Atheist with a huge premise for the existence of a god.

Originally posted by SeekerofTruth101
reply to post by jiggerj

 

Dear OP,

I've read your post, and like you, I don't believe in coincidences, more so when there are too many of them. It would only be akin to living in denial when facts are before our faces.

No man is an island, and each human is born from loving parents, or we would never have existed,for no mother would suffer that 9mths of labour or parents sacrificed much for the rest of a child's live so that he/she may live and know life, protected and sheltered where possible.

Many of our fellow humans are religious, and would have passed on its civilisational teachings to the next generations, some more, some less, based upon circumstances and all mostly free will based, for the child to discern for himself/herself.

Some grow up touched by the gift of life, love and our common Creator's spirit in us, His name known across geological barriers, culture, social developement stages, time and space on our planet. Some have yet to know, not in our time but on their time and our Creator's time, for spirituality is a deeply personal issue.

But sadly are those whom had been touched, and yet turned away....

We flawed mortals place demands upon our Creator, without comprehending that there is a bigger picture involved that not every demand can be met on the spot, without us doing anything to assist it along. For example, a prayer to make one rich would mean depriving another of their hard earned wealth. Heaven has no US dollar printing press nor deals in chaos. To heal or even resurrect an old and dying man would be to prolong his eventual suffering, for that mortal body will still continue decay, and we mortals are not ready, nor had shown any sense of responsiblity, for advance sciences.

Our Creator loves us all, a testimonial of our species' survival till today, with many miracles and intervention on His part that went unlisted and unknown, as is His way, but felt by many whom know Him. May those whom had walked away...comprehend and return....on their own free will...The gift of life need not one to continously bang one's head against the wall. Comfort, solace, love and guidance is for ALL mankind..

The god you speak of is a man-made god. This is not my god.
If I give a house to someone (just as a god gives life to someone), then I walk away. The house is theirs to do what they will with it (just as our lives are ours to do what we will with it). Once a house is given, it is none of my business what goes on in it. I don't know what form my god takes, but he created life and then walked away. No rules. No restrictions. No threats. No promises.

We are alone. We are responsible for our own planet and our own lives. Birth defects are accidents. Miracles are simply events that we just don't understand yet.

Originally posted by InfoKartel
reply to post by Barcs

 

Science = how things work. Religion = why things work.

Who is talking in defense of religion? I'm certainly not. Religion really explains nothing and puts people in shackles and servitude to churches, mosques, synagogues and what have you not.

Also, keep in mind that science is light years behind discovering many truths about life, rather, science as a field of research is divided into a couple of brackets( think of a pie chart ), and most brackets are researching viagra, make up, guns and bombs. So excuse me if I don't take folk like that all too serious. While, if you go out and ask some of the scientists with life experience who keep themselves busy with actual stars, rather than Hollywood stars your veil might be lifted some.

I'm talking in defense of science and your post really doesn't have anything to do with mine. People very often over simplify or ignore it to try to prove things and they are usually wrong. Light year is a term for measurement of distance, not actual time. I don't actually care if most scientists are researching viagra or weapons technology. That doesn't make them wrong in their studies or take away from what science can and has accomplished over the last century. It also does not discount the scientific method or the other fields of science that matter.

Also you said "WRONG" when confronted with the idea that atheists read the bible more than a lot of religious folks. This is true because at least 80% of all atheists out there started out as religious due to their upbringing. I've read the entire bible multiple times because I USED TO believe it. I see the purpose of the book, and it certainly isn't to teach literal truth and history. It's to teach morality and values. You don't need to be a believer to acknowledge that, just as you don't have to be an atheist to understand and acknowledge the science behind evolution and other cosmic or biological phenomina.

Originally posted by jiggerj
The god you speak of is a man-made god. This is not my god.
If I give a house to someone (just as a god gives life to someone), then I walk away. The house is theirs to do what they will with it (just as our lives are ours to do what we will with it). Once a house is given, it is none of my business what goes on in it. I don't know what form my god takes, but he created life and then walked away. No rules. No restrictions. No threats. No promises.

We are alone. We are responsible for our own planet and our own lives. Birth defects are accidents. Miracles are simply events that we just don't understand yet.

I had always thought theists or atheists are rational men, not given to speculation or fantasies, but I guess you proved my kind assessment of them wrong.

Just take a look at your analogy - 'giving' your house to someone.

Homes are a big ticket item and for a rational man to just give it away, he must either be truly out of this world generous, or simply a proven irrational man.

But it does happen, and more often than not, those mortals whom gave freely are truly altrusic, for example- voluntary construction of homes for third world nations, schools, etc. They help in the construction, or in the case of some truly conscionably rich mortals, they donate funds for homes, schools and facillities to be built for the poor.

But even then, for those altrusic mortals whom expects no medals, nor recognition, whom are RATIONAL, would in the least expect those homes are to be truly used for the purpose that it was created, and not use as something else, such as whorehouses, or gambling halls, or places for scaming others or of disrepute that may hurt or harm others.

They would be disappointed, and may even turn away from further altrusic goals towards others.

And they are only mortal humans, what more a higher being recorded as creating us, gave us life and free will, having guided our path towards civilisation, progress and growth for centuries?

It takes time, on your own time and free will to acknowledge the truth. But don't take too long. Better you stick to the 'big bang theory' if you wish to remain atheist. At least that's what the minority human race of atheists in our world clings on, incredible if not a fantasy theory as it is. It's their only comfort and solace, and no human should be without comfort and solace that hurts no one.

Good luck.

reply to post by Barcs

Light year is a term for measurement of distance, not actual time.

Yes I knew that. I don't know however, why you're telling me that. Maybe get a little people experience?

I don't actually care if most scientists are researching viagra or weapons technology. That doesn't make them wrong in their studies or take away from what science can and has accomplished over the last century.

Ah but that's apathy of you. Just wait until ALL government subsidies go towards weapon and beauty sciences because that's where the money is.

It also does not discount the scientific method or the other fields of science that matter.

Nowhere did I make such a claim. Stop projecting the image of a anti-scientific religious nutjob onto me, thank you very much.

Also you said "WRONG" when confronted with the idea that atheists read the bible more than a lot of religious folks.

Well duh. Although I'd say the numbers are pretty equal between religious folk and atheists, as religious ideas are based on the interpretation of others rather than self-experience. (denying ignorance).

I see the purpose of the book, and it certainly isn't to teach literal truth and history.

Obviously, you do not see the purpose of the book. It teaches truth to a tee. It also explains a lot about human psychology and it does so with insane accuracy, it also helps to relieve psychological errors due to the nature of what's written, ie. the healing effect of the words.

It's to teach morality and values.

Amongst others, but you shouldn't need a book to teach you morality and values, they should be within your core already. If not, then you can interpret it as a book that mainly teaches morality and values.

You don't need to be a believer to acknowledge that

Acknowledge your interpretation?

just as you don't have to be an atheist to understand and acknowledge the science behind evolution and other cosmic or biological phenomina.

Sure...but then again...don't atheist put a claim on science? Out of their ignorance of course.

Originally posted by InfoKartel
Ah but that's apathy of you. Just wait until ALL government subsidies go towards weapon and beauty sciences because that's where the money is.

I'll be concerned when NASA starts manufacturing beauty products.

Obviously, you do not see the purpose of the book. It teaches truth to a tee. It also explains a lot about human psychology and it does so with insane accuracy, it also helps to relieve psychological errors due to the nature of what's written, ie. the healing effect of the words.

Truth to a T? So talking snakes, living in a whale for 3 days, and hundreds of thousands of animals on a wooden boat is truth? Proof?

It's to teach morality and values.

Amongst others, but you shouldn't need a book to teach you morality and values, they should be within your core already. If not, then you can interpret it as a book that mainly teaches morality and values.

No kidding. Many people do not need a book for that, but then again many folks do. Back in the day when it was written, I'm sure way more people needed it, than not. I personally do not need a book to understand empathy.

Acknowledge your interpretation?

Are you trying to tell me the stories in the bible are not life lessons meant to be taught to others, to lead a good life?

Sure...but then again...don't atheist put a claim on science? Out of their ignorance of course.

I think everyone puts a claim in science. If not, we wouldn't be able to communicate via internet. So science is ignorance? I don't understand what point you are trying to convey here. I just don't like it when people try to promote faith as fact, or fact as faith. They are very different concepts, which was my main point.

reply to post by Barcs

I'll be concerned when NASA starts manufacturing beauty products.

Yes, that's what we call after-the-fact-concern. Last I read, American astronauts go into space on Russian rockets. Governments worldwide are moving towards funding money-making scientific research rather than actual helpful research, but what do I know right?

Truth to a T? So talking snakes, living in a whale for 3 days, and hundreds of thousands of animals on a wooden boat is truth? Proof?

See, you guys never get past certain parts because you lack insight. Maybe those parts are parables? Analogies? Maybe it takes some level of humility to understand some of these stories?

It's amazing really. Have you ever seen a talking snake? No. Do you believe in talking snakes? No. When someone writes about a talking snake, do you take it literally? Obviously, you do. Amazing.

Are you trying to tell me the stories in the bible are not life lessons meant to be taught to others, to lead a good life?

It goes beyond that...taught to others? Teach others to teach themselves rather than to teach others...that's where religion comes from, and idolizing of things like popes and statues.

Originally posted by InfoKartel
See, you guys never get past certain parts because you lack insight. Maybe those parts are parables? Analogies? Maybe it takes some level of humility to understand some of these stories?

It's amazing really. Have you ever seen a talking snake? No. Do you believe in talking snakes? No. When someone writes about a talking snake, do you take it literally? Obviously, you do. Amazing.

That's exactly why I said they were stories intended to teach people, and not literal history. You said it was "Truth to a t". Obviously that's false if the stories are just parables or life lessons. You are twisting around the purpose and intention of my original post back there. It was to demonstrate the difference between faith and fact, which you seem to be having some difficulty doing.

There is much that I would like to comment on from this thread, but let me just say this...

As humans, our intelligence allows us to interpret a vast number of things and incorporate them into our own ideologies. But, has anyone ever thought about something, or tried to grasp an idea, or tried to make sense of a couple of variables to the point of pure confusion?

I have.

My thoughts are, that it all boils down to free will. We have so much information available to contemplate in our vast universe. Just enough, it seems, so that one who CHOOSES to seek the Truth, can find it. If God gave us the proof that some so desperately require, it would either nullify this quest, or overload our minds so that we could never make the journey.

It must be a choice!
You decide.

Originally posted by SeekerofTruth101

Originally posted by jiggerj
The god you speak of is a man-made god. This is not my god.
If I give a house to someone (just as a god gives life to someone), then I walk away. The house is theirs to do what they will with it (just as our lives are ours to do what we will with it). Once a house is given, it is none of my business what goes on in it. I don't know what form my god takes, but he created life and then walked away. No rules. No restrictions. No threats. No promises.

We are alone. We are responsible for our own planet and our own lives. Birth defects are accidents. Miracles are simply events that we just don't understand yet.

I had always thought theists or atheists are rational men, not given to speculation or fantasies, but I guess you proved my kind assessment of them wrong.

Just take a look at your analogy - 'giving' your house to someone.

Homes are a big ticket item and for a rational man to just give it away, he must either be truly out of this world generous, or simply a proven irrational man.

But it does happen, and more often than not, those mortals whom gave freely are truly altrusic, for example- voluntary construction of homes for third world nations, schools, etc. They help in the construction, or in the case of some truly conscionably rich mortals, they donate funds for homes, schools and facillities to be built for the poor.

But even then, for those altrusic mortals whom expects no medals, nor recognition, whom are RATIONAL, would in the least expect those homes are to be truly used for the purpose that it was created, and not use as something else, such as whorehouses, or gambling halls, or places for scaming others or of disrepute that may hurt or harm others.

They would be disappointed, and may even turn away from further altrusic goals towards others.

And they are only mortal humans, what more a higher being recorded as creating us, gave us life and free will, having guided our path towards civilisation, progress and growth for centuries?

It takes time, on your own time and free will to acknowledge the truth. But don't take too long. Better you stick to the 'big bang theory' if you wish to remain atheist. At least that's what the minority human race of atheists in our world clings on, incredible if not a fantasy theory as it is. It's their only comfort and solace, and no human should be without comfort and solace that hurts no one.

Good luck.

Funny how you can focus logically on the reality of no one giving a house away (instead of the message within the analogy) yet you can follow and believe in a bible full of inconsistencies and impossibilities. Amazing. Truly amazing.

Originally posted by Barcs

Originally posted by InfoKartel
See, you guys never get past certain parts because you lack insight. Maybe those parts are parables? Analogies? Maybe it takes some level of humility to understand some of these stories?

It's amazing really. Have you ever seen a talking snake? No. Do you believe in talking snakes? No. When someone writes about a talking snake, do you take it literally? Obviously, you do. Amazing.

That's exactly why I said they were stories intended to teach people, and not literal history. You said it was "Truth to a t". Obviously that's false if the stories are just parables or life lessons. You are twisting around the purpose and intention of my original post back there. It was to demonstrate the difference between faith and fact, which you seem to be having some difficulty doing.

edit on 18-5-2012 by Barcs because: (no reason given)

If what is being taught is something which life is incomplete with, then I consider what is being taught truth. Then faith becomes stronger than fact. Talking snakes are a fact these days...ever watch a cartoon?

Originally posted by InfoKartel

Originally posted by Barcs

Originally posted by InfoKartel
See, you guys never get past certain parts because you lack insight. Maybe those parts are parables? Analogies? Maybe it takes some level of humility to understand some of these stories?

It's amazing really. Have you ever seen a talking snake? No. Do you believe in talking snakes? No. When someone writes about a talking snake, do you take it literally? Obviously, you do. Amazing.

That's exactly why I said they were stories intended to teach people, and not literal history. You said it was "Truth to a t". Obviously that's false if the stories are just parables or life lessons. You are twisting around the purpose and intention of my original post back there. It was to demonstrate the difference between faith and fact, which you seem to be having some difficulty doing.

edit on 18-5-2012 by Barcs because: (no reason given)

If what is being taught is something which life is incomplete with, then I consider what is being taught truth. Then faith becomes stronger than fact. Talking snakes are a fact these days...ever watch a cartoon?

So you're just arguing semantics then, it seems. Cartoons are not the real world. So you think that anything that "life is incomplete with" is automatic truth, whatever that means. You must believe a LOT of nonsense as absolute truth, then. Faith = belief, fact = something that's proven to be real. Faith is NEVER greater than fact, when you're looking at things objectively. It may one day become fact if evidence is found, but alas it has not happened, so it's pure blind faith. Life is incomplete with? I still don't understand that phrase. Please explain. How can you determine what "life is incomplete with"? Sounds like nothing but personal opinion to me.

reply to post by Barcs

So you're just arguing semantics then, it seems. Cartoons are not the real world.

I beg to differ.

Southpark is social commentary.

Cartoons have been used to teach lessons, and have been used as propaganda.

What is real?

Is what we watch on TV real?

Is Reality TV real?

The fact of the matter is that what we view and listen to has an impact on the way we think, just ask someone in the advertising industry.


Billions of dollars say that cartoons are real.

Originally posted by dusty1
reply to post by Barcs

 

So you're just arguing semantics then, it seems. Cartoons are not the real world.

I beg to differ.

Southpark is social commentary.

Cartoons have been used to teach lessons, and have been used as propaganda.

What is real?

Is what we watch on TV real?

Is Reality TV real?

The fact of the matter is that what we view and listen to has an impact on the way we think, just ask someone in the advertising industry.


Billions of dollars say that cartoons are real.

But just like cartoons, money isn't real either.

I'm not denying that cartoons are part of society and can help shape the way people think. I'm saying that plenty of concepts found within are not possible in the real world and that they are man made for entertainment. This is why I said it was semantics. It has nothing to do with actual fact vs faith. It has to do with the entertainment industry making money. The other dude said that the bible was truth to a T, and I said it was not because of the ridiculousness of some of the stories. It may contain some truth about morality, and a few historical things, but nothing close to absolute truth.

reply to post by Barcs

The other dude said that the bible was truth to a T, and I said it was not because of the ridiculousness of some of the stories.

A talking snake is ridiculous you say. I don't find it ridiculous because I see it as a metaphor. When your brother or sister speaks out in favor of your seduction, from which you will fall, then he is a snake that talks. Snakes spread their poison through biting, but I've never seen a human spread their poison through biting, usually they do it through talking.

It may contain some truth about morality, and a few historical things, but nothing close to absolute truth.

Those who are blind will look for truth in every place but the right one. But those who see, whether they have eyes or not...know how to look.

It holds absolute truth, that much I can tell you. Sadly, we live in a world of lies.

How can you determine what "life is incomplete with"? Sounds like nothing but personal opinion to me.

Is breathing incomplete without oxygen?
Is speaking incomplete without sound?
So is truth incomplete without the Word.

It sounds like personal opinion to you because it is personal opinion to you. Not to me though.

Originally posted by InfoKartel

A talking snake is ridiculous you say. I don't find it ridiculous because I see it as a metaphor. When your brother or sister speaks out in favor of your seduction, from which you will fall, then he is a snake that talks. Snakes spread their poison through biting, but I've never seen a human spread their poison through biting, usually they do it through talking.

You can't have it both ways. It's either truth to a T, or it's metaphorical. Or certain parts are true, while others are exaggerated or metaphorical.

Is breathing incomplete without oxygen?

Sure

Is speaking incomplete without sound?

I suppose

So is truth incomplete without the Word.

Worst analogy ever. This has absolutely nothing to do with the first 2. Sorry buddy, I appreciate you trying, but you are pretty much on pure semantics now, that the analogy didn't even follow basic logic.

It sounds like personal opinion to you because it is personal opinion to you. Not to me though.

AKA it IS INDEED your personal opinion. You have strong faith, that's cool. Just don't misconstrue it for fact or compare it to science. That was the only reason I responded to you. I'm so sick and tired of the war on evolution and science. It's pure sillyness.

reply to post by Barcs

But just like cartoons, money isn't real either.

Try telling that to the IRS.



According to the bible it was an intelligent being that "said". It could have been verbal, it could have been non verbal.

He did communicate with the first woman,

This being, influenced the thinking of Eve.....

Originally posted by dusty1
Try telling that to the IRS.

Anyone can choose to not make money, and live off the land instead. You do that and the IRS will never say squat, even though the government will falsely claim that they somehow "own" the land.. What the government enforces on the people is not truth... but really what are we even debating here? Whether cartoons and money are objective reality? That stuff is irrelevant when we're talking science.

According to the bible it was an intelligent being that "said". It could have been verbal, it could have been non verbal.

He did communicate with the first woman,

This being, influenced the thinking of Eve.....

Are you talking about Lillith?