there are souls over souls, descending into infinity, within the eternal and conscious Universe.

2) If the soul persists after death, it must either go to a prepared (created) place, or return to it's source

Well, yes and no. If the Universe is expanding, and we emanated from, say, the Big Bang, or were created from the stuff of exploding super novas, then, no we can't return to source when we die. We can, however return to a temporal source, like our bodies return to our mother earth. Perhaps the body of earth is a conscious oversoul from which our souls arise as individual parts of the whole.

3) therefore, the soul was either created, or it does not exist.


Everything that is, just is, or it isn't.

a reply to: Gryphon66

These are questions you should be asking "atheists" that believe in the afterlife, not me. I can give you my own opinions, but they are based on my own views as a theist.

It's amazing you don't see the disconnect here...

originally posted by: DeadSeraph
a reply to: Gryphon66

These are questions you should be asking "atheists" that believe in the afterlife, not me. I can give you my own opinions, but they are based on my own views as a theist.

It's amazing you don't see the disconnect here...

You're repeatedly intervening in the discussion attempting to force others to respond and correspond with your own terms with your own definitions. Not standard definitions, not generally accepted definitions, but YOUR definitions.

With all respect, don't try to sidestep now ... you want everyone to respond to your questions in your terms, then DEFINE YOUR TERMS.

That is, if you value intellectual honesty. If not ...

/shrug

originally posted by: daskakik

That cuts both ways. Suppose you interact with something that says it is a god, so you call it god...

For all of human history, we have projected parts of ourselves and interacted with them. It is we who chose to call them gods or aliens. To say they aren't gods but aliens is to get caught up in the symbolic form. To say they are aren't aliens but gods is also to get caught up in mere form. They are masks; costumes for archetypes of the collective unconscious.

I've noticed that most atheists reject the notion of a collective unconscious, despite ample evidence.

Not for me.

Hey whatever floats yer boat. Just don't expect me to bow to the dominant paradigm. I know better.

Great theory and I might even be inclined to give it credit but that still doesn't equal "god".

Yeah, well, when you've studied Comparativism for years and have been to the other side of the veil I might listen to what you think equals god.

👣

a reply to: Gryphon66

You're repeatedly intervening in the discussion attempting to force others to respond and correspond with your own terms with your own definitions

Really? I could have sworn I was replying to you.

Not standard definitions, not generally accepted definitions, but YOUR definitions.

I've been asking this entire time what the standard atheist definition of the afterlife is. Can you provide it for me?

With all respect, don't try to sidestep now ... you want everyone to respond to your questions in your terms, then DEFINE YOUR TERMS.

Just looking for a logical explanation of how atheism and the afterlife are compatible concepts. Sorry you took offence?

That is, if you value intellectual honesty. If not ...

I really do. I value passive aggressiveness too, so you get a star

a reply to: DeadSeraph

I take contention with people who claim they are atheists yet believe in an eternal soul or an afterlife. How can one be an atheist and yet believe in metaphysical concepts such as the soul, given what we know about the observable universe? I think I have demonstrated clearly why there is a logical disconnect between the two concepts.

No you haven't demonstrated a logical disconnect. You have failed to prove that the soul needs a God to establish its existence.

Talk to the scientists that propose a multiverse, I guess. Your beef is with them, not me.

Multi Universes are still "places". You're claiming that God exists in NO place. That's illogical.

Also, IF there's more than one Universe, that means that there's more than one God, IF the Universe IS God.

a reply to: windword

Guess what I have proven?

a reply to: DeadSeraph

NOTHING?

a reply to: windword

Oh come now windword. I've tried to be nice to you in this conversation. You could at least offer me a modicum of civility.

I've proven that atheism is just as much of a belief as theism, deism, or any other.

originally posted by: Lucius Driftwood
a reply to: Prezbo369

That is why radical atheists go out of their way to try and stomp out what they consider religion without realizing they themselves have a religion.

You're describing anti-theists not atheists.




Umm.....so is Richard Dawkins an atheist, an anti-theist, a nihilist or.....and which sect does he adhere to anyway?

Actually I think he said he's agnostic.

a reply to: DeadSeraph

I've proven that atheism is just as much of a belief as theism, deism, or any other.

No you haven't! LOL

All you've discovered is everybody has beliefs. Atheists have individual and different beliefs about life, the afterlife and higher purposes. The only thing all atheists have in common is that they all have no belief in a supreme creator deity.

originally posted by: windword

I believe in the Universe, like I outlined earlier. I'm able to enter conversations about the nature of "God" and such, because I can envision a conscious Universe as "God". If I'm conscious, it's my belief that the Universe itself is probably conscious too. If the Universe is eternal, which I believe it is, then I am too, probably. If the Universe is "God", then so am I.

Yep! That's it.

We are our own "creators" of the collective whole.

Kind of like Christmas Lights all on the same stand, plugged into a single outlet.

a reply to: maxzen2004

a reply to: DeadSeraph

Maybe that is being agnostic but I always thought it was dependent on some belief in God which I don't have. But on the other hand I won't say it isn't possible there is a God just at this time I don't believe there is. I can see how that may seem conflictive but I don't have proof either way so it is what it is.