BBF religious matrix

[Fluffy]

Do you not see that asking in itself can be offensive?

Yeah, askng questions wich you haven't though about and that temprorarilly makes you rethink of your 'beliefs' is not comfortable, I understand someone like you can take it as offensive, obviously you can't realice I've been kind enough to answer similar questions for weeks without taking offence.

 

It is oh so terrible from me to try to understand you better and increase my knowledge, I apologice.

[Fluffy]

If god is not the main motivator for you, then why are you asking anyway? (But if you cannot understand moral/ethical behaviour without god, then he/she is not only the main motivator but in fact the only one).

You are probably too infuriated to think what you are saying. I don't think of god all the time, but he helps to avoid temptations, is it so hard to understand? I just want to know if non-believers have something similar that helps them on situations where they would like to do something but they know it is wrong.

[Vampyr]

You are probably too infuriated to think what you are saying. I don't think of god all the time, but he helps to avoid temptations, is it so hard to understand? I just want to know if non-believers have something similar that helps them on situations where they would like to do something but they know it is wrong.

 

LOL infuriated? I guess that non-believers don't need an outside agent to help avoid temptations; their moral values are internalised.

[Codo]

 

In any case, not giving advice on other ways besides abstinence to lower the incidence of contracting AIDS is not murder; I would be comfortable with manslaughter or even some sort of death by negligence.

 

Now this is great. If someone provides food, water, medicine and advice to stay monogam he is a manslaughter.

If someone builds schools and fountains and gives good advice to have sex just with your spouse he is guilty of death by neglience.

 

Bizarro world your world.

May I ask what you contribute to help the poor and starving so that you can set so high standards for someone else?

 

I must admit that my participation in the rescue of the world is much smaller then the one of the catholic workers down in Africa. So, I would surely not insult them in the way you do in your superiority way of your personal Atheism.

And after your misunderstanding of Gonzalos questions and your rude tone here, I am very happy that you are no role model for an atheist, I very much prefer the Riks et al on this planet.

[Fluffy]

I must admit that my participation in the rescue of the world is much smaller then the one of the catholic workers down in Africa.

Same here, I think of it more latelly and feel a bit ashamed, but I haven't changed yet. Don't know if I will.

[Cyberyeti]

Now this is great. If someone provides food, water, medicine and advice to stay monogam he is a manslaughter.

If someone builds schools and fountains and gives good advice to have sex just with your spouse he is guilty of death by neglience.

 

Bizarro world your world.

May I ask what you contribute to help the poor and starving so that you can set so high standards for someone else?

 

I must admit that my participation in the rescue of the world is much smaller then the one of the catholic workers down in Africa. So, I would surely not insult them in the way you do in your superiority way of your personal Atheism.

And after your misunderstanding of Gonzalos questions and your rude tone here, I am very happy that you are no role model for an atheist, I very much prefer the Riks et al on this planet.

I give my money to non Catholic aid organizations who do all the same good work, but don't then mitigate this by telling people they'll go to hell if they use a condom.

[blackshoe]

But I don't really see why non believers need to follow any ethics.

Read The Moral Sense, by James Q. Wilson.

[mikeh]

Yes, that's what I did, sadly my father couldn't do it yet.

 

But what I was referring to is, I don't understand your source for ethics/moral, I do good acts not only because they make me feel good, but also because god wants me to, or because he might punnish me on aferlife if I don't.

 

But I don't really see why non believers need to follow any ethics. I might feel that doing something evil will have a reward (revenge pleasure or money for example) over the bad feeling for doing something bad, but then I have other reason why not to do it. As far as I know non-believers don't (and some might not even feel good doing good so go guess)

You may wish to google nicholas epley: I can't give you a direct link, but he did a study that demonstrated that when people try to think 'what would jesus do?' the answer is always based on their own personal preferences. They think on the topic and then conclude that jesus would so what they have already decided is the right thing.

 

This is all part of what I, and many others, mean when we say that believers create god in their own image. When you access your faith-based morality, you are merely doing what you feel is the right thing to do, regardless of your faith, and then persuading yourself that it is because of your faith.

 

You may feel that this is impossible, but you can only hold onto that thinking if you remain, as I suspect you are, ignorant of current information about how the mind works. If this is important to you, there are some very readable boks out there on how the mind works. Don't worry: I am not talking about books by such as Dawkins or Hitchens: I am talking about people like Steven Pinker. I suspect at least some of these books are available in Spanish.

 

The mind is truly fascinating, and it and the brain (in the sense that the mind is a product of the brain) can do things that seem to the conscious part of us to be incredible. In many ways the 'I' we all think we are appears to be a passenger that only thinks it is in charge.

 

Btw, calling somebody ignorant on a certain topic is not a slur on that person's intelligence. We are all ignorant of wide areas of human knowledge. The problem comes when someone, unaware of their ignorance, starts making arguments that, to those with less ignorance/more knowledge are laughable. Even then, there is no problem if the ignorant one comes to see how his or her ignorance is making their comments seem silly. After all, ignorance is very easy to cure. Stupidity is not, unfortunately, but you are not stupid.

 

 

You might also stop to think on the rather obvious problem with your own professed ignorance about how can non-believers act morally without faith. I hope you recognize that the great majority of us do act in a generally moral way. So there MUST be an explanation. The fact that you don't understand should drive you to seek to understand, rather than to merely state, as you have, that you think that religious faith is necessary. It demonstrably isn't: maybe you should change your thinking to accord with the evidence. That's what intelligent people do. Someone who clings to their opinionsin the face of overwhelming evidence that they are wrong...hmmm...I'll let you figure out an adjective for that person. It shouldn't be flattering

[helene_t]

Dunno what to make of this piece: http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/01/theres-more-to-life-than-being-happy/266805/

 

Listening to the organ music, he repeatedly asked himself, "Should I leave my parents behind?... Should I say goodbye and leave them to their fate?" Where did his responsibility lie? He was looking for a "hint from heaven."

 

When he returned home, he found it. A piece of marble was lying on the table. His father explained that it was from the rubble of one of the nearby synagogues that the Nazis had destroyed. The marble contained the fragment of one of the Ten Commandments -- the one about honoring your father and your mother. With that, Frankl decided to stay in Vienna and forgo whatever opportunities for safety and career advancement awaited him in the United States. He decided to put aside his individual pursuits to serve his family and, later, other inmates in the camps.

[Fluffy]

as I suspect you are, ignorant of current information about how the mind works.

Sorry for quoting the part you made efforsts for not discussing further, but it was shocking, not for the ignorant part, but because of what you consider me to be ignorant about. I consider how human mind works one of my strenghts. I am totally concious of how people lie to themselves to avoid facing real truth, I sometimes realice when I do it to me.

 

But as many other topics your knowledge comes mainly from reading other's thoughts, when mine comes from thinking about it myself for long. Yes this means I don't probably have the same conclusions as what you have read, and I don't know them, I never said you were wrong just that it was shocking.

 

You might also stop to think on the rather obvious problem with your own professed ignorance about how can non-believers act morally without faith. I hope you recognize that the great majority of us do act in a generally moral way. So there MUST be an explanation. The fact that you don't understand should drive you to seek to understand, rather than to merely state, as you have, that you think that religious faith is necessary. It demonstrably isn't: maybe you should change your thinking to accord with the evidence. That's what intelligent people do. Someone who clings to their opinionsin the face of overwhelming evidence that they are wrong...hmmm...I'll let you figure out an adjective for that person. It shouldn't be flattering

I am not worried about how non-believers act without faith, I am worried about why. There must be an explanation and that's why I am asking.

I don't recall having stated that faith is neccesary nor anything similar, I don't think anything close to that, I do however think that it can be more helpful than not having it, but I would always try to make it clear that it is just my opinion. And I do state that for my particular case it the latter is true.

 

You got to the point, I am fascinated that all non-believers are acting morally, and I want to understand why, because when I searched for the existence of god, I had to think as a non-believer, and I didn't see any reason to be moral, probably didn't dig enough onto the subject, and I didn't value my own life even remotelly as much at that time than now, also this is arguably one of the reasons why I picked to believe.

 

More to the point, if without going very deep I could think that morality was useless, I don't think I am so special, so I am worried others would think the same.

[mikeh]

Sorry for quoting the part you made efforsts for not discussing further, but it was shocking, not for the ignorant part, but because of what you consider me to be ignorant about. I consider how human mind works one of my strenghts. I am totally concious of how people lie to themselves to avoid facing real truth, I sometimes realice when I do it to me.

 

 

Sorry, Gonzalo, but if your understanding of how the mind works is based on your own thinking, then you are, whether you want to accept it or not, ignorant of a great deal of how the mind works!

 

There are a number of exceptionally intelligent, dedicated, and highly educated people who have made it their life's work to understand how the mind works. They have generated a large amount of carefully worked-out, and often experimentally tested, notions. They build on each other's works, and many of them have been working on this subject for longer than you have been alive.

 

More importantly, as you would know if you had done any significant amount of reading, they have shown that our minds do NOT operate the way that we subjectively think they do. Thus, almost certainly, you cannot, from your own mental resources, come to have any understanding of how your mind works.

 

There have been, a month or more back, some posts in the bridge part in which the poster trumpeted new methods, including a bizarre form of Gerber, tho it wasn't called gerber, and an even more bizarre form of signalling on defence. The writer had no doubt convinced himself that his ideas were brilliant. I am sure that part of the problem was that the writer was profoundly ignorant of current bridge methods, and so was unaware of how wrong his ideas seemed to those who knew more. You are, in terms of understanding the mind, in the same position. It is silly for anyone, who admits he has not done any reading in a field, to claim that he has a good understanding of the topic. The only reason you can say you do is that you don't have a clue about what there is there to be learned.

 

It's like me claiming that I understand the makeup of the atom, but without ever taking a physics course or reading a physics text...I just thought about it a lot and worked out how it must be.

[gwnn]

For people who have time, this is a great debate on morality with/without God:

 

 

William Lane Craig (who is usually regarded as a theist who has won most if not all his debates vs atheists) appears to have lost this debate, later he claimed that this is because this was supposed to be an 'informal discussion' and not a proper debate. Therefore he didn't want to give too strong arguments (?). It makes for good watching anyway I think.

 

Note that my previous post in this thread directly stole one idea of Kagan's, namely the hypothetical dialogue

'Why do you not kill people?'

'Because God told me not to'

'Why do you do what God told you to?'

'Because what he says is good'

'But why is what God told you good'

'Because he is good'

'But why is he good?'

etc. (edit: somewhere around 48:00)

 

For people who have less than 90 minutes, I can summarise poorly here that Shelly Kagan proposes an objective morality that is agreed upon by infinitely intelligent conscious creatures based on the best possible conditions for everyone, assuming that these creatures are not aware of their own possible bad intentions at the time of their agreement (i.e. if I am a homicidal maniac, I do not find out about it until after I agreed to the principle of murder is bad - well anyway I am hardly infinitely intelligent so I wouldn't be asked about it). Given that we are far from this ideal situation, we cannot hope to realise this objective morality, but it is nonetheless a well-defined situation that constitutes an objective standard. Of course then one can ask again 'but why would this social contract constitute moral good?' which is cool but does not really apply to a better degree than 'why does obeying the Creator of the Universe constitute moral good?', at least not until you meddled with the definitions sufficiently (IMO).

[gwnn]

double

[32519]

2. Just as Paul had his Damascus road experience when he was confronted head on by God, the same thing happened to me in the early 1990s. Since then God has revealed to me on at least another 3 occasions that he exists and is real. If he did that for me he can do the same for you.

Quite right! It is God's job to convince us that he exists, just as he convinced you. If God wants me (or mikeh, or passedout, or mgoetze) to believe in him, surely he is well capable of giving us a message that cannot be mistaken.

 

Is there some reason by which he chooses to whom he reveals himself? What do you think that reason might be? What form do such messages typically take?

How do I know beyond doubt that God is real and that he exists? Ask anyone who has been baptised in the Spirit of God. It is an unmistakeable life-changing experience. It happened to me on 28 December 1995. I was visiting a family of believers. The father of the house had the practice that at 20h00 every night all members of his family (and any guests present at the time) had to pray together. A bit extreme I thought as a complete novice believer. Each person in turn was expected to pray something, no matter what. I was extremely nervous as this was new to me. It was also unexpected. When it was my turn I managed a few barely audible words. It was then that the Spirit of God fell upon me. The weight of his presence pinned me down in the chair I was sitting on. The warmth of his presence began washing over me. I began crying uncontrollably, a crying from deep within which can only happen when touched by God. Snot began streaming from my nose as I cried and cried. But the weight of God’s presence had rendered me immobile. It was absolutely impossible for me to lift an arm or a hand to wipe away the snot. After about 5 minutes God’s presence lifted and I was able to move again. I had zero understanding of what had just taken place. But the father of the house did as he had seen it happen to many others as well. After cleaning up the snot puddle he began explaining to me about being baptised in the Spirit of God.

 

The second time this happened was during 1996. A preacher from the USA was in my hometown. I can’t remember the guys name but it could have been Virgil Johnson. Neither of us had ever set eyes on the other before. During the service he called me forward and started praying and prophesying over me. I can’t remember exactly what was said but it was something along these lines, “I can see that you are on fire for God, a sailing ship ready to set out to sea, a violent and tempestuous sea. But God will bring winds and storms across the face of the ship, forcing it back into the safety of the harbour. You are not ready to leave.” I never had the faintest idea what this guy was talking about at the time. However, as he began praying and prophesying, the Spirit of God fell upon me again like the first time. This time I was standing in front of a church full of friends and strangers, crying openly at once again unmistakably being touched by God.

 

The third time happened in one of the home fellowship meetings. Someone was praying over one of the woman who had been molested as a youngster. God was busy cleansing her of all the anger, hatred and hurt of some very painful memories. But this meeting had a difference. There were others in the group who had also suffered some or other form of abuse. When the Spirit of God fell upon the woman being prayed for, he fell on the others in need of healing as well. I was one of the others who was being healed.

 

You ask me how I know God is real? I know because he showed up more than once!

 

Prior to this third happening, I had attended a church course dealing with healing. I don’t know where he got his numbers from, but the guy presenting the course claimed that 7 out of every 10 woman were molested or raped at some point. In my own country South Africa, statistics reveal that every 7 seconds, a woman or child is being raped or molested somewhere in the country. That is truly shocking. The world population recently passed the 7 billion mark with 51% of the population women. Take the South African statistic and extend that worldwide and the number of woman and children in need of healing is truly staggering. A psychiatrist or a psychologist cannot heal you. The best they can do is give you a crutch to cling to so that you can cope with your ordeal.

 

The question has been asked a myriad times: If there really is a God, why does he allow these things to happen? In short; I don’t know. Fallen man void of the indwelling presence of God is capable of doing some really horrific things. But this I do know. It is necessary for us to be born. We are all to become God’s vessels wherein an invisible God becomes visible. The things that happened to us during the 70+ years before we die will become completely irrelevant.

 

The same question can be extended to the millions (especially Africans) born into abject poverty and no future of any kind. Millions die of starvation, mostly before they reach age 5.

[hrothgar]

 

Prior to this third happening, I had attended a church course dealing with healing. I don’t know where he got his numbers from, but the guy presenting the course claimed that 7 out of every 10 woman were molested or raped at some point. In my own country South Africa, statistics reveal that every 7 seconds, a woman or child is being raped or molested somewhere in the country. That is truly shocking.

 

Delete

[dwar0123]

Prior to this third happening, I had attended a church course dealing with healing. I dont know where he got his numbers from, but the guy presenting the course claimed that 7 out of every 10 woman were molested or raped at some point. In my own country South Africa, statistics reveal that every 7 seconds, a woman or child is being raped or molested somewhere in the country. That is truly shocking.

It is shocking.

 

That you think it is shocking is progress. 500 years ago, you wouldn't have.

 

3000 years ago your God was rewarding his follower(Lot) for offering up his daughters to be raped by strangers.

 

This story was actually one of the most shocking things I read as a kid and went a long way to convincing me that the Bible was morally bankrupt. New Testament or not, any God that ever did such things is despicable.

 

This and the genocide of the Canaanites and the story of the prophet who called upon God to punish children that were taunting him for being bald and God responded by sending bears to maul 42 of them. Going to Sunday school made me feel sick after reading those stories.

[billw55]

How do I know beyond doubt that God is real and that he exists? Ask anyone who has been baptised in the Spirit of God. It is an unmistakeable life-changing experience. It happened to me on 28 December 1995. I was visiting a family of believers. The father of the house had the practice that at 20h00 every night all members of his family (and any guests present at the time) had to pray together. A bit extreme I thought as a complete novice believer. Each person in turn was expected to pray something, no matter what. I was extremely nervous as this was new to me. It was also unexpected. When it was my turn I managed a few barely audible words. It was then that the Spirit of God fell upon me. The weight of his presence pinned me down in the chair I was sitting on. The warmth of his presence began washing over me. I began crying uncontrollably, a crying from deep within which can only happen when touched by God. Snot began streaming from my nose as I cried and cried. But the weight of God's presence had rendered me immobile. It was absolutely impossible for me to lift an arm or a hand to wipe away the snot. After about 5 minutes God's presence lifted and I was able to move again. I had zero understanding of what had just taken place. But the father of the house did as he had seen it happen to many others as well. After cleaning up the snot puddle he began explaining to me about being baptised in the Spirit of God.

 

The second time this happened was during 1996. A preacher from the USA was in my hometown. I can't remember the guys name but it could have been Virgil Johnson. Neither of us had ever set eyes on the other before. During the service he called me forward and started praying and prophesying over me. I can't remember exactly what was said but it was something along these lines, "I can see that you are on fire for God, a sailing ship ready to set out to sea, a violent and tempestuous sea. But God will bring winds and storms across the face of the ship, forcing it back into the safety of the harbour. You are not ready to leave." I never had the faintest idea what this guy was talking about at the time. However, as he began praying and prophesying, the Spirit of God fell upon me again like the first time. This time I was standing in front of a church full of friends and strangers, crying openly at once again unmistakably being touched by God.

 

The third time happened in one of the home fellowship meetings. Someone was praying over one of the woman who had been molested as a youngster. God was busy cleansing her of all the anger, hatred and hurt of some very painful memories. But this meeting had a difference. There were others in the group who had also suffered some or other form of abuse. When the Spirit of God fell upon the woman being prayed for, he fell on the others in need of healing as well. I was one of the others who was being healed.

 

You ask me how I know God is real? I know because he showed up more than once!

It sounds like you have had some very powerful emotional experiences.

 

I can say with certainty, that nothing remotely like this has ever happened to me. I suppose God must not want my belief, as much as he wants yours.

[hrothgar]

It sounds like you have had some very powerful emotional experiences.

 

I can say with certainty, that nothing remotely like this has ever happened to me. I suppose God must not want my belief, as much as he wants yours.

 

Either that, or those rape happy South Africans roofied 32519...

[mikeh]

How do I know beyond doubt that God is real and that he exists? Ask anyone who has been baptised in the Spirit of God. It is an unmistakeable life-changing experience. It happened to me on 28 December 1995. I was visiting a family of believers. The father of the house had the practice that at 20h00 every night all members of his family (and any guests present at the time) had to pray together. A bit extreme I thought as a complete novice believer. Each person in turn was expected to pray something, no matter what. I was extremely nervous as this was new to me. It was also unexpected. When it was my turn I managed a few barely audible words. It was then that the Spirit of God fell upon me. The weight of his presence pinned me down in the chair I was sitting on. The warmth of his presence began washing over me. I began crying uncontrollably, a crying from deep within which can only happen when touched by God. Snot began streaming from my nose as I cried and cried. But the weight of Gods presence had rendered me immobile. It was absolutely impossible for me to lift an arm or a hand to wipe away the snot. After about 5 minutes Gods presence lifted and I was able to move again. I had zero understanding of what had just taken place. But the father of the house did as he had seen it happen to many others as well. After cleaning up the snot puddle he began explaining to me about being baptised in the Spirit of God.

 

The second time this happened was during 1996. A preacher from the USA was in my hometown. I cant remember the guys name but it could have been Virgil Johnson. Neither of us had ever set eyes on the other before. During the service he called me forward and started praying and prophesying over me. I cant remember exactly what was said but it was something along these lines, I can see that you are on fire for God, a sailing ship ready to set out to sea, a violent and tempestuous sea. But God will bring winds and storms across the face of the ship, forcing it back into the safety of the harbour. You are not ready to leave. I never had the faintest idea what this guy was talking about at the time. However, as he began praying and prophesying, the Spirit of God fell upon me again like the first time. This time I was standing in front of a church full of friends and strangers, crying openly at once again unmistakably being touched by God.

 

The third time happened in one of the home fellowship meetings. Someone was praying over one of the woman who had been molested as a youngster. God was busy cleansing her of all the anger, hatred and hurt of some very painful memories. But this meeting had a difference. There were others in the group who had also suffered some or other form of abuse. When the Spirit of God fell upon the woman being prayed for, he fell on the others in need of healing as well. I was one of the others who was being healed.

 

You ask me how I know God is real? I know because he showed up more than once!

 

Prior to this third happening, I had attended a church course dealing with healing. I dont know where he got his numbers from, but the guy presenting the course claimed that 7 out of every 10 woman were molested or raped at some point. In my own country South Africa, statistics reveal that every 7 seconds, a woman or child is being raped or molested somewhere in the country. That is truly shocking. The world population recently passed the 7 billion mark with 51% of the population women. Take the South African statistic and extend that worldwide and the number of woman and children in need of healing is truly staggering. A psychiatrist or a psychologist cannot heal you. The best they can do is give you a crutch to cling to so that you can cope with your ordeal.

 

The question has been asked a myriad times: If there really is a God, why does he allow these things to happen? In short; I dont know. Fallen man void of the indwelling presence of God is capable of doing some really horrific things. But this I do know. It is necessary for us to be born. We are all to become Gods vessels wherein an invisible God becomes visible. The things that happened to us during the 70+ years before we die will become completely irrelevant.

 

The same question can be extended to the millions (especially Africans) born into abject poverty and no future of any kind. Millions die of starvation, mostly before they reach age 5.

I don't know whether to feel sorry for whatever events in your life left you so vulnerable to what sounds like an extremely powerful internal event, to be repeated later if I understood you correctly, or whether to congratulate you for finding a way to believe that (it seems) makes you feel better about yourself than you did.

 

I hope you will not take offence, but I suggest that you probably already know and agree that sometimes people have subjective experiences that are not objectively true. I do NOT mean to equate your experiences with the delusions of people suffering from paranoia or in the grips of a psychosis. I mention these as extreme examples of power and propensity of the human brain/mind to entertain, as 'true', ideas that are false.

 

I DO mean to suggest that lesser and far more benign situations can arise in which we have experiences that we struggle to frame. The fact that you describe yourself as a 'novice believer' at the time of your first experience, and the fact that you were voluntarily associating with what sounds like a cultish sort of religious family suggests that you were pre-disposed/conditioned by your upbringing to frame an emotionally powerful experience in religious terms.

 

Put another way: if I were at someone's home, as a guest, and the 'head' of the family said that at 8 pm we ALL HAVE TO PRAY....I'd make my apologies and leave.

 

We are by nature social animals. We tend to defer to those we sense are in positions of authority, and we tend to believe what those around us believe. Obviously these generalities are just that and different individuals react differently, but collectively it is fairly easy to predict human reactions. This is why newspapers (when they were the dominant media) could cause entire countries to go to war (as two examples: the Crimean War and the Spanish-American war were both brought into reality by the newspapers of the day).

 

It's why cults are so successful, provided that they can isolate the candidate member amongst established cultists for a short time, and why the Stockholm phenonomen exists.

 

My guess, and it can only be a guess, is that you were emotionally vulnerable, placed into a situation in which your companions were deeply religious, and you had an emotional event of some kind, and naturally you saw it as 'god'.

 

But that doesn't make it 'god'. Nor do your efforts to quote biblical passages make those biblical passages true.

 

To persuade non-believers, you need to be able to do such things as coherently state a definition of god.

 

And that definition must be such that one can construct experiments to see whether the universe acts in a manner consistent or inconsistent with the existence of that entity.

 

Telling us that we will find out when the Second Coming happens is just nonsense....until and unless the Second Coming occurs. Until then, it's simply fantasy.

 

Prayer, for example: most religions include the concept of prayer. Yet the only truly scientific study ever done on the power of prayer revealed that there was zero...absolutely zero....positive effect from prayer. Interestingly this study was endorsed, before the results were known, by a number of religious figures. They ALL chose to repudiate the study rather than to change their beliefs to accord with the evidence. That says a huge amount about the type of people who are religious.

 

I know nothing will persuade you to consider that you may be mistaken. And maybe nothing should: your feeling obviously makes you happy. It is sad to see someone who seems to be quite articulate go through life blinkered and 'stoned' but that's on me, not on you. So long as you agree that you and your co-religionists have zero right to ask others to abide by your beliefs, then I wish you well.

[Scarabin]

I don't know whether to feel sorry for whatever events in your life left you so vulnerable to what sounds like an extremely powerful internal event, to be repeated later if I understood you correctly, or whether to congratulate you for finding a way to believe that (it seems) makes you feel better about yourself than you did.

 

I hope you will not take offence, but I suggest that you probably already know and agree that sometimes people have subjective experiences that are not objectively true. I do NOT mean to equate your experiences with the delusions of people suffering from paranoia or in the grips of a psychosis. I mention these as extreme examples of power and propensity of the human brain/mind to entertain, as 'true', ideas that are false.

 

I DO mean to suggest that lesser and far more benign situations can arise in which we have experiences that we struggle to frame. The fact that you describe yourself as a 'novice believer' at the time of your first experience, and the fact that you were voluntarily associating with what sounds like a cultish sort of religious family suggests that you were pre-disposed/conditioned by your upbringing to frame an emotionally powerful experience in religious terms.

 

Put another way: if I were at someone's home, as a guest, and the 'head' of the family said that at 8 pm we ALL HAVE TO PRAY....I'd make my apologies and leave.

 

We are by nature social animals. We tend to defer to those we sense are in positions of authority, and we tend to believe what those around us believe. Obviously these generalities are just that and different individuals react differently, but collectively it is fairly easy to predict human reactions. This is why newspapers (when they were the dominant media) could cause entire countries to go to war (as two examples: the Crimean War and the Spanish-American war were both brought into reality by the newspapers of the day).

 

It's why cults are so successful, provided that they can isolate the candidate member amongst established cultists for a short time, and why the Stockholm phenonomen exists.

 

My guess, and it can only be a guess, is that you were emotionally vulnerable, placed into a situation in which your companions were deeply religious, and you had an emotional event of some kind, and naturally you saw it as 'god'.

 

But that doesn't make it 'god'. Nor do your efforts to quote biblical passages make those biblical passages true.

 

To persuade non-believers, you need to be able to do such things as coherently state a definition of god.

 

And that definition must be such that one can construct experiments to see whether the universe acts in a manner consistent or inconsistent with the existence of that entity.

 

Telling us that we will find out when the Second Coming happens is just nonsense....until and unless the Second Coming occurs. Until then, it's simply fantasy.

 

Prayer, for example: most religions include the concept of prayer. Yet the only truly scientific study ever done on the power of prayer revealed that there was zero...absolutely zero....positive effect from prayer. Interestingly this study was endorsed, before the results were known, by a number of religious figures. They ALL chose to repudiate the study rather than to change their beliefs to accord with the evidence. That says a huge amount about the type of people who are religious.

I

I know nothing will persuade you to consider that you may be mistaken. And maybe nothing should: your feeling obviously makes you happy. It is sad to see someone who seems to be quite articulate go through life blinkered and 'stoned' but that's on me, not on you. So long as you agree that you and your co-religionists have zero right to ask others to abide by your beliefs, then I wish you well.

My congratulations on a truly outstanding post. It shows both understanding and humanity. My only remaining wish is that all your posts may show such moderation.

[mikeh]

My congratulations on a truly outstanding post. It shows both understanding and humanity. My only remaining wish is that all your posts may show such moderation.

Thanks for the compliment and the carefully phrased insult :P

 

I see no real difference between the post you like and the posts you apparently dislike.

 

Yes, the tone may be different, but that is a result of the post to which I respond. When I see idiocy, especially masquerading as knowledge, or when I see someone insulting me or others who think in a similar manner to me, then my posts will be, shall we say, blunt and to the point.

 

There has been a great deal of idiocy and ignorance (the two are not invariably linked, tho stupidity can tend to lead to ignorance)in the recent threads. We see people (including you) distorting what others have said. We have seen both strawman and no true scotsman arguments made in support or defence of religion. We have seen accusations that an increase in atheism has given rise to an increase in mass murder. We have seen assertions that atheism would lead people to kill because we can't have a moral code without god. We see people assert that when there exists a difference of opinion on a subject, the 'intelligent' response is to reserve judgment: to be 'balanced'. In fact, the intelligent response is to weigh the evidence. If the evidence is balanced, then reserve judgment. But if the evidence points strongly in one direction, the intelligent response is to go with the evidence, altho in the absence of completely incontrovertible evidence, the wise person remains alive to the possibility of having to rethink his or her opinion at some later time.

 

The post to which I responded above was written from the heart, or so it seems. He or she (I am not going to speculate and I don't 'know') seems to have had some painful experiences and seems to genuinely believe that he or she experienced communion with god. I am confident that this was not true but equally confident not only that my opinion matters not, but also that he or she needed and maybe still needs it to have been true. So he or she merits compassion, so long as he or she doesn't try to force religion on the rest of society.

 

I don't see why you'd expect me to have responded in any fashion than the one I employed.

[Scarabin]

Thanks for the compliment and the carefully phrased insult :P

 

.......

 

I don't see why you'd expect me to have responded in any fashion than the one I employed.

 

I meant no insult. I promise you that although I may criticize you I will never deliberately insult you.

 

Would you accept "My only wish is that all posts may show such moderation" without feeling insulted? Some other replies showed less compassion.

 

Since brevity seems to invite misunderstanding, let me elaborate. I judged 32519 to be sincere, as you did, and hence felt his post deserved your reply. I can understand that other posters may feel he is perpetrating an elaborate hoax and hence their replies are suitable. Where we may differ is that I think we should always assume posters to be sincere.

[Fluffy]

We have seen accusations that an increase in atheism has given rise to an increase in mass murder. We have seen assertions that atheism would lead people to kill because we can't have a moral code without god.

Damn, if that's what you read from my posts I have totally failed, I rather stay silent.

[Winstonm]

I don't know whether to feel sorry for whatever events in your life left you so vulnerable to what sounds like an extremely powerful internal event, to be repeated later if I understood you correctly, or whether to congratulate you for finding a way to believe that (it seems) makes you feel better about yourself than you did.

 

I hope you will not take offence, but I suggest that you probably already know and agree that sometimes people have subjective experiences that are not objectively true. I do NOT mean to equate your experiences with the delusions of people suffering from paranoia or in the grips of a psychosis. I mention these as extreme examples of power and propensity of the human brain/mind to entertain, as 'true', ideas that are false.

 

I DO mean to suggest that lesser and far more benign situations can arise in which we have experiences that we struggle to frame. The fact that you describe yourself as a 'novice believer' at the time of your first experience, and the fact that you were voluntarily associating with what sounds like a cultish sort of religious family suggests that you were pre-disposed/conditioned by your upbringing to frame an emotionally powerful experience in religious terms.

 

Put another way: if I were at someone's home, as a guest, and the 'head' of the family said that at 8 pm we ALL HAVE TO PRAY....I'd make my apologies and leave.

 

We are by nature social animals. We tend to defer to those we sense are in positions of authority, and we tend to believe what those around us believe. Obviously these generalities are just that and different individuals react differently, but collectively it is fairly easy to predict human reactions. This is why newspapers (when they were the dominant media) could cause entire countries to go to war (as two examples: the Crimean War and the Spanish-American war were both brought into reality by the newspapers of the day).

 

It's why cults are so successful, provided that they can isolate the candidate member amongst established cultists for a short time, and why the Stockholm phenonomen exists.

 

My guess, and it can only be a guess, is that you were emotionally vulnerable, placed into a situation in which your companions were deeply religious, and you had an emotional event of some kind, and naturally you saw it as 'god'.

 

But that doesn't make it 'god'. Nor do your efforts to quote biblical passages make those biblical passages true.

 

To persuade non-believers, you need to be able to do such things as coherently state a definition of god.

 

And that definition must be such that one can construct experiments to see whether the universe acts in a manner consistent or inconsistent with the existence of that entity.

 

Telling us that we will find out when the Second Coming happens is just nonsense....until and unless the Second Coming occurs. Until then, it's simply fantasy.

 

Prayer, for example: most religions include the concept of prayer. Yet the only truly scientific study ever done on the power of prayer revealed that there was zero...absolutely zero....positive effect from prayer. Interestingly this study was endorsed, before the results were known, by a number of religious figures. They ALL chose to repudiate the study rather than to change their beliefs to accord with the evidence. That says a huge amount about the type of people who are religious.

 

I know nothing will persuade you to consider that you may be mistaken. And maybe nothing should: your feeling obviously makes you happy. It is sad to see someone who seems to be quite articulate go through life blinkered and 'stoned' but that's on me, not on you. So long as you agree that you and your co-religionists have zero right to ask others to abide by your beliefs, then I wish you well.

 

I think the following quote from noted Christian author William Lane Craig really explains all that is needed to understand the religious mind:

 

Should a conflict arise between the witness of the Holy Spirit to the fundamental truth of the Christian faith and beliefs based on argument and evidence, then it is the former which must take precedence over the latter.

 

Reasonable Faith, page 48.

[gwnn]

Fluffy, if religion is a good last resort against something and someone lacks religion, it follows that (other things being equal) that person is more likely to commit that something. The other part seems to be more complex but certainly the most natural reading of 'I see no reason' is 'I think there is no reason.' And I am not saying that your wording was careless or what not, the ideas are quite clear to me and you are entitled to them but please do not expect atheists to agree with you or enjoy reading these views.