First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
Post Reply Communication
Creator
57720 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / canada
Offline
Posted 4/4/08 , edited 4/4/08
JAS...I forgot to copy my last post. I'll go get it. In response to Seraph's last post in "Interesting Links":

I understand all of that. I'm just wondering how atheism would be presented as a forum topic designed to increase understanding. You've pretty much said all that can be said...everything else is personal perspective, and will vary from person to person, with no one being "right" or "wrong" (in the sense of a religious tenet being accurate to that particuar religion). No one would be able to say "all atheists believe..." the way other religions can. Now, there are, of course, many Christian sects, (I'll use Christianity, as I am most familiar with it) that teach different opinions, but underlying these opinions are the common thread of belief that Christ died for our sins, and was resurected, and that we must follow Him and accept Him as our Saviour in order to achieve exaltation. In your Muslim thread you define two sects of Islam. I'm pretty sure there are more than one sect of Buddhism...but there is organization and commonality among them that atheism lacks. Because of that lack, I wonder how effective it would be to put an Atheism thread here...I am concerned that it would open the floor to flaming and argumentativeness the would not be conducive to the overall spirit of this group.
46535 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 4/4/08
Continuing form this point :http://www.crunchyroll.com/forumtopic-144807/Interesting-Links.html?fpid=9041320

"Both theism and atheism presuppose that there is some clear meaning to the word "God." However, this does not seem to be true. For Spinoza, God has none of the personal characteristics that the God of various religions is supposed to have. Spinoza has been called a pantheist, and another view of God in which God does not interefere with the world at all, is called deism. Many theists regard pantheists and deists as atheists.
Aquinas thought that we could not make any positive statements about God, while many Fundamentalist Christrians claim that the statements about God that are made in the Bible are literally true.
"

Also, let's not forget to point that out that a Christian is an Atheist in regards to Zeus, Allah, Ra, and many other Gods...


kimmm6 wrote:

So, Mauz...just out of curiosity, where do you stand in that continuum?


Mild Agnosticism - Mild agnosticism (also called weak agnosticism, soft agnosticism, open agnosticism, empirical agnosticism, temporal agnosticism) —the view that the existence or nonexistence of God or gods is currently unknown but is not necessarily unknowable, therefore one will withhold judgment until/if more evidence is available. In other words, the possibility of you knowing what God is or the possibility of that God's existence is actually true, is not being excluded.
Creator
57720 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / canada
Offline
Posted 4/4/08
Question: How do you propose to prove that God exists? Any God...and not ALL Christians believe that Muslims, Buddhists, even Wiccans are atheists. Just because they call God by a different name doesn't mean they don't believe in Him. In fact, from reading Seraph's posts in Islam, it seems to me that Muslims, Jews and Christians all believe in the same God...being God, the father of Jesus Christ...the difference is in prophecy and interpretation, as well as the acceptance of Christ as the Son of God, and Saviour.
46535 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 4/4/08
Arguments regarding the existence of God are numerous and many philosophers now agree that is impossible to prove or disprove God.

I'm using the term atheist in a malleable manner. Do you believe Zeus, Kronos, Athena, Poseidon, etc exists? no you dont. There are still people out there who do believe they exists and say Jesus, and the christian God don't....etc
Creator
57720 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / canada
Offline
Posted 4/4/08
I'm not arguing that. You said: "The existence or non-existence of God or gods is currently unknown but is not unknowable, therefore one will withhold judgement until/if more evidence is available." How do you propose to come up with said evidence? Also: " Arguments regarding the existence of God are numerous and many philosophers now agree that [it] is impossible to prove or disprove God." Doesn't that contradict your own statement about waiting for proof? I'm not trying to badger you, really, I'm just trying to understand how you define your views. It helps me understand you better.
Member
10452 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 4/4/08

mauz15 wrote:

Also, let's not forget to point that out that a Christian is an Atheist in regards to Zeus, Allah, Ra, and many other Gods...


Well, an atheist can have religious beliefs, and a religious person atheistic beliefs, but that doesn’t make those beliefs held by the atheist atheistic, or those beliefs held by the religious individual religious, because they are-by the definition, not.

There’s really not much to discuss about atheistic belief except for individual interpretation. We can define the terms but beyond that there’s really nothing else to discuss because there is not a structure or organized church of atheism-just atheism.

But again, a large part of this group -is- here to discuss personal beliefs...so, I guess I have no arguement against this, as long as it remains -related- to religion and the group isn't hijacked by science and logic.
46535 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 4/4/08

kimmm6 wrote:

I'm not arguing that. You said: "The existence or non-existence of God or gods is currently unknown but is not unknowable, therefore one will withhold judgement until/if more evidence is available." How do you propose to come up with said evidence? Also: " Arguments regarding the existence of God are numerous and many philosophers now agree that [it] is impossible to prove or disprove God." Doesn't that contradict your own statement about waiting for proof? I'm not trying to badger you, really, I'm just trying to understand how you define your views. It helps me understand you better.


I'm talking about philosophical arguments, for example:

1. The existence of an effect requiring the concurrent existence and action of an efficient cause implies the existence and action of that cause.
2. The cosmos as a whole exists.
3. The existence of the cosmos as a whole is radically contingent (meaning that it needs an efficient cause of its continuing existence to preserve it in being, and prevent it from being annihilated, or reduced to nothing).
4. If the cosmos needs an efficient cause of its continuing existence, then that cause must be a supernatural being, supernatural in its action, and one the existence of which is uncaused, in other words, the Supreme Being, or God.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

That's why I'm not atheist, yes they said is impossible to prove/disprove but this is only a common agreement between some philosophers, is is not proved that "is impossible to prove or disprove God" Is like I said, an argument that appears valid to a certain number of people who happen to study this more closely that many of us. Note the word currently and the statement 'many philosophers now agree'.

Many as in not all
Now as in currently.

I cant rule out the possibility of God actually showing up tomorrow morning, for example.
Creator
57720 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / canada
Offline
Posted 4/4/08
but how would you know. IF God were to appear tomorrow, then He would most likely to appear to His believers, and thus you still have only the word of the believers. How would it be any different than now?
46535 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 4/4/08

kimmm6 wrote:
then He would most likely to appear to His believers, and thus you still have only the word of the believers. How would it be any different than now?


That's just an assumption you have made.
Creator
57720 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / canada
Offline
Posted 4/4/08
you are right...which is why I said "most likely". You still haven't answered my question, though, Mauz.
46535 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 4/4/08
If I have only their word then I would still retain the same opinion I have now, and while the matter of being believer, nonbeliever, agnostic, etc is being discussed now I just want to point out is not the most important thing for me...ethics are. Do they depend on God, or are they independent of it? what can knowledge about other religions help on viewing morality in general? etc...
Creator
57720 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / canada
Offline
Posted 4/4/08

mauz15 wrote:

If I have only their word then I would still retain the same opinion I have now, and while the matter of being believer, nonbeliever, agnostic, etc is being discussed now I just want to point out is not the most important thing for me...ethics are. Do they depend on God, or are they independent of it? what can knowledge about other religions help on viewing morality in general? etc...


Are you asking me, or yourself? Define ethics (not the word itself, but what the word means to you). If you have no fear of a supreme being, then why worry about ethics at all? What drives a person who doesn't believe in God, or is ambivilant to His existence, to continue with ethical or moral behaviour? What makes some things okay, and other things not okay?

46535 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 4/4/08
Just throwing out a question to whoever is interested, and yes I asked myself those questions because I consider them important.

Ethics is morality, character, and looking for a what encompasses a life worth living. It's not only about 'X thing is wrong, Y thing is right' is concerned about what ought to be, your worldview, etc.

Fear of a supreme being? If people worry about ethics because they fear a supreme being then quite frankly their ethics are weak and unauthentic. I try to do what is good because it is good itself, and being moral is a reward in itself.

This goes back to that old question that always comes up: Is the Good good Because God Wills It? Or Does God Will It because It Is Good?

Can God make a triangle of five corners? I don't think a perfectly logical being can do that, it would be self defeating.
Can God decide rape is bad, respect is good? Some people don't think so, instead they think God is perfect enough to follow what is good at its maximal greatness just as God being logical enough to follow Logic at its maximal ideal.
Posted 4/4/08
I don't really mind if there's an atheism thread even if atheism isn't strictly a religion.

Perhaps there should be a thread on "secular moral beliefs" or something. That might be more interesting and inclusive. I'm always curious as to where people who don't follow any religion get their moral beliefs and what they believe in.
46535 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 4/4/08
Right, secular is a better word and is more manageable.
First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.