If you worship nothing....

reply to post by NOTurTypical


Actually I don't consider your conclusions arbitrary, once you relate them straightly and directly to a systematic methodology. And such a systematic methodology could be at your own choice, even from the 'outer' reaches of epistemology.

The REAL problem is, that misapplied or mixed systematic methodologies lead to semantic confusion on the way to an 'answer'/conclusion, which thus also will be 'confused'.

E.g. depending on application of such as deductive logic, induction by similarity or category, assumptions, axioms and whatever other elements a constellation of systematic methodology can contain, the outcome often will emerge as something it's not (according to the premises formally (mis)used).

So 'faith' can falsely appear to be deductionally acchieved, which a/ creates no end of wasted debate; b/ amongst religionist hotheads (with more fervour than common sense) many times has 'justified' violent conflicts and c/ on political ground give 'credence' to competing parts.

Personally I have no objections to 'faith', but each thing in its proper place. And a contemporary 'proper' place is IN social co-sensus, not elitistic absolutes with privileges imposed on society.

In the society of non-elitistic ideologies, the options of worshipping nothing as well as a specific deity are both present.

i dont believe in a god of sorts (im not sayings its impossible, i just dont believe it at this time)

spirits snd angels are more believeable to me

i think more about aliens... in space and in other dementions... since i saw a UFO

but even b4 that i didnt believe in religion, or anything i guess

and now ancient alien theorists are tieing religious texts and ET's together...


like i said, gods/spirts/angels are not impossible to me,
but i just believe in alien theories more, becuase a triangular UFO flew within a few hundred feet of me

none of those other things have got that close to me.... or if they have i didnt notice them...

Originally posted by legitbrah
i dont believe in a god of sorts (im not sayings its impossible, i just dont believe it at this time)

spirits snd angels are more believeable to me

i think more about aliens... in space and in other dementions... since i saw a UFO

but even b4 that i didnt believe in religion, or anything i guess

and now ancient alien theorists are tieing religious texts and ET's together...


like i said, gods/spirts/angels are not impossible to me,
but i just believe in alien theories more, becuase a triangular UFO flew within a few hundred feet of me

none of those other things have got that close to me.... or if they have i didnt notice them...

it's all a conspiracy to get you looking into the bible and Daniel & Ezekiel so you can begin to read the verses... the Alien thing one grows out of...

got ya

Originally posted by bogomil


What's the meaning of this statement. Pulling rank to see, who can get the furthest back in history.

no the reasoning behind the statement was educational... your statement was refutable nothing more, sorry if it upset your personal view of history but least the result was you doing a google search.

reply to post by bogomil

Actually I don't consider your conclusions arbitrary..

You're correct, generally they are not. I did that purposely on the previous page in an effort to lure you into providing a response that wasn't arbitrary.

I still have hope though you'll do so.

reply to post by NOTurTypical


You wrote:

["You're correct, generally they are not. I did that purposely on the previous page in an effort to lure you into providing a response that wasn't arbitrary."]

Your meaningless games (and not for the first time), define you.

Quote: ["I still have hope though you'll do so."]

You're inventing your own rules, which you try to apply to any tight spot you get into. The basics of logic, inconvenient as they are to theism, are still valid and functional, and by pretending to misunderstand, or by misinterpreting or misusing them, you only emphasize the impression of your religious stance as unreasonable, bend on supremacy.

I gave you an opening, and you threw it away.

reply to post by Cosmic.Artifact


You wrote:

["no the reasoning behind the statement was educational... your statement was refutable nothing more, sorry if it upset your personal view of history but least the result was you doing a google search."]

What on earth are you talking about?

What purpose would a deflecting digression into a 'googling-competition' serve, maybe except to lead the thread away from the important parts in it.

There are a lot of central points I've taken up, and you choose to ignore them and concentrate on such as this. Get to something relevant, and stay there.

I worship no one and no thing.
Even going to catholic grade school, I could not understand why people so vehemently believed in these stories. Enough to want to kill those who did not believe. Or worse yet, to die for that belief. Ridiculous!

I believe in ufo/aliens. Big deal. I won't want to kill you for not believing nor will I voluntarily die for that belief.

Inner peace? I'm quite content with my life. This is the only one I get, I can't complain.

Originally posted by bogomil
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

Your meaningless games (and not for the first time), define you.

Not games. It's a matter of intelligibility and maturity. Little children get a free pass for arguing and having arbitrary rationale for their opinions. When one grows up they are expected to have a rational reason for their opinions. Little children state arbitrary things frequently, I.E. "Daddy, there is a monster in the closet!". When one grows up it's expected of them to not hold to arbitrary opinions.

You're inventing your own rules, which you try to apply to any tight spot you get into.

LOL!!!! Wait, do you really consider internet posting I enjoy doing in me free time to be an occasion to find myself in a 'tight spot'???? Please tell me you're being facetious. Haha.

The basics of logic, inconvenient as they are to theism, are still valid and functional, and by pretending to misunderstand, or by misinterpreting or misusing them, you only emphasize the impression of your religious stance as unreasonable, bend on supremacy.

Coincidentally, refusing the opposition to use arbitrary arguments IS a 'basic' of logical debate. You learn this in the first month of Speech and Debate 101.

reply to post by NOTurTypical


Your semantic shufflings only lead to more semantic shufflings. Probably to avoid answering directly to issues.

In this case

Quote from a former post of yours:

["God gave us everything you listed to enrich our lives and to bless us, but created things should never take the place of the Creator. Even if people do not honor God they still are creatures created to worship and will worship other things by spending a great deal of their time, talents, and treasures upon."]


Which I called a circle-argument.

You have not responded to this yet, but wasted time on scholastic on 'arbitrary' and personal comments, without any sign of wanting to USE logic; instead talking round ABOUT logic.

Please answer directly to the issue: What evidence do you have to support your theist claims as above, except by a book which also is self-contained and upheld by circle-argumentation.

reply to post by Ellie Sagan


Personally Ellie I don't believe in worshipping anything.

I am more spiritual than anything.

If I worship anything I would say it is myself since I am the one who ultimately makes my decisions. Do I believe in spiritual guides? Yes in a sense....right now mine must be on vaca


If I were to "worship" anything it would be Earth or mother nature. Earth gives me everything I need to survive not some god but that is my beliefs. I would rather give to the planet than some being said to be a god.

reply to post by bogomil

Which I called a circle-argument.

YAY!!!! Finally, we're getting somewhere!!! At least now your explaining WHICH post you claim is circular argumentation! Now, if you could explain WHY you believe it's circular in construction and rationale your claim will not be arbitrary.

I have faith you can do it.

You have not responded to this yet, but wasted time on scholastic on 'arbitrary' and personal comments, without any sign of wanting to USE logic; instead talking round ABOUT logic.

Precisely because YOU have not presented a reason why you hold your opinion that the above post you quoted is circular argumentation. You just made a claim that a certain unnamed post was circular in construction and or rationale. Until you do this your opinion is just that, and opinion, and furthermore until recently there was no indication which post you were even referring to.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by bogomil

 

Which I called a circle-argument.

YAY!!!! Finally, we're getting somewhere!!! At least now your explaining WHICH post you claim is circular argumentation! Now, if you could explain WHY you believe it's circular in construction and rationale your claim will not be arbitrary.

I have faith you can do it.

You have not responded to this yet, but wasted time on scholastic on 'arbitrary' and personal comments, without any sign of wanting to USE logic; instead talking round ABOUT logic.

Precisely because YOU have not presented a reason why you hold your opinion that the above post you quoted is circular argumentation. You just made a claim that a certain unnamed post was circular in construction and or rationale. Until you do this your opinion is just that, and opinion, and furthermore until recently there was no indication which post you were even referring to.

edit on 14-2-2011 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)

Now that this is settled, can we go on?

Separate post will follow, concentrating on topic and its central issues. A position I'm not interested in derailing from by getting into irrelevant comments.

reply to post by NOTurTypical


I repeat myself from my recent post:

["Please answer directly to the issue: What evidence do you have to support your theist claims as above, except by a book which also is self-contained and upheld by circle-argumentation."]

As 'evidence' can be different things to different people, a systematic methodology validating 'evidence' is necessary for meaningful communication, and it's probably no surprise, that I in a context of debating theistic claims personally rely on deductive logic and science.

If the systematic methodology of deductive logic/science is your choice also..fine. I then take it, that you are familiar with its principles and procedures, when you use it.

If you choose another systematic methodology, please define it, define its principles and procedures (not least its control functions) and its basic platform.

If you do not accept the necessity of a systematic methodology (which you naturally are entitled to do, if you want), please state this. A simple "I accept the necessity of a systematic methodology" (or: " I don't accept....etc"), will be sufficient.

Originally posted by Ellie Sagan
If you don't believe in gods or goddesses... do you still believe in spirits and angels or whatever? and if you do, do you worship them? If you worship nothing and no one, then how do you find peace? I need peace and in the past I looked to the judeo christian god of the bible. Now I don't look to him anymore, I'm kinda learning a lot now of other religions and deities. I want to believe in something, but I don't want to believe in anything just for the sake of believing. I don't want to love a deception just to have a false peace of mind. How do you atheists do it? I really need help with this, I feel so lost.

First of all, "worship" means "to work for, to serve."

Avodah is the transliteration of the Hebrew word for worship and work. Have you ever thought about the connection? Is worship work? Is work worship? The root word means to work or to serve. The cluster of words derived from the root give us insight into the nature of both worship and work. An oved is a worker. An evid is a slave. Avdut is slavery. Work involves the idea of serving someone. Avodat Elohim is the service or worship of the true God. Avodah zara is literally strange worship (it is also the title of one of the tractates of the Talmud, which discusses the subject of idolatry and corrupt and false worship).

You sound like me. I once thought I needed something to believe in, so I began to research religions, every single one of them. They are all based on Sun worship, and all trace back to Ancient Sumeria. Then I discovered the Annunaki, and came to the conclusion that the Biblical Gods were Annunaki, and not Gods at all. And further, Jesus was a MAN, and a dead one at that, and was never a God.

However, Our planet, Planet Earth, is a sentient, living, being, often called Mother Earth. She provides for us, and gives us all that we needs, or want. When we die, we are buried in Her. When I give thanks, for a meal or something, I thank my Great Mother and Father. That is good enough for me.

Read christian bibles, I was a confused person before i read and understood the bible. I understood the bible after reading it two times. After understanding the bible,you will understand god and you will then come to peace with yourself.

reply to post by miracleretiree


I have read christian bibles, many different translations. I do understand what it teaches. I still had questions. I have one for you, if you care to answer... Why do you put god in a box, or book, in this case? Don't you think god/goddess is bigger than that?

reply to post by autowrench


I like what you say here autowrench. It is true that Earth gives us all we need, and the Sun also, of course. And the stars and Moon feed my mind and spirit also. When I was a christian, I used to think I was being sinful thinking that the earth and universe is beautiful and awesome and I actually thought that if I wasn't a christian, I could definitely see myself worshipping/honoring the earth. We were taught that that was evil though, of satan. So the way I reconciled it, as do many christians I think, was to say thank you to god for all that he created for us. Everything came back to him. But really, does he control everything down to weather patterns and celestial workings? No, I do not think so. These are things that are set in motion and continue on their own. Nature. Beautiful.

I feel like I didn't sound very eloquent here getting my thoughts across, but I hope you can see what I mean. Anyway, I like what you wrote.

Originally posted by SnakeShot
Why would you need to worship someone/something to find peace?

Because the source of peace comes from which you worship.

a reply to: Ellie Sagan

I don't necessarily agree with what I said in this thread originally.
I've come a long way since then and learned many many things and had a lot of wild Spiritual experiences.

I definitely worship now, but it's very difficult often times because I've been experiencing suffering and misery as a consequence of this. I am so addicted to worshipping, it's such a strong urge and completes me in such a way that I cannot help but need to continue it. And it hurts me because I feel punished and cursed. It's complicated and a long story. One day I'll write it all out, if I live that long. Sigh...



I don't want to change, worship is so right and it's what I feel I was meant to be. I want "It", the Universal Spirit, to change, because I don't want to change my Heart. I don't even know how to explain it right now, it hurts.