It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

I Converted A Catholic To Atheism

page: 41
21
<< 38  39  40    42  43  44 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 06:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 



No material evidence of a creator will satisfy the atheist.


Like you would know! You haven't even tried yet!


I know this wasnt directed at me, but I do suspect that NAM is correct for many atheists. I think that for many, it is not actually a search for truth in any form, but more of a counter culture. As such, accepting any material evidence would be accepting defeat and letting "the man" win. It definitely doesnt apply to everyone, but its a behavior we see in many areas of societal exchanges, and I dont think any one idealogy is immune to it.

A god tends to be presented with a couple attributes in several religions. Those are omnipotence and omniscience. Obviously, it doesnt give the full picture, but many other attributes are simply a matter of course after these two. I am trying to whittle this idea down to its core simplicity, so there are bound to be some issues with this, but hopefully, we can work through any miscommunication that will inevitably arise.


So, is there anything that encompasses those attributes that we know to materially exist? I would say that there is, and that is the universe itself. It is omnipotent in that there is nothing in the universe that is more powerful than the universe itself. Every single thing is just a part of the whole. And it could be considered omniscient in that the universe contains all of the knowledge of itself. Now, this might get into whether there is a cohesive knowledge of all things simultaneously, but I would argue that each part of the whole of the universe has inherent knowledge of itself and each part makes up the entirety of the whole.

Interesting to me that regardless of an existence, there are two main points that I arrived at for myself..

The first is; Whether or not a God exists, does it change the way I will act?

The second is; Is the material universe we know all that exists?




posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 06:46 PM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


I explained to him how he could make his own salvation. His fate is his own to determine.

Actually, the point was for him to own himself.

In order to convert him to atheism, you must have told him that the above weren't possible, if he held a belief in God. Did you?


Did you even read my explanations?

Well... I read ALL of your posts, but I didn't see many explanations.


Even more so than being told he's going to hell for being gay? Yeah, I'm such a bad person for encouraging him to break free that personal struggle.

Don't lay that "guilt trip" on me. I don't feel that you are a bad person. However, I do feel that it's wrong to brag about helping a friend in need. That's ALL you have done!


You apparently believe my friend has made the transition from one cruddy approach to another cruddy approach

Nope! I only take issue with your self proclaimed importance in this matter.


I don't see how atheism is any worse than Catholicism

It's not up to you, or me, to make that decision for anyone else.


he is now free to be himself and choose for himself without being punished for making any mistakes along the way.

Atheism is no guarantee that one won't be punished for "making any mistakes along the way". It's only a way of avoiding any fear of God.


He essentially is now free to approach his life and himself without fear of what he might find or encounter.

No! That's not quite true. The only thing that has changed, is that he no longer has a fear of God. Everything else is still the same.


There's plenty of other threads that cater to your way of thinking.

Unlike you, I don't need others to "cater" to my "way of thinking".


When did you become psychic, and how can I learn too?

It doesn't take a psychic read the title of this thread, and to understand the motivation behind it.


I have not seen any willingness from you to respect any difference in opinion.

I can, legitimately, say the same about you.

See ya,
Milt



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 06:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 



No material evidence of a creator will satisfy the atheist.


Like you would know! You haven't even tried yet!

You know that's not true at all.



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 06:51 PM
link   
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 


Originally posted by NewAgeMan

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by NewAgeMan
 



No material evidence of a creator will satisfy the atheist.


Like you would know! You haven't even tried yet!

You know that's not true at all.


Material evidence, not circumstantial speculation and extrapolation.



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 06:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Joecroft
reply to post by vethumanbeing
 




Originally posted by vethumanbeing
The problem with many is they think this is supposed to be easy. YOU HAVE TO SEARCH for it, its a deeply personal quest. Those that want the immediate OF COURSE will not experence it as they havent bothered to look within themselves. Its not about scripture (for some it helps as guidance toward the goal of having a suggestion it exists).


Speeech! *Applauds”


Yes, exactly; people have to ready to search within themselves and start thinking about the mysteries in a deeper way. The modus operandi of Empirical data, can only reach so far. Performing those inner schrodinger cat type experiments, is the only way forward. As for your scripture comment…hmmm yes, it can help in guidance and also in confirmation. Discernment is the Key- JC


Ah, discernment as the key. So its up to us to find the truth within the information and as scatalogical and broad it was made so purposely? Without study into its true mystery (not rote information spoon fed) youll never get the reason it exists. It trys to enable/ include enough readers of and not alienate too many. I see, that is why its poetic and obtuse. Its not verbatum, its what you make of it that resonates with your truth as an individual expression of God. You are the interpreter of the words and rings true. I knew (my own Freemason grandfathers) that made it their life study beyond popular culture because there is much mystery knowlege encompassed. No one knows that though, its all there the Pagan etc if you bother to see it. (I drag my feet for a reason).
edit on 20-6-2013 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 06:57 PM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


How do we define what the evidence means without extrapolation?

If there is no need to extrapolate the data, then there would be no need for the evidence in the first place. The way I see it, there is a need to extrapolate any given data so that it is even relevant to the human perspective. Otherwise, we wouldnt even have math in the first place, or any derivative of it like science.



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 07:00 PM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by BenReclused
 



I shall clarify that for you:
Bragging about one's own influence on another human being, IS WRONG! That only indicates that one is a "control freak"!

See ya,
Milt


I will take pride in my positive influence on any human being, regardless of your opinion. K. Thx. Bye.

Taking pride in one's positive influences on another is one thing, wanting to be honored for that, is quite another.

See ya,
Milt



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 07:02 PM
link   
reply to post by BenReclused
 



Originally posted by BenReclused
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


I explained to him how he could make his own salvation. His fate is his own to determine.

Actually, the point was for him to own himself.

In order to convert him to atheism, you must have told him that the above weren't possible, if he held a belief in God. Did you?


I told him his options regarding the above were limited in most traditional religions, including Catholicism.


Don't lay that "guilt trip" on me. I don't feel that you are a bad person. However, I do feel that it's wrong to brag about helping a friend in need. That's ALL you have done!


Disclaimer: I am about to be really sarcastic, so if you're sensitive with a particular allergy to humor, I would advise you skip the next eight lines.

I CONVERTED A CATHOLIC INTO AN ATHEIST HEHEHE I'M SUCH A BAD PERSON NOW I'M SURE TO GO TO HELL AND ROAST WITH THE HOMOSEXUALS AND WICCANS!!! I AM JUST SO PROUD OF BEING EVIL AND SINFUL!!!

...Ahem. There. Now I've given you a reason to be upset. Here, let me bask in it. *pulls out sunglasses* Ah, hell hath no fury like an indignant theist.

*serious face* To be fair, I've only ever said I was proud of helping him, not converting him. If you don't believe me, that's not my problem. Kthxbye.


Nope! I only take issue with your self proclaimed importance in this matter.


There's the door. I'm done justifying myself and defending myself. Have fun.


Atheism is no guarantee that one won't be punished for "making any mistakes along the way". It's only a way of avoiding any fear of God.


Freedom of happiness, in other words. Sounds good to me.



No! That's not quite true. The only thing that has changed, is that he no longer has a fear of God. Everything else is still the same.


K.


Unlike you, I don't need others to "cater" to my "way of thinking".


Not at all. I'm perfectly happy to let you submit your opinion...as long as you accept mine in return.



It doesn't take a psychic read the title of this thread, and to understand the motivation behind it.


Again, your interpretive difficulties are not my problem. There's a therapist 15 miles down the road who is willing to listen to your complaints for $45 an hour.



edit on 20-6-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 07:06 PM
link   
reply to post by BenReclused
 



Taking pride in one's positive influences on another is one thing, wanting to be honored for that, is quite another.


Oh, right...that's what Christians do. My bad.

NO NO WAIT. That's what GOD does. Sorry, my bad again.

edit on 20-6-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 07:12 PM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


How can it be a god if it's not even an entity?

Perhaps, "entity" is only one of "the clumsy labels with which we have attempted to define" God.

See ya,
Milt



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 07:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Serdgiam
 



How do we define what the evidence means without extrapolation?

If there is no need to extrapolate the data, then there would be no need for the evidence in the first place. The way I see it, there is a need to extrapolate any given data so that it is even relevant to the human perspective. Otherwise, we wouldnt even have math in the first place, or any derivative of it like science.


All I see is a bunch of people arguing about why something that is obvious doesn't need evidence or any outwardly conclusive sign to make it obvious. In other words, fire doesn't need to be bright or hot or even visible to obviously be fire.

Let's not make excuses. I know what kind of evidence I want and everyone's doing everything they can to do anything but admit they have no such evidence. Except faith. Because faith has always been considered evidence in any debate. And those who have no faith obviously have no reason to believe what those people with faith have the faith to believe. Because that faith makes that belief that much more valid. Because faith is evidence. Holy crow, Batman, it makes so much sense! Ermahgerd!



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 07:14 PM
link   
reply to post by BenReclused
 



Perhaps, "entity" is only one of "the clumsy labels with which we have attempted to define" God.

See ya,
Milt


So let me get this straight, my good chap: you're here to poke holes in my ideas without giving me anything to replace them with? Just wanna leave me with a broken boat? Is that your goal?

Cool beans.



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 07:19 PM
link   
If I seem somewhat less diplomatic with these replies, it's because I'm tired of getting the same questions and veiled jabs. So I'm getting a little impatient. Which means I'm going to have a little fun while I'm wasting my energy.



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 07:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Serdgiam
 


If you do not agree you are going to a place you do not like very much!!!!

Hell! I'm already there! And, I didn't even have to disagree with anyone to get here. LOL


Hmm, Im new at this. Ill have to try harder.

I feel that you are doing much better, than many others are!


See ya,
Milt



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 07:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
All I see is a bunch of people arguing about why something that is obvious doesn't need evidence or any outwardly conclusive sign to make it obvious. In other words, fire doesn't need to be bright or hot or even visible to obviously be fire.


I am not arguing that at all. I was actually asking about extrapolation, which is something that is used in science as a matter of course. It needs to be done, or no progress would be made whatsoever. Perhaps it was just a whim of a word choice, but I was attempting to understand where you were coming from on it.


Let's not make excuses. I know what kind of evidence I want and everyone's doing everything they can to do anything but admit they have no such evidence. Except faith. Because faith has always been considered evidence in any debate. And those who have no faith obviously have no reason to believe what those people with faith have the faith to believe. Because that faith makes that belief that much more valid. Because faith is evidence. Holy crow, Batman, it makes so much sense! Ermahgerd!


What excuses am I, personally, making?

What evidence do you want that would not require your own extrapolation/interpretation as to whether or not it is satisfactory to your requirements? And what are those requirements?

I havent, personally, brought up faith at all and as such, I do not see it as relevant. Even you said that atheism is a shift of faith, so why isnt it an acceptable concept the other way around?

I must say, that it seems your response is loaded with condescension. If it was meant for others, then why direct it towards me? And if it was meant for me, what do you hope to accomplish with it?



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 07:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
If I seem somewhat less diplomatic with these replies, it's because I'm tired of getting the same questions and veiled jabs. So I'm getting a little impatient. Which means I'm going to have a little fun while I'm wasting my energy.


If you have been approached in the same way as I am approaching you often enough to be jaded, would you mind pointing me in the direction where I could participate in those discussions?

Frequently, I am lumped into the opposing "side" by everyone involved, which leaves me essentially without a source of stars!
I would love to know where I can take part in a conversation such as this where I am not immediately relegated to a position of opposition, but rather, of a learning opportunity for everyone involved.

Its that division that I feel is a core issue, and I would like to work through it with.. someone.



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 07:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by BenReclused
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


How can it be a god if it's not even an entity?

Perhaps, "entity" is only one of "the clumsy labels with which we have attempted to define" God.


Now that IS a tough one; we would have to define ourselves as entities FIRST then using that analogy define God as being 'like ourselves' in configuration, muscle structure, bone, and equivalent brain power. No chance of autopsying That Being anytime anywhere AT ALL, unless a hit and run accidental, (IT fell off of a cloud onto the Kennedy/Eisenhower interchange 'spagetti bowl'). God is neither body/or matter it is formless as far as I understand ITS BEING.
edit on 20-6-2013 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 07:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by BenReclused
Hell! I'm already there! And, I didn't even have to disagree with anyone to get here. LOL


Touche! Well played sir.



I feel that you are doing much better, than many others are!


See ya,
Milt


Thanks, I am actually putting in honest effort to understand where other people are coming from. I have been doing this for a long time now, with little to no actual discussion. People just tend to get angry and insulting when I ask questions that may be difficult to answer, but I am rarely asked anything of my own perspective except as a matter of convenience, or frequently, in hopes of setting up some kind of insult.

I am quite convicted about it though, and I still learn a great amount. I have yet to speak with someone who asked honest questions without condescension that also made me question things. I do look forward to the day that happens, if it does..



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 07:32 PM
link   
I've jumped into this thread a couple of times, but jumped out again just as quickly. Something didn't seem right. Now, I think I know what it is.

AfterInfinity, when asked about what kind of proof was necessary wrote:

Material evidence, not circumstantial speculation and extrapolation.
And that's why this thread is impossible, although it seems to be bringing AfterInfinity quite a bit of amusement, and that's a good thing I suppose.

He wants material proof of an immaterial being. It's identical, logically, to a blind man asking for the weight of "Blue." You can say that blue exists, but it has no weight. Other people can tell him that they know blue exists, but the response will be "Everything has weight, if it exists, it has weight. Since blue doesn't have weight, it doesn't exist."

Or, for another analogy, prove the existence of "Love." No one can. They can say that they experience something they call love, or they do something because of love, but it can't be weighed, seen, or smelled. Material evidence doesn't exist for it.

Atheism demanding this kind of proof is similar to a child asking "If God is everywhere, how come I don't bump into him everytime I move?" One can try to explain, but after a while all you can say is "Let's talk about it when you're grown up a little more."



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 07:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Serdgiam
 


It wasn't meant for you. You just happened to be there, and I was too lazy to make another post. Sorry for teh inconvenience. Anyway, it feels this thread has sort of lost purpose.



new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 38  39  40    42  43  44 >>

log in

join