Belief in God is infantile...

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
Uhh, what does the Vatican have to do with me or my argument? You see the crescent moon in my avy, right?

Yes, I saw it before I posted. I even imagined you would have this response. I understand that we think completely differently, so I'm not going to have a discussion with you that will only be a futile argument. I have enough of that in my 3D life.

a reply to: stormson

Because you have a god complex for changing a diaper does not mean your child sees you as a god. It just means your ego is out of check.

a reply to: stormson

Actually your OP (ironically) argues in favor of a higher power.

You created your child. She didn't just spring out from nothingness.

Ergo something created you... and the earth... and the cosmos... and the multiverse.

So by trying to argue away the influence of a divine creator, you just admitted His existence.

Freudian slip? Or part of the divine plan?

WHY is it important for the OP to deny Christianity?

a reply to: TzarChasm

Science = Paradigm

Label anything correct and you will buy it, God doesnt move.

a reply to: stormson

NO, what is infantile is completely dismissing something out of hand because it doesn't conform to your belief structure...

Funny, the very thing that you are both DOING here, and erroneously accusing those who believe in God of doing...

Jaden

originally posted by: Masterjaden
a reply to: stormson

NO, what is infantile is completely dismissing something out of hand because it doesn't conform to your belief structure...

Funny, the very thing that you are both DOING here, and erroneously accusing those who believe in God of doing...

Jaden

That's something huh? It's pointless....

originally posted by: yulka
a reply to: TzarChasm

Science = Paradigm

Label anything correct and you will buy it, God doesnt move.

par·a·digm
ˈperəˌdīm/
noun
1.

a typical example or pattern of something; a model.

i would agree, science does help us establish a typical example of something, how it happens and how we can predict it and use it. which is a pretty useful skill to have if you really think about it. science is the discipline we require if we are to ever take ourselves seriously as explorers of earth, physics, and the cosmos. and i know that because literally every serious expert on earth is required to learn it. its not just some bumper sticker you get for buying a yearly membership.

a reply to: Trachel

I think your argument goes like this:

You bought your child a diaper. It didn't just spring out from nothingness. Ergo, somebody bought you your child... and the earth... and the cosmos... and the multiverse.

So by trying to argue away the influence of a divine purchaser, you just admitted His existence.



I'm trying to illustrate why I don't follow your logic.

as an atheist and as a heavy reader on this topic... i can say with 100% certainty that the OP assertions are completely juvenile and filled with anger.

I think the OP was making the comparison of those believing God are almost child like in a sense, the whole "We are all Gods children", and not pissing Dad off or he will spank you with thunder and lightning, or send you to hell for a eternal time out...Etc.

And that they cling to the believe of God like it was pair of milk jugs, the waters of life(Funny truth actually.)

originally posted by: stormson
I placed this here because it deals with the origins of the gods.

I wrote this on another thread, but think it needs its own thread.

I have a newborn. I created her. I am her God.
When she cries out to the heavens for food, or a diaper change, I provide.

To her I'm all powerful. To her I know everything. To her I have no start or finish. I am. There are others like me, but she fears, respects, loves, and follows me. I am her God.

As children we all think this of our parents. It's deeply ingrained and reinforced from birth for years.

Then something happens and you realize that your parents aren't gods. They are like you, only older and wiser.

What do you do with this notion you've had since birth of an all powerful being that provides for you? You transfer it to an unseen imaginary friend. You keep the idea because it provides comfort and simply shift it away from your parents.

Fortunately you have a whole group of people that help reinforce this transfer. It's called organized religion. You find they can answer most of your questions (cause those questions have been asked before so they are ready with an answer). So your infantile belief doesn't change, only the focus does.

Now I'm not saying this is good or bad. I happen to be a soft polytheist. I just accept the logical basis for my belief. I don't care if its a hold over from my infant days. So is my like of breasts

.

If you like this idea, check out Jung as he wrote on this. I think it was in "answers to job" but I could be wrong.

What your proposing is extremely interesting. I saw the thread title and was going to say that absolute belief in the non existence of god is as naive as absolute belief in its existence. But your allegory is loud and clear. I can see a God archetype being created by the nurturing of our parents at an infantile stage. I think god is way bigger than that but as far as humans needing to have a relationship with a particular archetype....what im trying to say is..im agnostic and what you said appears valid. Good day sir.

a reply to: stormson

God exists. I have no doubt about that. But we are just humans and we see just what we see. But there is so much we don’t know.
After death everything becomes clear. It’s something the ancients knew about. But yur soul has to grow to understand.
Our mind is nothing more than a quantum computer implanted in our brains.
By the way it‘s strange that people who never knew their parents also believe in God. God is only thinkable for the human mind.

Read www.evawaseerst.be... red dots and make up your mind

originally posted by: jbowenh
absolute belief in the non existence of god is as naive as absolute belief in its existence.

No, it's not. I also have zero belief in the existence unicorns. The burden of proof is on those making extraordinary claims. So far their hasn't even been any evidence produced. The believers just tell us to believe. I must confess, there is logic in the statement, "If you believe, then you will believe."

I'm gonna go with this guys explanation.

originally posted by: Specimen
I think the OP was making the comparison of those believing God are almost child like in a sense, the whole "We are all Gods children", and not pissing Dad off or he will spank you with thunder and lightning, or send you to hell for a eternal time out...Etc.

And that they cling to the believe of God like it was pair of milk jugs, the waters of life(Funny truth actually.)

well in terms of sentience, we are pretty infantile...we have only been around for half a millennia. the dinosaurs were around for 150 millennia and we consider them animals.

originally posted by: gentledissident

originally posted by: jbowenh
absolute belief in the non existence of god is as naive as absolute belief in its existence.

No, it's not. I also have zero belief in the existence unicorns. The burden of proof is on those making extraordinary claims. So far their hasn't even been any evidence produced. The believers just tell us to believe. I must confess, there is logic in the statement, "If you believe, then you will believe."

Unicorns can be bought. Single horned white goats. Your disbelief didnt affect the existence of the unicorn. Your absolute beliefe that they didnt exist impeded your search for the facts.

a reply to: jbowenh

en.wikipedia.org...
You wanted to believe in unicorns so much, you saw one where there wasn't.

I've studied religion at a seminary. I've hung out with preachers. I've had "religious" experiences. I've also studied sciences. As the sciences advance, they explain away religious belief and mechanisms. The god of the gaps is finding less to do.

originally posted by: gentledissident
a reply to: jbowenh

en.wikipedia.org...
You wanted to believe in unicorns so much, you saw one where there wasn't.

I've studied religion at a seminary. I've hung out with preachers. I've had "religious" experiences. I've also studied sciences. As the sciences advance, they explain away religious belief and mechanisms. The god of the gaps is finding less to do.

Im agnostic. I dont believe. Youve projected a belief system on me. I still say such a firm stance in athiesm is equally as ignorant as a firm stance in the belief of god. Most solid athiests i know only talk about the christian idea of god. Their entire concept of what god could be is very limited to mainstream (govt controlled) religion. Your concept of a unicorn may have been unrealistic. Once presented with the reality of the unicorn (a goat with a single horn) its dismissed. Once you prove the existence of the mythical creature its no longer mythical.

Im not defending religion. Im defending an unbias view of what could possibly exist.

originally posted by: jbowenh
Im not defending religion. Im defending an unbias view of what could possibly exist.

LOL A unicorn is not a single horned goat. My life would be very difficult to navigate if I allowed for the possibility of fairy tales being real. If you want to argue an undiscovered species originating from a much more complicated universe making us their science project, I'm still going to ask for evidence.