EPT>Invisible creator who also poofed out of nowhere did it
>Stuck in infinite loop
Are you a deist? - Page 6
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Fuckyeah
17 Posts
>Invisible creator who also poofed out of nowhere did it >Stuck in infinite loop | ||
|
TheAntZ
Israel6248 Posts
but i dont believe the awful things people write about that being *shudders* | ||
|
Linkirvana
Netherlands365 Posts
Rewatch 1:45 onward, lack of belief isn't a belief. More reading if you wish. http://atheism.about.com/od/mythdefiningatheism/a/LackBelief.htm I decided not to re-watch the video, and instead read the arguments from that link you presented. I heavily disagree with basically everything said there. Belief in a deity is something different from every example given in the text. Let me first define belief for you: "Belief is the psychological state in which an individual holds a proposition or premise to be true." Hmm, this is actually going to be quite hard for me to put into proper words, but I'll give it a try: Lacking belief in a deity of some sort, means you are open to any alternative but a deity. Since there are however logical arguments to support the existence of a God in the broadest sense of the word deciding to ignore those logical arguments, and drawing your own conclusion puts you in the position that religious people hold as well. Therefor I would say a statement such as "Atheists believe there is no God, and that there must be an alternative explanation for our known universe" would be true. I would use a sentence from the video you posted as an example of why I think belief in a God is different: "Does it take more faith to disbelieve in big foot than it is to believe in it?" The answer is no, because all evidence skews towards 1 side of the spectrum here. In the case of God however it does not, since once again there are logical reasonings leading to the conclusion that a God of some sort must exist. Therefor a leap of faith is required to go either way. Once again I am referring to God in the broadest sense of the word. (Which I suspect is not what they are adressing in the video, I suspect they are discussing the Christian God here, which is something completely different from what I'm trying to point out) | ||
|
Demonace34
United States2493 Posts
On July 14 2011 20:22 Chargelot wrote: Enter deism. A belief that a being probably had something to do with our belief of how the universe may have been created. When you put it like that, the religion vs. atheism argument doesn't make sense. Everyone sounds stupid. Last time I went to church (age 7 or 8) I don't remember the preacher saying God might have created the world in X amount of days or that you may go to hell if you are bad person. They preach certainty and absolutes. I rather listen to the scientists that say we don't know but we are figuring it out piece by piece. I thought this was a theist vs atheist thread? Edit: Deism thread, somehow it turned into a science vs religion or theist vs atheist in my head. I think I'm going to lurk rather than post in this one due to me derailing. Sorry guys. | ||
Pholon
Netherlands6142 Posts
On July 14 2011 20:32 Demonace34 wrote: Last time I went to church (age 7 or 8) I don't remember the preacher saying God might have created the world in X amount of days or that you may go to hell if you are bad person. They preach certainty and absolutes. I rather listen to the scientists that say we don't know but we are figuring it out piece by piece. I thought this was a theist vs atheist thread? I thought it was about the merits of deism.. | ||
|
Linkirvana
Netherlands365 Posts
Enter deism. A belief that a being probably had something to do with our belief of how the universe may have been created. When you put it like that, the religion vs. atheism argument doesn't make sense. Everyone sounds stupid. What? You're not even making sense, a belief that a being had something to do with our belief? Deism is not the belief that some God-like creature implented creationism-like ideas into our head? Errr? | ||
|
Omnipresent
United States871 Posts
On July 14 2011 20:22 Chargelot wrote: Enter deism. A belief that a being probably had something to do with our belief of how the universe may have been created. When you put it like that, the religion vs. atheism argument doesn't make sense. Everyone sounds stupid. Deism doesn't suggest "that a being probably had something to do with how the universe may have been created" (edited for what I assume you meant to say). Deism makes a positive claim. Deists don't hedge. They believe in a creator, 100%. They simply don't see a need for religious dogma, and generally conceive the creator as non-interventionist. Deism isn't the reasonable alternative to theism. They just don't focus on a personal God as much. Both make claims that are equally forceful and equally unfounded. The argument isn't "religion vs atheism." It's theism/deism vs atheism/agnosticism. | ||
|
butchji
Germany1531 Posts
Deists basically exist because everything the Theists claimed got proven wrong more or less. The only thing you can't prove wrong is whether a God created the very first molecule or not. Everything from that point on can be proven wrong (now or in the future). A good view on this topic is I think: Deists have a slightly different opinion than Atheists which doesn't really change anything (Because the God doesn't intervene in any way and they don't have to worship anything etc). Theists are delusional. Bigots are dangerous. Imo. | ||
|
Omnipresent
United States871 Posts
On July 14 2011 20:32 Linkirvana wrote: I decided not to re-watch the video, and instead read the arguments from that link you presented. I heavily disagree with basically everything said there. Belief in a deity is something different from every example given in the text. Let me first define belief for you: "Belief is the psychological state in which an individual holds a proposition or premise to be true." Hmm, this is actually going to be quite hard for me to put into proper words, but I'll give it a try: Lacking belief in a deity of some sort, means you are open to any alternative but a deity. Since there are however logical arguments to support the existence of a God in the broadest sense of the word deciding to ignore those logical arguments, and drawing your own conclusion puts you in the position that religious people hold as well. Therefor I would say a statement such as "Atheists believe there is no God, and that there must be an alternative explanation for our known universe" would be true. I would use a sentence from the video you posted as an example of why I think belief in a God is different: "Does it take more faith to disbelieve in big foot than it is to believe in it?" The answer is no, because all evidence skews towards 1 side of the spectrum here. In the case of God however it does not, since once again there are logical reasonings leading to the conclusion that a God of some sort must exist. Therefor a leap of faith is required to go either way. Once again I am referring to God in the broadest sense of the word. (Which I suspect is not what they are adressing in the video, I suspect they are discussing the Christian God here, which is something completely different from what I'm trying to point out) The bold part is a mistake. Lacking a belief in a god doesn't mean you aren't open to any arguments. It simply means there has yet to be a satisfactory logical argument or convincing physical evidence that such a being exists. Atheists are open to such arguments/evidence. I think you misunderstand how people process logical arguments. It's not "some argue god exists, some argue he doesn't. Therefore you must choose, and either choice requires faith." (my paraphrase of your argument). It works like this. If I'm going to believe in God, I need to see physical evidence or a logically sound argument. Bring me such an argument, and I'm forced to accept it. The trouble is, no such argument exists. If you think one does, please make it. I'm willing to accept the existence of a god if you can demonstrate it to be true. | ||
|
aebriol
Norway2066 Posts
However, proper deism rejects all religions as groundless and provably false. IE, you are not supposed to be a deist, and a Christian. That's a theist. Which is weird, and convoluted, and I don't blame people for using the terms without being aware of the difference. Also, people have then later on decided that it's perfectly fine to be a Christian deist ... ie, existence of a God being proven through science and reason, and faith meaning that the Christian religion is true. Which doesn't make much sense at all. But people do believe that. | ||
|
shoop
United Kingdom228 Posts
On July 14 2011 16:26 Flameberger wrote: Like seemingly a lot of people these days I only believe in what there is evidence to support. If you think about it, you'll find that a lot of the things you believe (think/expect/estimate) are actually not based on any particular evidence. In rational arguments you may take a position like the one you state, but reality is much too complex to handle with the rational mind alone. People have to work with a million smaller and larger beliefs in order to get anywhere at all. Try to program a computer to do any nontrivial task (such as recognizing a face) based on the rules of logic and you'll find out just how much that approach fails. Much of how we perceive the world is based on hearsay, fuzzy inferences and guesswork, if not downright self-deception. Much of the discussion about religion is not so much about how we actually perceive the world, because those perceptions are a complete uncategorizable mess, but about culture: which group of people, and what set of ideas, do we identify with and want to support consciously? Also, as far as I know ethics are not evidence-based: according to your statement, you do not believe that "it is wrong to kill", because there is no objective evidence that such a thing is wrong. (What does "wrong" even mean?) Yet I'm pretty sure you subscribe to that particular ethic. | ||
|
Linkirvana
Netherlands365 Posts
The bold part is a mistake. Lacking a belief in a god doesn't mean you aren't open to any arguments. It simply means there has yet to be a satisfactory logical argument or convincing physical evidence that such a being exists. Atheists are open to such arguments/evidence. I think you misunderstand how people process logical arguments. It's not "some argue god exists, some argue he doesn't. Therefore you must choose, and either choice requires faith." (my paraphrase of your argument). It works like this. If I'm going to believe in God, I need to see physical evidence or a logically sound argument. Bring me such an argument, and I'm forced to accept it. The trouble is, no such argument exists. If you think one does, please make it. I'm willing to accept the existence of a god if you can demonstrate it to be true. Crap, I feel obliged to go into futher detail here, so I'll do my best to find some of the logically valid arguments in favour of the existence of a God. Since obviously you are right, to not take on the position of an atheist there has to be atleast some grounds to do so. Alright, well, I just spent like 30 minutes looking into it and there's just too much crap to plow through. If you're interested I would recommend Dr William Lane Craig's videos (drcraig on youtube), like I said there's a lot of crap to go through if you want to find some of the good stuff. Atleast I recall some of his arguments to be very compelling, however the arguments that I did find compelling were regarding the existence of a God in general, and I can't seem to find the debates I used to watch with him. However since the dude's a Christian, there are a lot of videos not relevant to your request. (Some of which I have just watched in the hope to find something good again XD) So! I suppose I will leave this thread with my tail between my legs now ^^, I hope you find some of the arguments I vaguely remember, since I basically can't give you any right now. | ||
|
shoop
United Kingdom228 Posts
On July 14 2011 21:19 Linkirvana wrote: Since obviously you are right, faith should be justified. Many great thinkers have tried, but failed to convince people who did not already believe. There is a list of about ten traditional arguments each of which I find utterly unconvincing. On the other hand, even though I'm not a believer myself, I wouldn't necessarily require that you justify your opinion. Just believe your stuff and leave it at that! | ||
|
Dark Stalker
102 Posts
| ||
|
Dark Stalker
102 Posts
| ||
|
MiraMax
Germany532 Posts
On July 14 2011 20:37 Omnipresent wrote: Deism doesn't suggest "that a being probably had something to do with how the universe may have been created" (edited for what I assume you meant to say). Deism makes a positive claim. Deists don't hedge. They believe in a creator, 100%. They simply don't see a need for religious dogma, and generally conceive the creator as non-interventionist. Deism isn't the reasonable alternative to theism. They just don't focus on a personal God as much. Both make claims that are equally forceful and equally unfounded. The argument isn't "religion vs atheism." It's theism/deism vs atheism/agnosticism. Being an atheist, I nonetheless strongly disagree with your analysis. Certainly, deists make a claim. But the claim is (typically) not that they "know" a god exists, but that they think it is the best explanation given what we know about existence. This is - I believe - certainly rationally defendable, even though I remain unconvinced by the arguments. In this sense deism is in fact a "rational alternative" to theism since deists don't have to dissolve and defend several problematic positions with regard to the motives and actions of personal deities. | ||
|
SirGlinG
Sweden933 Posts
When atheism grew up, with its frontrunner Nietschze there was a blind eye towards the positive things a church community can give, and the feeling of safety that a blind belief in life can give. I'd like to remind every atheist of the positive effects on life religion also has had and convince you that these things without believing in God can remain in our culture and life. One short example: When a person had died in a small swedish village back in the 19th century, the priest would arrive and help out with the practical stuff and do it in a respectful way towards the family. He would speak of life and death in a perhaps harsch devil like way or a peaceful way. But the point is that he would speak of it, that's the key to dealing with a death within the family. Afterwards the whole village would come for a visit and ask the family how their doing and what happened. Speaking of this loss with perhaps 40 different persons is in many ways dealing with death and loss. Today we get a letter from the state, a firm with people we don't know arrive to take care of the body. When we stepped away from God an became our own Gods, we also stepped away from these troubling responsobilites. I think Atheists have a responsibilty to keep these important values alive if we're gonna take away the positive effects of religion from our children and people around us. Now that's just me, but I think Jesus was on to something when he spoke of loving others and not just ourselves and making our own dreams come true at any cost as our society in many ways looks today. If this post was judgemental I apologize, I hope the point got through. Thank you. | ||
|
Demonace34
United States2493 Posts
On July 14 2011 21:25 Dark Stalker wrote: I just want to say one more thing - go out to the grand canyon sometime and look at its magnificent wonders. Or just look at a sunset or the mountains. How can you not believe in a creator when there's something so beautiful in this world? It can't have just all happened by chance. Your argument for god is: The world is beautiful -----> There is a god. There is also death, destruction, famine and tons of injustices. The universe is chaotic, stars blow up everyday, and our sun will eventually blow up. I don't think that a beautiful world proves the existence of god. On July 14 2011 21:24 Dark Stalker wrote: If you are an atheist then you pretty much having nothing to live for. Why don't you just kill yourself, if nothing exists after death anyway? The reason I am a Christian is because it gives my life meaning. If I wasn't a Christian there would be a gap inside... I guess you could call it a 'God-shaped hole' that can't be fulfilled by money, sex, power... Pretty much any worldly thing there is out there. Basically Christianity is about believing that we are all born fallen, but there is still hope for us if only we're willing to accept it. If a judge was going to put you in jail, but someone came in offering to take your place, why wouldn't you take it? Because that's pretty much what Jesus did for us - we are all sinners, and if Jesus didn't die for us we would all be in Hell right now. Most people who argue against Christianity don't know anything about it so it's like trying to debate about the benefits of StarCraft with someone who thinks that all nerds are just wasting their lives and productivity and giving the gaming industry profits with no social benefits by playing computer games. What I've taken away from this post as truths. Atheists have nothing to live for so you should kill yourself. Christians are the only people to have meaning in their lives. If you don't love god, you are a materialistic and have to fill the void with sex money and power. If you don't believe that Jesus died for your sins, you are going to hell. Most people who argue against Christianity are ignorant. I would just say that many atheists have well intentioned moral and ethical beliefs and can actually be altruistic without god in the picture. We also have atleast a basic understanding of world religions and have well thought out arguments against theists. | ||
|
shoop
United Kingdom228 Posts
On July 14 2011 21:24 Dark Stalker wrote: If you are an atheist then you pretty much having nothing to live for. Whoah, that's a bummer. Glad you told me. Why don't you just kill yourself, if nothing exists after death anyway? Wouldn't that be an excellent reason not to kill yourself? More seriously, The reason I am a Christian is because it gives my life meaning. If I wasn't a Christian there would be a gap inside... I guess you could call it a 'God-shaped hole' that can't be fulfilled by money, sex, power... What bothers me is that you seem to assume that nonbelievers only live for things like money, sex and power. I find that a very arrogant attitude! While I don't see that there is any objective "meaning of life", I do try to lead a meaningful and ethical life. My work and my relations with friends and family are every bit as meaningful as yours, and art and music can at times touch me to the core. Do you really feel the need to insist that such things are meaningless? If a judge was going to put you in jail, but someone came in offering to take your place, why wouldn't you take it? It has never happened to me, but I suppose I would unless I really felt I deserved it :-) | ||
|
Fuckyeah
17 Posts
On July 14 2011 21:24 Dark Stalker wrote: If you are an atheist then you pretty much having nothing to live for. Why don't you just kill yourself, if nothing exists after death anyway? The reason I am a Christian is because it gives my life meaning. If I wasn't a Christian there would be a gap inside... I guess you could call it a 'God-shaped hole' that can't be fulfilled by money, sex, power... Pretty much any worldly thing there is out there. Basically Christianity is about believing that we are all born fallen, but there is still hope for us if only we're willing to accept it. If a judge was going to put you in jail, but someone came in offering to take your place, why wouldn't you take it? Because that's pretty much what Jesus did for us - we are all sinners, and if Jesus didn't die for us we would all be in Hell right now. Most people who argue against Christianity don't know anything about it so it's like trying to debate about the benefits of StarCraft with someone who thinks that all nerds are just wasting their lives and productivity and giving the gaming industry profits with no social benefits by playing computer games. Get out. Why would atheists kill theirselves? Because they do not believe in an afterlife? That's retarded. | ||
| ||
