Page 5 of 7 [ 97 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

Shambles
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 29 Jan 2012
Age: 30
Gender: Female
Posts: 80
Location: Birmingham, England

14 Feb 2012, 1:40 pm

Declension wrote:
I didn't believe in God on page 3, but now I believe in God after watching a lot of Youtube videos featuring Alvin Plantinga. Time flies, huh?

Easy come, easy go, maybe.


Plantinga? He hasn't convinced me, all he says is "God must exist" .. Maybe there's something else he's trying to say and I'm not getting it??


_________________
"I may not believe in myself but I believe in what I'm doing" - Jimmy Page


WilliamWDelaney
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Apr 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,201

14 Feb 2012, 1:53 pm

Oh, this question again. Nope. I think religion in general is nonsense. However, my atheism is the ONE TRUE atheism.



circular
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jan 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 361
Location: France

14 Feb 2012, 3:13 pm

No, it's mine ! :lol:



TeaEarlGreyHot
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jul 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Female
Posts: 28,982
Location: California

14 Feb 2012, 3:23 pm

circular wrote:
TeaEarlGreyHot wrote:
Quote:
Ok. So you don't believe in god. It's more like you suppose that there is cause because there is something.


By your definition of god, I suppose.

Well, if you call God, and say "he" whereas you don't think it is a person, this is kind of schizophrenic. Many people protect themselves from being reproached their atheism by using the word God. But that's only a social consideration.

Quote:
I already said I don't believe in a cause.

Nope. You said before you thought it was like fuel. Fuel is a cause. So you are contradicting yourself.


So you feel qualified to label me an Atheist when you can't even read properly?


_________________
Still looking for that blue jean baby queen, prettiest girl I've ever seen.


WilliamWDelaney
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Apr 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,201

14 Feb 2012, 3:35 pm

circular wrote:
No, it's mine ! :lol:
Watch out, or I'll declare holy war on you.



Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

14 Feb 2012, 3:39 pm

WilliamWDelaney wrote:
circular wrote:
No, it's mine ! :lol:
Watch out, or I'll declare holy war on you.


I've already decided you "strong" atheists are blasphemers, and the only true path is apatheism. Thus I have declared Jihad on you all. So expect extreme levels of apathy in the near future


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


artrat
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Nov 2011
Age: 41
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,269
Location: The Butthole of the American Empire

15 Feb 2012, 12:00 am

I believe in a first mover but not an all powerful God.


_________________
?During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act" ~George Orwell

"I belive in God, only I spell it Nature."
~ Frank Llyod Wright


Subotai
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2010
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,036
Location: 日本

15 Feb 2012, 12:06 am

circular wrote:
Subotai wrote:
For one thing, I'm not a Gnostic, I just thought I'd point out that god as a personification/social being is just the exoteric interpretation of the unwashed masses, and even in ancient times the mystics didn't see god in that way.

How can you call exoteric the interpretation that is written in all religious texts of the biggest religions that have spread on the whole world ? There is not one true interpretation of the word God, there are only social interpretations of it. And clearly the gnostic one is a minority.

Of course, each person interprets the word God according to his own subjectivity, so there have been people believing God is what you say. The point is that God in this sense just means the biggest thing, everything and more than everything. So it is just the same thing as Nature, Existence, Universe, Cosmos or even Wow.

You think that in the past, there were ancients mystics that were right, and then it got distorted. In reality, we do not know what thought people in ancient times, and it is not because it is ancient that it is right or true. But we are talking about the word God, which is just the word god with an uppercase. And the notion of god has always been a special social being, generally invisible, that influences nature. It is an etymological non sense to think that before the word God meant something else. The meaning has been changed and expanded later.

Quote:
For another thing, for me at least, god is definitely not a social acceptance factor in the least. Where I'm from (Canada) Christianity, or whatever monotheism, is not as big a deal as in the US, where an atheist might be persecuted. My family is made up of atheists and arbitrarily spiritual people, and the minority of my friends are Christian, also religion is not really heavily discussed among acquaintances I've had.
To top it off I currently live in a majority atheist country.

I am also in an atheist country, but even if criticising organised religions is quite common, the word God and deism in a more general term is still agressively guarded and people do not dare say anything about it. The autoritarian aura around the word God is still there. And the people who are the most cruel when questionning this subject are atheists. They don't believe in God but they will want to make you live in hell on earth if you dare say that religion is false.


No, I don`t neccesarily think the ancient mystics were right or wrong, I`m just saying that they saw god as an indescribable concept, and the commoners personified it.
Look at Sufiism.

Me, I`m an agnostic, I also wouldn`t be surprised if we human beings are writhing blindly in the dark about the true nature of reality.
I think our senses are inadequate to perceive it, and our minds inadequate to compehend it.



Shambles
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 29 Jan 2012
Age: 30
Gender: Female
Posts: 80
Location: Birmingham, England

15 Feb 2012, 4:34 am

artrat wrote:
I believe in a first mover but not an all powerful God.


Like an Aristotle type thing?


_________________
"I may not believe in myself but I believe in what I'm doing" - Jimmy Page


circular
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jan 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 361
Location: France

15 Feb 2012, 8:38 am

TeaEarlGreyHot wrote:
So you feel qualified to label me an Atheist when you can't even read properly?

Oh no, I wouldn't dare put on you such a horrible label. :lol:

Well you said
Quote:
Like fuel for a car.


So you need to explain.

Vigilans wrote:
WilliamWDelaney wrote:
circular wrote:
No, it's mine ! :lol:
Watch out, or I'll declare holy war on you.


I've already decided you "strong" atheists are blasphemers, and the only true path is apatheism. Thus I have declared Jihad on you all. So expect extreme levels of apathy in the near future

Oh I'm scared... 8)

Subotai wrote:
No, I don`t neccesarily think the ancient mystics were right or wrong, I`m just saying that they saw god as an indescribable concept, and the commoners personified it.
Look at Sufiism.

Well I don't feel like we are all descendants of suffists. It makes me think of buddhism. But anyway, what I point out is that ancient mystics are not the ancients, and that a spiritual experience is not a proof of anything. The fact that the ego is a main issue in any spirituality is, in my opinion, the reason why there is a discourse about divine beings. It is like a deformation of the notion of ego. So the term God is still inappropriate as the ego is more an element of human subjectivity than anything else.

Quote:
Me, I`m an agnostic, I also wouldn`t be surprised if we human beings are writhing blindly in the dark about the true nature of reality.
I think our senses are inadequate to perceive it, and our minds inadequate to compehend it.

Of course, our senses cannot perceive everything, this is clearly established by science, even by the most atheistic people. Our minds could not fully understand reality ? Maybe, but that is all the more an argument against the use of the term god. Why do you want to stick to a term that is more like a human ego for something you think you do not know anything about ?



Last edited by circular on 15 Feb 2012, 8:49 am, edited 1 time in total.

J05ua
Emu Egg
Emu Egg

User avatar

Joined: 14 Feb 2012
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 7

15 Feb 2012, 8:47 am

Nope.

I reject the Gods of all classical theism and if they do exist; I hate them.

Simples.



circular
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jan 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 361
Location: France

15 Feb 2012, 8:50 am

J05ua wrote:
I reject the Gods of all classical theism and if they do exist; I hate them.

That's understandable. A God that would create so much misery and watch while doing nothing is worse than the worst parent on earth.



MagicToenail
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2012
Gender: Female
Posts: 401

15 Feb 2012, 11:59 am

A being responsible for the creation of everything and the fate of all beings, nope.
In the remote possibility that super-beings like Trelane's parents exist-maybe. :D



kg4fxg
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 7 Feb 2012
Age: 40
Gender: Female
Posts: 168

15 Feb 2012, 12:13 pm

If by believe in God you mean the type of God Aristotle believed in - yes. But that is not the Christian God of the Bible. I follow Philosophy and I have studied it for years. I would consider myself an Atheist. If that is too harsh then Agnostic. Yes, I believe there was a first mover to start the world moving.

B



shrox
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Aug 2011
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,295
Location: OK let's go.

15 Feb 2012, 1:09 pm

Shambles wrote:
artrat wrote:
I believe in a first mover but not an all powerful God.


Like an Aristotle type thing?


Can someone describe this first mover?



Shambles
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 29 Jan 2012
Age: 30
Gender: Female
Posts: 80
Location: Birmingham, England

15 Feb 2012, 1:51 pm

shrox wrote:
Shambles wrote:
artrat wrote:
I believe in a first mover but not an all powerful God.


Like an Aristotle type thing?


Can someone describe this first mover?



Well, what Aristotle realised was that the earth was is a constant state of change.

So he theorised the idea of the First Mover (also known as Prime Mover or Unmoved Mover xD)

The First Mover doesn't move itself. Instead it changes and moves stuff around it ... Like a magnet, as the magnet can stay stationary as items move towards it.

According to Aristotle, everything is attracted to the First Mover as everyone is drawn to God's perfection and therefore wants to imitate it, as if it were a role model.

Aristotle also theorised that God must be contingent, eternal, perfectly good, beyond material, time and space.

hope that helps :)


_________________
"I may not believe in myself but I believe in what I'm doing" - Jimmy Page