For those who take offense at calling unbelief "irrational"

[tanstaafl72555]

It has been a subtheme for skeptics here to assume that I am making fun of their intelligence, or mocking their intellect when I accuse them of being sloppy thinkers, anti-intellectual, or believing stupid stuff. It ain't so. It is in fact sheer logic.

Consider the following. It is only one of many clear, logical, astute, and sensible observations about the nature of unbelief and the intellectual despair that it will lead to if one is consistent.

I do take offense at the halfassed pseudointellectual pretentiousness that shows up here (and other places on the internet) which puffs up at being tough minded and "unconventional" (I have to laugh at that one.... and wonder what world they live in!) and stoic when all they have done is be shallow and sloppy thinking.

I hope this will provoke thought. It raises questions that you normally won't get in your bull sessions about God, especially for those who are eagerly searching for a justification for abandoning the remnants of a belief system they inherited from family/culture.


Supposing there was no intelligence behind the universe, no creative mind. In that case, nobody designed my brain for the purpose of thinking. It is merely that when the atoms inside my skull happen, for physical or chemical reasons, to arrange themselves in a certain way, this gives me, as a by-product, the sensation I call thought. But, if so, how can I trust my own thinking to be true? It's like upsetting a milk jug and hoping that the way it splashes itself will give you a map of London. But if I can't trust my own thinking, of course I can't trust the arguments leading to Atheism, and therefore have no reason to be an Atheist, or anything else. Unless I believe in God, I cannot believe in thought: so I can never use thought to disbelieve in God.

 

[Catfish]

This sounds like false dichotomy to me. What if I believe in myself instead of God, doesn't that suffice?

 

[tanstaafl72555]

This sounds like false dichotomy to me. What if I believe in myself instead of God, doesn't that suffice?

When you "believe in yourself" you do in one sense "start out" like the person who has faith in God. You have an "axiom" or a belief you cannot demonstrate using your starting point. Faith, whether in yourself, your mind, or God, is self referential. That is, belief systems are all circular. That much is true.

The question, though, is whether belief in a chance, chaotic, and irregular universe with no design could REASONABLY be expected to burp up a mind that correlates correctly to the universe. It is faith of a more staggering and unsupportable nature to "believe" that the neural stimuli bouncing around accurately correspond to "what is really there."

If we believe in God, it is an easy jump to believe that my mind was designed to correspond to the creation in which He placed me. If I believe in a universe of blind chance, there is NO logical reason to assume there is such a correlation. It might, or it might not. Actually, within the limits of probability in a chaotic and designless system, it is more rational to believe that any ordering of the cosmos is a product solely of our own minds, and not the order of the Cosmos.

David Hume saw this one night playing pool. He said that he saw one ball strike a rack, and the balls scatter. He ASSUMED he saw one "cause" another, but then realized he did not OBSERVE the "cause" at all... only one event followed by another. "Cause" was something his mind simply IMPUTED to the order of events. That is, our minds are actively engaged in manipulation and imputation of stuff we don't see, can't see, and have no RATIONAL reason for assuming. We don't observe and dispassionately think through anything.

This is why I say unbelief is (mostly) phenomenally sloppy and shallow thinking.

 

[B00ger]

In my time and experience discussing matters with non-believers there is a common trend that many take "the easy way out". Of course it doesn't apply to all, but many will find the first "chink" in the armor of faith and run with it without actually investing any time or effort into rational research. Which is odd to me because they will often spend days or weeks researching their next tech purchase, vehicle purchase, or even firearm purchase, but they will spend nearly zero time objectively researching their standing with eternity.

It is often the same themes:

The Bible is inaccurate because it was written so long ago.

The Bible has been translated so many times there is no way it can even be close to as it was intended.

The Old Testament is too violent therefore Christianity is based on violence.

Jesus may have been a good teacher, but he wasn't the son of some god.

There are so many religions and they are all the same so who knows what is true or not.

The church is just filled with hypocrites so I don't want to go.

Jesus didn't really die on the cross.

If Jesus was such a big deal, why isn't he ever mentioned anywhere else in writings from that time, so he was probably a myth.

I don't believe he rose from the dead because that just doesn't happen to people and there is no proof it did happen.

And so forth...

It's easy to just grab on to a common issue above and rest assured in its absolute accuracy as truth because other non-believers share that as an issue. But an extreme few have ever taken those questions and out them to true objective research to see if they are, in fact, accurate.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[tanstaafl72555]

In my time and experience discussing matters with non-believers there is a common trend that many take "the easy way out". Of course it doesn't apply to all, but many will find the first "chink" in the armor of faith and run with it without actually investing any time or effort into rational research. Which is odd to me because they will often spend days or weeks researching their next tech purchase, vehicle purchase, or even firearm purchase, but they will spend nearly zero time objectively researching their standing with eternity.

It is often the same themes:

The Bible is inaccurate because it was written so long ago.

The Bible has been translated so many times there is no way it can even be close to as it was intended.

The Old Testament is too violent therefore Christianity is based on violence.

Jesus may have been a good teacher, but he wasn't the son of some god.

There are so many religions and they are all the same so who knows what is true or not.

The church is just filled with hypocrites so I don't want to go.

Jesus didn't really die on the cross.

If Jesus was such a big deal, why isn't he ever mentioned anywhere else in writings from that time, so he was probably a myth.

I don't believe he rose from the dead because that just doesn't happen to people and there is no proof it did happen.

And so forth...

It's easy to just grab on to a common issue above and rest assured in its absolute accuracy as truth because other non-believers share that as an issue. But an extreme few have ever taken those questions and out them to true objective research to see if they are, in fact, accurate.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have to admit, the skeptics here on this forum are (generally) less ideologically rigid than much of the unbelief I have seen over the years. That is, most are amiable, more or less respectful, more nuanced and less emotional than lots of the flotsam floating around in our secular culture.

I think you hit on a key point, though. If we look at the picture of man presented in the bible, we will see a creature who does NOT use his intellect "dispassionately" or objectively. That is, we are actively seeking a justification for unbelief, and not a balanced question of "is this true, and if it is, I will give my life to it." I see reason and intellectual inquiry as a suit of clothes, which unbelief will pick up and use as a covering and justification, and shield against the thought of being accountable to an eternal judge. Therefore, it is far more convenient to latch on to a surface argument, even one that does not make sense, than to face such an unpleasant inquiry. Once such an argument is discovered, there is an emotional and volitional reason to avoid anything which might discredit it. Bottom line is that reason is a tool of the volition (will) and not (as skeptics lie to themselves) the other way about.

Of course, this argument can be properly pointed back at believers. We have an emotional "reason" to embrace the logical supports for faith, and people will cling to faith even if they don't have an answer for the skeptic, especially those who find such tasks difficult.

I myself have always been a person who wanted things to "line up." I have gone through several periods in my life (pre faith and post faith) where I said "I have to sit down and decide if this is just wishful thinking or some weird oddity of thought... or whether it actually makes sense."

I have found that the more carefully I examined the best arguments against Christ, the more I became assured the gospel is actually true. I also came to understand the biblical term "fool" is not sneering at someone's intellect. It is in fact a MORAL accusation, in that people will willingly (eagerly?) believe what they know to be lies and "stuff down" obvious evidence to the contrary, if it allows them to believe they have escaped God.

 

[noway2]

@tanstaafl72555 it sounds to me too like you're positing at least one, if not more, false dichotomies. One is the idea that if one accepts that there is sone sort of intelligence behind the universe that this automaticly lends itself or extends to the notion that said intelligence directly intended human existence and has some sort of guiding hand in the process, which isn't necessarily true. It is entirely possible to accept an intelligence behind the universe that is so vast that we on this little rock are such an inconsequence, not to mention possibly not even particularly unique. Rather it strikes me as human arrogance to believe that such an intelligence would be so involved.

The second false dichotomy is in the use of believers versus non believers or "atheists", which I've noticed in your terminology several times; whereas soneone like myself doesn't fit that dichotomy. While I can honestly say I believe in god, I don't necessarily equate god with being this universal intelligence and even more specifically, I do not believe in the existence of the Christian view of God and by extension that this being judges our corporal behavior against some sort of metric. This would make me a non believer from the Christian sense, as much as it would make me an infidel in the Islamic sense, but I am certainly not an athiest.

 

[tanstaafl72555]

@tanstaafl72555 it sounds to me too like you're positing at least one, if not more, false dichotomies. One is the idea that if one accepts that there is sone sort of intelligence behind the universe that this automaticly lends itself or extends to the notion that said intelligence directly intended human existence and has some sort of guiding hand in the process, which isn't necessarily true. It is entirely possible to accept an intelligence behind the universe that is so vast that we on this little rock are such an inconsequence, not to mention possibly not even particularly unique. Rather it strikes me as human arrogance to believe that such an intelligence would be so involved.

The second false dichotomy is in the use of believers versus non believers or "atheists", which I've noticed in your terminology several times; whereas soneone like myself doesn't fit that dichotomy. While I can honestly say I believe in god, I don't necessarily equate god with being this universal intelligence and even more specifically, I do not believe in the existence of the Christian view of God and by extension that this being judges our corporal behavior against some sort of metric. This would make me a non believer from the Christian sense, as much as it would make me an infidel in the Islamic sense, but I am certainly not an athiest.

I have to go tear out a floor. I have delayed too long this morning with my pontifications. Thank you for your response and I will be back later. I must note with extreme displeasure that you have not yet taken me up on my offer to discuss any of this stuff over brews . j/k Back later.

 

[SSgt75]

There have been thousands and thousands of books already written by "scholars" which offer "proof" of both sides of this question. A short thread in a gun forum is not going to cause anyone to change their beliefs or go searching for more enlightenment (probably).

What I believe or don't believe may differ vastly from what you believe or don't believe. Does that change what happens in the end to either of us? Nope!
(Well, it actually does, but that's another long discussion)

All we can do in this lifetime is to love one another, forgive one another and be at peace with ourself and our beliefs. If everyone followed the 'Golden Rule' of Do Unto Others As You Would Have Them Do Unto You the whole world would be a much better place. But, realistically, it ain't likely to happen any time soon. Even here in this forum we see a lack of compassion for one another except when prayers are asked for and then they are freely given. Prayer, no matter what your belief/religion/non-religion, is a powerful tool that works wonders.

There is an old oriental saying that I have found to be true over and over "When The Student Is Ready, The teacher Will Be There". Sometimes the 'teacher' may be a book, or a movie or a close friend who is just waiting for us to be ready to receive new knowledge. Keep an open mind and an open Spirit.

Peace Be With You Always.

 

[B00ger]

There have been thousands and thousands of books already written by "scholars" which offer "proof" of both sides of this question. A short thread in a gun forum is not going to cause anyone to change their beliefs or go searching for more enlightenment (probably).

What I believe or don't believe may differ vastly from what you believe or don't believe. Does that change what happens in the end to either of us? Nope!
(Well, it actually does, but that's another long discussion)

All we can do in this lifetime is to love one another, forgive one another and be at peace with ourself and our beliefs. If everyone followed the 'Golden Rule' of Do Unto Others As You Would Have Them Do Unto You the whole world would be a much better place. But, realistically, it ain't likely to happen any time soon. Even here in this forum we see a lack of compassion for one another except when prayers are asked for and then they are freely given. Prayer, no matter what your belief/religion/non-religion, is a powerful tool that works wonders.

There is an old oriental saying that I have found to be true over and over "When The Student Is Ready, The teacher Will Be There". Sometimes the 'teacher' may be a book, or a movie or a close friend who is just waiting for us to be ready to receive new knowledge. Keep an open mind and an open Spirit.

Peace Be With You Always.

While I don't completely disagree, we have to remember that if just one seed is planted in even one persons heart or mind to go do the research themselves then a discussion like this anywhere, no matter how insignificant it may be, has just become invaluable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SSgt75]

While I don't completely disagree, we have to remember that if just one seed is planted in even one persons heart or mind to go do the research themselves then a discussion like this anywhere, no matter how insignificant it may be, has just become invaluable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree with you completely on this. We can scatter the seeds, but we can't force them down someone's throat and make them go search by telling them they are wrong in their thinking and that we are the ones who are right. We might not be right.

I had a close friend, a shooting/coffee buddy, who was a "born-again Christian" and attended a charismatic church and believed the Bible as literal history/prophecy. We could talk about guns and politics and religion over coffee and although I didn't agree with him on lots of things it wasn't my position to damage his beliefs. We could find areas to discuss that we agreed on. After co-leading an adult Bible study class for the past 20 years I've learned a LOT that changed how I view a lot of things and I tried to include what I've learned into our conversations. I found that I learned more by teaching than I ever did as a student although I am still learning new things every day. I try to share what I learn, but without damaging someone else's beliefs that give them peace and comfort. We will all wake up to the Truth at some point.

Peace

 

[TheWallrus]

I must note with extreme displeasure that you have not yet taken me up on my offer to discuss any of this stuff over brews . j/k Back later.

@noway2 @tanstaafl72555
Don't forget about me.

 

[Slacker]

The all knowing magic sky wizard is a hard pill for many to swallow.

I do think the 10 commandments are good rules and I try to abide by them....but not from fear of repercussions by a vengeful sky wizard.

 

[noway2]

I do think the 10 commandments are good rules and I try to abide by them....but not from fear of repercussions by a vengeful sky wizard.

There is a similar(?) saying in my belief system, "that which you project will be returned to you threefold". My beliefs don't hold repercussions by a vengeful sky wizard either, but instead that you will get your (threefold) rewards in the here and now.

 

[B00ger]

And it is specifically those who choose to enter into objective debate by referring to the subject as a "vengeful Sky wizard" that often prove the most pointless to interact with.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Catfish]

The all knowing magic sky wizard is a hard pill for many to swallow.

I do think the 10 commandments are good rules and I try to abide by them....but not from fear of repercussions by a vengeful sky wizard.

Vengeful Sky Wizard smites you for 9999999 points of damage.
You have died.
Press [ENTER] to start over.

 

[Slacker]

There is a similar(?) saying in my belief system, "that which you project will be returned to you threefold". My beliefs don't hold repercussions by a vengeful sky wizard either, but instead that you will get your (threefold) rewards in the here and now.

This has proven true to me many times over. I think it's called Karma.

 

[sr30]

While I don't completely disagree, we have to remember that if just one seed is planted in even one persons heart or mind to go do the research themselves then a discussion like this anywhere, no matter how insignificant it may be, has just become invaluable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

When you draw closer to Him, He draws closer to you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[rogue]

And it is specifically those who choose to enter into objective debate by referring to the subject as a "vengeful Sky wizard" that often prove the most pointless to interact with.

There is nothing to debate.

"Belief" cannot be debated.

There are no facts available to debate with.

 

[sr30]

There is nothing to debate.

"Belief" cannot be debated.

There are no facts available to debate with.

Satan, is that you?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[B00ger]

There is nothing to debate.

"Belief" cannot be debated.

There are no facts available to debate with.

Sadly, there are. You have just fallen into the category I initially laid out in my first post.

More specifically, God, as Christians believe is not vengeful, nor does he live "in the sky", nor is he a wizard as wizardry implies supernatural, and to God all of what he does is perfectly natural.

But if you would like to debate the finer points of the Bible, divinity, history, archeology, or even philosophy then by all means. Otherwise claiming "there is nothing to debate" and then throwing snark and condescension does not advance your position.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[rogue]

Satan, is that you?

Possibly! I had a bible teacher years (and I mean years) ago that said I had the "devil in me"!

I have read the bible (multiple times). I have studied other religions, mythologies (greek, norse, egyption,) and belief systems from all over the globe.

Reading and understanding the bible is exactly how I became an athiest. Reading and understanding other religions holy books solidified that conclusion.

The fact that man created god (all gods) is obvious. Our "gods" act like us and have our morals (like condoning slavery and misogyny), but you don't hear those verses in church!

But, I also understand why people have "beliefs". Belief in something is the simplest possible solution and requires no thought, research, facts or evidence. Most people like simple. It's easy. It feels good. It goes along with the crowd. I get that.

No I don't....

 

[noway2]

More specifically, God, as Christians believe is not vengeful, nor does he live "in the sky", nor is he a wizard as wizardry implies supernatural, and to God all of what he does is perfectly natural.

Sometimes I think we're not as far apart in our views as it sometimes seems. One area that I admittedly don't understand, and perhaps this is just an assumption on my part that you believe this, is that we are judged upon death for our actions on this planet and more specially that this would determine whether one is condemned to heaven or hell. To me this seems to be a man made principle originating with the church as a (political) power over the people and trying to instill in them the idea that if they obey some "authority", through which the man in control speaks, that they will be rewarded upon death. Note that this sounds very similar to what this suicide jihadis are taught.

Perhaps I have it wrong, and I don't mean disrespect.

 

[rogue]

Otherwise claiming "there is nothing to debate" and then throwing snark and condescension does not advance your position.

I'm not "throwing" anything. I am condescending because I find the entire subject ridiculous. It's 2017 for crying out loud.

And, I have no "position" to advance. Atheism is not a religion.

You and I are humans. That's all we need.

 

[B00ger]

I'm not "throwing" anything. I am condescending because I find the entire subject ridiculous. It's 2017 for crying out loud.

And, I have no "position" to advance. Atheism is not a religion.

You and I are humans. That's all we need.

Yet...as ridiculous as you find it, you can't help but partake while not offering anything additional to the discussion. And Athiesm is as much a religion as any. You have a profound faith in what you believe, even in disbelief. Even prior to my conversion I was never so arrogant to believe that in the entire length and breadth of the universe that I was intelligent enough to know for sure, and with no doubt, that there was nothing greater than the natural world.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[noway2]

And Athiesm is as much a religion as any. You have a profound faith in what you believe, even in disbelief.

That song by Rush, "If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice."

 

[rogue]

And Athiesm is as much a religion as any. You have a profound faith in what you believe, even in disbelief.

This is why we can't have nice things

 

[B00ger]

Sometimes I think we're not as far apart in our views as it sometimes seems. One area that I admittedly don't understand, and perhaps this is just an assumption on my part that you believe this, is that we are judged upon death for our actions on this planet and more specially that this would determine whether one is condemned to heaven or hell. To me this seems to be a man made principle originating with the church as a (political) power over the people and trying to instill in them the idea that if they obey some "authority", through which the man in control speaks, that they will be rewarded upon death. Note that this sounds very similar to what this suicide jihadis are taught.

Perhaps I have it wrong, and I don't mean disrespect.

From a strictly Christian perspective this "judgement" isn't exactly as you describe it. For a Christian it is simple a matter of choosing to accept Christ's atonement for ones sins and then living as one of his. There are no "good deeds" people can perform that covers the sin debt.

You also speak of condemnation. Condemnation is something that occurs through direct action, as in a sentence. The God of the Bible, the Christian God does not "send" people to hell. A choice is given as to where one will spend eternity. It isn't forced on anyone.

As far as what the Jihadis are taught v what Christians are taught is different in the fact that Jihadis believe that their actions will earn their place in "paradise", Christians believe it is their submission that will, not their actions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[B00ger]

This is why we can't have nice things

I have plenty of extremely nice things.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[sr30]

Possibly! I had a bible teacher years (and I mean years) ago that said I had the "devil in me"!

I have read the bible (multiple times). I have studied other religions, mythologies (greek, norse, egyption,) and belief systems from all over the globe.

Reading and understanding the bible is exactly how I became an athiest. Reading and understanding other religions holy books solidified that conclusion.

The fact that man created god (all gods) is obvious. Our "gods" act like us and have our morals (like condoning slavery and misogyny), but you don't hear those verses in church!

But, I also understand why people have "beliefs". Belief in something is the simplest possible solution and requires no thought, research, facts or evidence. Most people like simple. It's easy. It feels good. It goes along with the crowd. I get that.

No I don't....

Being a believer is far from easy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[B00ger]

Being a believer is far from easy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

His reply also ignores the fact that there are many believers who spend far more time than they could imagine doing research and investigating their faith from all perspectives. It is an ongoing thing for many, as opposed to the one time choice of some.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[tanstaafl72555]

Sigh. Just when things start getting interesting, I have to go do some ridiculous thing like "make a living"

 

[sr30]

His reply also ignores the fact that there are many believers who spend far more time than they could imagine doing research and investigating their faith from all perspectives. It is an ongoing thing for many, as opposed to the one time choice of some.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Agreed. I replied from the standpoint of how difficult self-reflection and humbling yourself before God can be.

Ego is the WMD of the devil.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[rogue]

Ego is the WMD of the devil.

Assuming you "believe" in the devil, which I don't. No religion can survive without a "boogie man".

If there really was a "god", there would be no need for a "devil". Clearly an invention of man.

Let that roll around for a minute.

 

[B00ger]

Assuming you "believe" in the devil, which I don't. No religion can survive without a "boogie man".

If there really was a "god", there would be no need for a "devil". Clearly an invention of man.

Let that roll around for a minute.

There is no need for the devil. He is not the boogeyman. Your research on the subject is showing quite poor. An eternity without the presence of the creator is the fear. The devil, Lucifer, is powerless to even the lowliest of those who have faith.

You must be accustomed to discussing the Bible and Christianity with children or with those who blindly listened in Sunday school and never actually looked into the subject.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[rogue]

There is no need for the devil. He is not the boogeyman. Your research on the subject is showing quite poor. An eternity without the presence of the creator is the fear. The devil, Lucifer, is powerless to even the lowliest of those who have faith.

You must be accustomed to discussing the Bible and Christianity with children or with those who blindly listened in Sunday school and never actually looked into the subject.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Typical condescending response.

Enjoy your faith.

In time it will be deemed a mental illness, as it should be

 

[B00ger]

Typical condescending response.

Enjoy your faith.

In time it will be deemed a mental illness, as it should be

What was condescending about it? You not liking it?

I am enjoying my faith, very much so.

Enjoy your faith as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[fieldgrade]

Typical condescending response.

Enjoy your faith.

In time it will be deemed a mental illness, as it should be

Why do you even post in this section of the forum? I don't understand it. You obviously aren't interested in civil discourse. There are others who are not "believers" here yet they seem to be able to conduct themselves with civility and engage in an intellectual dialog, which I know for a fact the OP very much welcomes.

It's like me posting in the reloading section of the forum about how stupid it is for people to reload, just because I decided to spend my time differently.

 

[tanstaafl72555]

I like him here. More later

 

[noway2]

There is no need for the devil. He is not the boogeyman. Your research on the subject is showing quite poor. An eternity without the presence of the creator is the fear. The devil, Lucifer, is powerless to even the lowliest of those who have faith.

You just reminded me of something... @tanstaafl72555 will probably complain that we're getting interesting here and want a cold beverage

Many cultures in one way or another refer to "the light" and going into this light and it is something that we've heard about from those with near death experiences, etc. Assuming this is true, and I have no idea if it is or not, I have come to believe that it is the individual who will decide if they enter or not, not that they will be judged by an external force (this may be an area we agree based upon your previous post) and that deciding not to and being outside of this light would be what the definition of hell is.

 

[B00ger]

You just reminded me of something... @tanstaafl72555 will probably complain that we're getting interesting here and want a cold beverage

Many cultures in one way or another refer to "the light" and going into this light and it is something that we've heard about from those with near death experiences, etc. Assuming this is true, and I have no idea if it is or not, I have come to believe that it is the individual who will decide if they enter or not, not that they will be judged by an external force (this may be an area we agree based upon your previous post) and that deciding not to and being outside of this light would be what the definition of hell is.

Well, the concept of "going into the light" is in no way a Christian one. There is no mention of any "light" or however people describe in their experiences. I side with science on that one as they say it's the brain shutting down. Christians believe that to be absent from the body means being present with the Lord. There is no long transition period of people wandering around trying to decide where they are going to go. To a Christian, that decision is made prior to passing.

So, yes, we would disagree to the point that I don't believe that there is any form of post death choice that will be made. And while the Bible does describe hell as a lake of fire, it could just as easy be describing the torment of eternity outside the presence of God.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk