| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"leo" |
| Date: |
13 Nov 2006 03:35:03 PM |
| Object: |
prove about god's delusion |
all religions are saying their message is from god himself via some
profet or other intermediary.
Quite often a religious nuts is challenging atheist, "prove there is
not a god".
Well, a repeated constant in all religions is "this message is from
god", or "god himself want to comunicate with us". This is the prove
that god is a fraud, or a delusion. If really wanted to comunicate
with humans he had not any obstacle to do it. But from the general
philosphy of religions, all the people of certain church, or certain
faith, or any different god, or dogma, is that "the people of our
church are the true believers, are the choosen people of god, all the
rest is bound to suffer in hel for an eternity, or any to suffer any
other damnation".
To me, this idea of a god with a small fraction of Humanity declared
choosen people, it is utter nonsense.
If I would need a prove, this nonsense of "a choosen people of god" it
the the realization of a fraud. This is all the prove I needed.
leo
.
|
|
| User: "Bill M" |
|
| Title: Re: prove about god's delusion |
13 Nov 2006 04:06:28 PM |
|
|
When it comes to the fear of death, all logic is abandoned in favor of
inventing a god that will save them after death in their heaven.
"leo" <leopoldo.perdomo@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1163453703.395550.64730@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
all religions are saying their message is from god himself via some
profet or other intermediary.
Quite often a religious nuts is challenging atheist, "prove there is
not a god".
Well, a repeated constant in all religions is "this message is from
god", or "god himself want to comunicate with us". This is the prove
that god is a fraud, or a delusion. If really wanted to comunicate
with humans he had not any obstacle to do it. But from the general
philosphy of religions, all the people of certain church, or certain
faith, or any different god, or dogma, is that "the people of our
church are the true believers, are the choosen people of god, all the
rest is bound to suffer in hel for an eternity, or any to suffer any
other damnation".
To me, this idea of a god with a small fraction of Humanity declared
choosen people, it is utter nonsense.
If I would need a prove, this nonsense of "a choosen people of god" it
the the realization of a fraud. This is all the prove I needed.
leo
.
|
|
|
| User: "leo" |
|
| Title: Re: prove about god's delusion |
14 Nov 2006 05:31:58 AM |
|
|
Bill M ha escrito:
When it comes to the fear of death, all logic is abandoned in favor of
inventing a god that will save them after death in their heaven.
I am not sure that any religious people "truly believe" as a result a
search and independent process of reasoning. Mostly they are behaving
like "automats" or sort of tamed animals. They were tamed to repeat
some phrases, and to declare they believe there is a god, an afterlife,
a heavens and all that. This is not an objective knowledge, and they
can understand this well. I mean religious people can discriminate
quite well, between objective matters of daily life and subjective
matters, related to their religious dogma and irrational delirious.
They know quite well, this delirious or delusions are such, that is
stinking *****. But have been tamed and caged into a religious
behaviour. How much are they tamed, how much are they involved into
the religious militance, depends on a great mesure to the degree of
their conditioning.
Just consider the case of Rev. Faggard. He was apparently a fundi in
all his right. And he really was, but all this words about hating
faggots were fake, for he was enjoying the pleasures of male-love. I
am not meaning that all religious people had to be hidden gays. Most
of them had to be straight like most people are. But you can see in
this case, that words are only words, and even if many people they real
hate for gays or for atheists, these are the result of an operant
conditioning. Many of our feelings are mediated, sometimes by
imitation, sometimes by an operant conditioning. If you are tame to
hate and despise gays or other minorities, by example, you can feel a
sort of superiority that would defeat your low self-esteem due to poor
grades in school and a low IQ. So, with poor grades and a low IQ, you
know that there are a lot of trash in this world like fags, people that
do not believe in the true faith, people that believe in fake gods and
also they got the atheists.
To beleive in religious tenets is something analogous to people that do
not understand the scientific reasons that upheld some numbers like the
Pi number, the number E, of the electron's charge, the mass of a
proton, the gravitacional constant G, and so on.
The crucial difference between believing in science or in religious
tenets is that Science had proved objective usefulness, while religions
have not produced mostly hate among peoples and nations, with the
result of dangerous wars.
Leopoldo
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pangur Ban" |
|
| Title: Re: prove about god's delusion |
14 Nov 2006 07:19:03 AM |
|
|
leo wrote after much deliberation:
Bill M ha escrito:
When it comes to the fear of death, all logic is abandoned in favor of
inventing a god that will save them after death in their heaven.
I am not sure that any religious people "truly believe" as a result a
search and independent process of reasoning.
The exception proves the rule. I am the exception to the above.
Mostly they are behaving
like "automats" or sort of tamed animals. They were tamed to repeat
some phrases, and to declare they believe there is a god, an afterlife,
a heavens and all that.
Not I.
This is not an objective knowledge, and they
can understand this well. I mean religious people can discriminate
quite well, between objective matters of daily life and subjective
matters, related to their religious dogma and irrational delirious.
They know quite well, this delirious or delusions are such, that is
stinking *****. But have been tamed and caged into a religious
behaviour. How much are they tamed, how much are they involved into
the religious militance, depends on a great mesure to the degree of
their conditioning.
Just consider the case of Rev. Faggard. He was apparently a fundi in
all his right. And he really was, but all this words about hating
faggots were fake, for he was enjoying the pleasures of male-love. I
am not meaning that all religious people had to be hidden gays. Most
of them had to be straight like most people are. But you can see in
this case, that words are only words, and even if many people they real
hate for gays or for atheists, these are the result of an operant
conditioning. Many of our feelings are mediated, sometimes by
imitation, sometimes by an operant conditioning. If you are tame to
hate and despise gays or other minorities, by example, you can feel a
sort of superiority that would defeat your low self-esteem due to poor
grades in school and a low IQ. So, with poor grades and a low IQ, you
know that there are a lot of trash in this world like fags, people that
do not believe in the true faith, people that believe in fake gods and
also they got the atheists.
I am not prejudiced against gays or other minorities; I had good
grades through all my schooling and degrees.; I don't know what my IQ
is - and don't care - but was told only that it is over 140. *shrug*
Yet I am a theist.
To beleive in religious tenets is something analogous to people that do
not understand the scientific reasons that upheld some numbers like the
Pi number, the number E, of the electron's charge, the mass of a
proton, the gravitacional constant G, and so on.
The crucial difference between believing in science or in religious
tenets is that Science had proved objective usefulness, while religions
have not produced mostly hate among peoples and nations, with the
result of dangerous wars.
Don't forget that the increasingly sophisticated technology of war is
provided by science. Religion may provide the reason; science provides
the means.
--
Pangur Ban - nonchristian theist
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill M" |
|
| Title: Re: prove about god's delusion |
14 Nov 2006 08:44:19 AM |
|
|
JUST ANOTHER BEFUDDLED GOD WORSHIPPER!
"Pangur Ban" <PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:mn.717b7d6b8d470bea.64065@worldnet.att.net...
leo wrote after much deliberation:
Bill M ha escrito:
When it comes to the fear of death, all logic is abandoned in favor of
inventing a god that will save them after death in their heaven.
I am not sure that any religious people "truly believe" as a result a
search and independent process of reasoning.
The exception proves the rule. I am the exception to the above.
Mostly they are behaving
like "automats" or sort of tamed animals. They were tamed to repeat
some phrases, and to declare they believe there is a god, an afterlife,
a heavens and all that.
Not I.
This is not an objective knowledge, and they
can understand this well. I mean religious people can discriminate
quite well, between objective matters of daily life and subjective
matters, related to their religious dogma and irrational delirious.
They know quite well, this delirious or delusions are such, that is
stinking *****. But have been tamed and caged into a religious
behaviour. How much are they tamed, how much are they involved into
the religious militance, depends on a great mesure to the degree of
their conditioning.
Just consider the case of Rev. Faggard. He was apparently a fundi in
all his right. And he really was, but all this words about hating
faggots were fake, for he was enjoying the pleasures of male-love. I
am not meaning that all religious people had to be hidden gays. Most
of them had to be straight like most people are. But you can see in
this case, that words are only words, and even if many people they real
hate for gays or for atheists, these are the result of an operant
conditioning. Many of our feelings are mediated, sometimes by
imitation, sometimes by an operant conditioning. If you are tame to
hate and despise gays or other minorities, by example, you can feel a
sort of superiority that would defeat your low self-esteem due to poor
grades in school and a low IQ. So, with poor grades and a low IQ, you
know that there are a lot of trash in this world like fags, people that
do not believe in the true faith, people that believe in fake gods and
also they got the atheists.
I am not prejudiced against gays or other minorities; I had good grades
through all my schooling and degrees.; I don't know what my IQ is - and
don't care - but was told only that it is over 140. *shrug* Yet I am a
theist.
To beleive in religious tenets is something analogous to people that do
not understand the scientific reasons that upheld some numbers like the
Pi number, the number E, of the electron's charge, the mass of a
proton, the gravitacional constant G, and so on.
The crucial difference between believing in science or in religious
tenets is that Science had proved objective usefulness, while religions
have not produced mostly hate among peoples and nations, with the
result of dangerous wars.
Don't forget that the increasingly sophisticated technology of war is
provided by science. Religion may provide the reason; science provides
the means.
--
Pangur Ban - nonchristian theist
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: prove about god's delusion |
14 Nov 2006 07:38:28 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 14 Nov 2006 06:19:03 -0700, Pangur Ban
<PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
leo wrote after much deliberation:
Bill M ha escrito:
When it comes to the fear of death, all logic is abandoned in favor of
inventing a god that will save them after death in their heaven.
I am not sure that any religious people "truly believe" as a result a
search and independent process of reasoning.
The exception proves the rule. I am the exception to the above.
If you want us to believe that you came to it as a result of "a search
and independent process of reasoning" you would have to explain
exactly what this process was rather than just asserting it.
Because it cannot be reached as a logical conclusion from information
or evidence which simply isn't there.
You would also have to explain why you were searching for something
you didn't already believe in.
I don't think you want your reasoning to be demolished here.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill M" |
|
| Title: Re: prove about god's delusion |
14 Nov 2006 08:49:45 AM |
|
|
<calee@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:u9hjl218a9c6lbme17tul61kealm0lkh57@4ax.com...
On Tue, 14 Nov 2006 06:19:03 -0700, Pangur Ban
<PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
leo wrote after much deliberation:
Bill M ha escrito:
When it comes to the fear of death, all logic is abandoned in favor of
inventing a god that will save them after death in their heaven.
I am not sure that any religious people "truly believe" as a result a
search and independent process of reasoning.
The exception proves the rule. I am the exception to the above.
If you want us to believe that you came to it as a result of "a search
and independent process of reasoning" you would have to explain
exactly what this process was rather than just asserting it.
Because it cannot be reached as a logical conclusion from information
or evidence which simply isn't there.
You would also have to explain why you were searching for something
you didn't already believe in.
I don't think you want your reasoning to be demolished here.
Religious God believers do not base their beliefs on objective verifiable
evidence. ( There is none.)
They base their beliefs on pure 'hope and faith' because they have a panic
fear of the reality of the finality of death.
They need to create an after life to deal with this fear.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Pangur Ban" |
|
| Title: Re: prove about god's delusion |
14 Nov 2006 11:31:39 AM |
|
|
explained :
On Tue, 14 Nov 2006 06:19:03 -0700, Pangur Ban
<PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
leo wrote after much deliberation:
Bill M ha escrito:
When it comes to the fear of death, all logic is abandoned in favor of
inventing a god that will save them after death in their heaven.
I am not sure that any religious people "truly believe" as a result a
search and independent process of reasoning.
The exception proves the rule. I am the exception to the above.
If you want us to believe that you came to it as a result of "a search
and independent process of reasoning" you would have to explain
exactly what this process was rather than just asserting it.
Because it cannot be reached as a logical conclusion from information
or evidence which simply isn't there.
You would also have to explain why you were searching for something
you didn't already believe in.
I don't think you want your reasoning to be demolished here.
I chose my religious beliefs after study of several religions, internet
searches, much thought, and self-examination. This was a multi-year
process. I stripped away as many man-created accretions from the
various religions as I could identify (sure didn't leave much) and
dropped those tenets peculiar to any specific religion. What was left
was examined (by me) for reasonableness, effects on me, and possible
effects on others. I chose my beliefs by what I think were fairly
rigorous standards.... a moral system, if you will, as it contains none
of the nonsense about sin, hell, heaven, angels, virgins in the
afterlife, resurrection of the dead,etc.
I have always believed in a deity (no proof, no evidence, no facts
then), I simply felt that all the religions or religious sects I
examined were sheer nonsense. I also have no fear of death - one of
the usual motivations for believing in a deity.
What motivated my search for a "religion" was proof - for me. My proof
was and is intensely personal and private. That began my search.
Later my proof was buttressed by two similar proofs received by a very
close friend. He has remained ambivelant about religion and does not
"practice" any.
Most respectfully and politely stated, I will not present my proof on a
ng; I might - if I firmly trusted an individual - discuss my proof
face-to-face. My friend is the only person with whom I have discussed
my proof; no other living person do I trust enough to share. My proof
is what all religion ought to be - a personal and private matter.
I am not advocating or demanding anyone accept my ideas or beliefs; I
simply mentioned that I feel I am an exception to the "rule" that most
theists believe without thought or reason.
--
Pangur Ban - nonchristian theist
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: prove about god's delusion |
14 Nov 2006 11:34:30 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 14 Nov 2006 10:31:39 -0700, Pangur Ban
<PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
calee@optonline.net explained :
On Tue, 14 Nov 2006 06:19:03 -0700, Pangur Ban
<PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
leo wrote after much deliberation:
Bill M ha escrito:
When it comes to the fear of death, all logic is abandoned in favor of
inventing a god that will save them after death in their heaven.
I am not sure that any religious people "truly believe" as a result a
search and independent process of reasoning.
The exception proves the rule. I am the exception to the above.
If you want us to believe that you came to it as a result of "a search
and independent process of reasoning" you would have to explain
exactly what this process was rather than just asserting it.
Because it cannot be reached as a logical conclusion from information
or evidence which simply isn't there.
You would also have to explain why you were searching for something
you didn't already believe in.
I don't think you want your reasoning to be demolished here.
I chose my religious beliefs after study of several religions, internet
searches, much thought, and self-examination. This was a multi-year
process. I stripped away as many man-created accretions from the
various religions as I could identify (sure didn't leave much) and
dropped those tenets peculiar to any specific religion. What was left
was examined (by me) for reasonableness, effects on me, and possible
effects on others. I chose my beliefs by what I think were fairly
rigorous standards.... a moral system, if you will, as it contains none
of the nonsense about sin, hell, heaven, angels, virgins in the
afterlife, resurrection of the dead,etc.
I have always believed in a deity (no proof, no evidence, no facts
then), I simply felt that all the religions or religious sects I
examined were sheer nonsense. I also have no fear of death - one of
the usual motivations for believing in a deity.
Then you didn't believe through reason.
What motivated my search for a "religion" was proof - for me. My proof
was and is intensely personal and private. That began my search.
Later my proof was buttressed by two similar proofs received by a very
close friend. He has remained ambivelant about religion and does not
"practice" any.
Most respectfully and politely stated, I will not present my proof on a
ng; I might - if I firmly trusted an individual - discuss my proof
face-to-face. My friend is the only person with whom I have discussed
my proof; no other living person do I trust enough to share. My proof
is what all religion ought to be - a personal and private matter.
I am not advocating or demanding anyone accept my ideas or beliefs; I
simply mentioned that I feel I am an exception to the "rule" that most
theists believe without thought or reason.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pangur Ban" |
|
| Title: Re: prove about god's delusion |
14 Nov 2006 01:20:29 PM |
|
|
expressed precisely :
On Tue, 14 Nov 2006 10:31:39 -0700, Pangur Ban
<PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
explained :
On Tue, 14 Nov 2006 06:19:03 -0700, Pangur Ban
<PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
leo wrote after much deliberation:
Bill M ha escrito:
When it comes to the fear of death, all logic is abandoned in favor of
inventing a god that will save them after death in their heaven.
I am not sure that any religious people "truly believe" as a result a
search and independent process of reasoning.
The exception proves the rule. I am the exception to the above.
If you want us to believe that you came to it as a result of "a search
and independent process of reasoning" you would have to explain
exactly what this process was rather than just asserting it.
Because it cannot be reached as a logical conclusion from information
or evidence which simply isn't there.
You would also have to explain why you were searching for something
you didn't already believe in.
I don't think you want your reasoning to be demolished here.
I chose my religious beliefs after study of several religions, internet
searches, much thought, and self-examination. This was a multi-year
process. I stripped away as many man-created accretions from the
various religions as I could identify (sure didn't leave much) and
dropped those tenets peculiar to any specific religion. What was left
was examined (by me) for reasonableness, effects on me, and possible
effects on others. I chose my beliefs by what I think were fairly
rigorous standards.... a moral system, if you will, as it contains none
of the nonsense about sin, hell, heaven, angels, virgins in the
afterlife, resurrection of the dead,etc.
I have always believed in a deity (no proof, no evidence, no facts
then), I simply felt that all the religions or religious sects I
examined were sheer nonsense. I also have no fear of death - one of
the usual motivations for believing in a deity.
Then you didn't believe through reason.
Believe in a deity? Now I do. Before, it was irrelevant to my
life...as was religion in general.
What motivated my search for a "religion" was proof - for me. My proof
was and is intensely personal and private. That began my search.
Later my proof was buttressed by two similar proofs received by a very
close friend. He has remained ambivelant about religion and does not
"practice" any.
Most respectfully and politely stated, I will not present my proof on a
ng; I might - if I firmly trusted an individual - discuss my proof
face-to-face. My friend is the only person with whom I have discussed
my proof; no other living person do I trust enough to share. My proof
is what all religion ought to be - a personal and private matter.
I am not advocating or demanding anyone accept my ideas or beliefs; I
simply mentioned that I feel I am an exception to the "rule" that most
theists believe without thought or reason.
--
Pangur Ban - nonchristian theist
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Neil Kelsey" |
|
| Title: Re: prove about god's delusion |
14 Nov 2006 01:33:38 PM |
|
|
Pangur Ban wrote:
calee@optonline.net explained :
On Tue, 14 Nov 2006 06:19:03 -0700, Pangur Ban
<PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
leo wrote after much deliberation:
Bill M ha escrito:
When it comes to the fear of death, all logic is abandoned in favor of
inventing a god that will save them after death in their heaven.
I am not sure that any religious people "truly believe" as a result a
search and independent process of reasoning.
The exception proves the rule. I am the exception to the above.
If you want us to believe that you came to it as a result of "a search
and independent process of reasoning" you would have to explain
exactly what this process was rather than just asserting it.
Because it cannot be reached as a logical conclusion from information
or evidence which simply isn't there.
You would also have to explain why you were searching for something
you didn't already believe in.
I don't think you want your reasoning to be demolished here.
I chose my religious beliefs after study of several religions, internet
searches, much thought, and self-examination. This was a multi-year
process. I stripped away as many man-created accretions from the
various religions as I could identify (sure didn't leave much) and
dropped those tenets peculiar to any specific religion. What was left
was examined (by me) for reasonableness, effects on me, and possible
effects on others. I chose my beliefs by what I think were fairly
rigorous standards.... a moral system, if you will, as it contains none
of the nonsense about sin, hell, heaven, angels, virgins in the
afterlife, resurrection of the dead,etc.
I have always believed in a deity (no proof, no evidence, no facts
then), I simply felt that all the religions or religious sects I
examined were sheer nonsense. I also have no fear of death - one of
the usual motivations for believing in a deity.
What motivated my search for a "religion" was proof - for me. My proof
was and is intensely personal and private. That began my search.
Later my proof was buttressed by two similar proofs received by a very
close friend. He has remained ambivelant about religion and does not
"practice" any.
Most respectfully and politely stated, I will not present my proof on a
ng; I might - if I firmly trusted an individual - discuss my proof
face-to-face. My friend is the only person with whom I have discussed
my proof; no other living person do I trust enough to share. My proof
is what all religion ought to be - a personal and private matter.
I am not advocating or demanding anyone accept my ideas or beliefs; I
simply mentioned that I feel I am an exception to the "rule" that most
theists believe without thought or reason.
We don't know if you're an exception to the rule or not, you won't
tell. Personally, I don't think you are, but you certainly are nice and
polite with an intellectual curiousity, all splendid character traits.
The only way you would be an exception to the rule would be if you
presented a proof of your god and that proof would be valid. Otherwise,
you're dodging the issue like everyone else. That does not mean I don't
like you.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pangur Ban" |
|
| Title: Re: prove about god's delusion |
14 Nov 2006 10:00:13 PM |
|
|
Neil Kelsey explained on 11/14/2006 :
Pangur Ban wrote:
calee@optonline.net explained :
On Tue, 14 Nov 2006 06:19:03 -0700, Pangur Ban
<PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
leo wrote after much deliberation:
Bill M ha escrito:
When it comes to the fear of death, all logic is abandoned in favor of
inventing a god that will save them after death in their heaven.
I am not sure that any religious people "truly believe" as a result a
search and independent process of reasoning.
The exception proves the rule. I am the exception to the above.
If you want us to believe that you came to it as a result of "a search
and independent process of reasoning" you would have to explain
exactly what this process was rather than just asserting it.
Because it cannot be reached as a logical conclusion from information
or evidence which simply isn't there.
You would also have to explain why you were searching for something
you didn't already believe in.
I don't think you want your reasoning to be demolished here.
I chose my religious beliefs after study of several religions, internet
searches, much thought, and self-examination. This was a multi-year
process. I stripped away as many man-created accretions from the
various religions as I could identify (sure didn't leave much) and
dropped those tenets peculiar to any specific religion. What was left
was examined (by me) for reasonableness, effects on me, and possible
effects on others. I chose my beliefs by what I think were fairly
rigorous standards.... a moral system, if you will, as it contains none
of the nonsense about sin, hell, heaven, angels, virgins in the
afterlife, resurrection of the dead,etc.
I have always believed in a deity (no proof, no evidence, no facts
then), I simply felt that all the religions or religious sects I
examined were sheer nonsense. I also have no fear of death - one of
the usual motivations for believing in a deity.
What motivated my search for a "religion" was proof - for me. My proof
was and is intensely personal and private. That began my search.
Later my proof was buttressed by two similar proofs received by a very
close friend. He has remained ambivelant about religion and does not
"practice" any.
Most respectfully and politely stated, I will not present my proof on a
ng; I might - if I firmly trusted an individual - discuss my proof
face-to-face. My friend is the only person with whom I have discussed
my proof; no other living person do I trust enough to share. My proof
is what all religion ought to be - a personal and private matter.
I am not advocating or demanding anyone accept my ideas or beliefs; I
simply mentioned that I feel I am an exception to the "rule" that most
theists believe without thought or reason.
We don't know if you're an exception to the rule or not, you won't
tell. Personally, I don't think you are, but you certainly are nice and
polite with an intellectual curiousity, all splendid character traits.
The only way you would be an exception to the rule would be if you
presented a proof of your god and that proof would be valid. Otherwise,
you're dodging the issue like everyone else. That does not mean I don't
like you.
No, I most politely won't tell. :-) I am not here to convince anyone
of the validity of my beliefs. That's just not important to me; my
beliefs harm no one and I feel no need to defend them If my proof
satisfies me, that is enough for me. I feel no need to validate it by
presenting it others. I am confident enough of myself to rely on my
own judgment. *shrug* If others have differing knowledge or even
beliefs and do no harm - like the majority of folk on this ng - I offer
them the same acceptance I always hope to receive.
My politeness is partially just me, and partially (big part) my
beliefs. I am intensely curious - read nearly every thread - but don't
need to comment on each.
I don't intend to "dodge" as that has the connotation of being
deceitful and I am not....I just chose not to share.
*grin* I like you too....just don't ask me to meet you after study
hall! >:|
Seriously, thank you for the acceptance.... I do appreciate it.
--
Pangur Ban - nonchristian theist
.
|
|
|
| User: "Neil Kelsey" |
|
| Title: Re: prove about god's delusion |
15 Nov 2006 08:52:03 AM |
|
|
Pangur Ban wrote:
Neil Kelsey explained on 11/14/2006 :
Pangur Ban wrote:
calee@optonline.net explained :
On Tue, 14 Nov 2006 06:19:03 -0700, Pangur Ban
<PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
leo wrote after much deliberation:
Bill M ha escrito:
When it comes to the fear of death, all logic is abandoned in favor of
inventing a god that will save them after death in their heaven.
I am not sure that any religious people "truly believe" as a result a
search and independent process of reasoning.
The exception proves the rule. I am the exception to the above.
If you want us to believe that you came to it as a result of "a search
and independent process of reasoning" you would have to explain
exactly what this process was rather than just asserting it.
Because it cannot be reached as a logical conclusion from information
or evidence which simply isn't there.
You would also have to explain why you were searching for something
you didn't already believe in.
I don't think you want your reasoning to be demolished here.
I chose my religious beliefs after study of several religions, internet
searches, much thought, and self-examination. This was a multi-year
process. I stripped away as many man-created accretions from the
various religions as I could identify (sure didn't leave much) and
dropped those tenets peculiar to any specific religion. What was left
was examined (by me) for reasonableness, effects on me, and possible
effects on others. I chose my beliefs by what I think were fairly
rigorous standards.... a moral system, if you will, as it contains none
of the nonsense about sin, hell, heaven, angels, virgins in the
afterlife, resurrection of the dead,etc.
I have always believed in a deity (no proof, no evidence, no facts
then), I simply felt that all the religions or religious sects I
examined were sheer nonsense. I also have no fear of death - one of
the usual motivations for believing in a deity.
What motivated my search for a "religion" was proof - for me. My proof
was and is intensely personal and private. That began my search.
Later my proof was buttressed by two similar proofs received by a very
close friend. He has remained ambivelant about religion and does not
"practice" any.
Most respectfully and politely stated, I will not present my proof on a
ng; I might - if I firmly trusted an individual - discuss my proof
face-to-face. My friend is the only person with whom I have discussed
my proof; no other living person do I trust enough to share. My proof
is what all religion ought to be - a personal and private matter.
I am not advocating or demanding anyone accept my ideas or beliefs; I
simply mentioned that I feel I am an exception to the "rule" that most
theists believe without thought or reason.
We don't know if you're an exception to the rule or not, you won't
tell. Personally, I don't think you are, but you certainly are nice and
polite with an intellectual curiousity, all splendid character traits.
The only way you would be an exception to the rule would be if you
presented a proof of your god and that proof would be valid. Otherwise,
you're dodging the issue like everyone else. That does not mean I don't
like you.
No, I most politely won't tell. :-) I am not here to convince anyone
of the validity of my beliefs. That's just not important to me; my
beliefs harm no one and I feel no need to defend them If my proof
satisfies me, that is enough for me. I feel no need to validate it by
presenting it others. I am confident enough of myself to rely on my
own judgment. *shrug* If others have differing knowledge or even
beliefs and do no harm - like the majority of folk on this ng - I offer
them the same acceptance I always hope to receive.
My politeness is partially just me, and partially (big part) my
beliefs. I am intensely curious - read nearly every thread - but don't
need to comment on each.
I don't intend to "dodge" as that has the connotation of being
deceitful and I am not....I just chose not to share.
*grin* I like you too....just don't ask me to meet you after study
hall! >:|
Seriously, thank you for the acceptance.... I do appreciate it.
My point was really that I'm not so sure you're the exception to the
rule you think you are.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pangur Ban" |
|
| Title: Re: prove about god's delusion |
15 Nov 2006 11:42:13 AM |
|
|
Neil Kelsey submitted this idea :
Pangur Ban wrote:
Neil Kelsey explained on 11/14/2006 :
Pangur Ban wrote:
calee@optonline.net explained :
On Tue, 14 Nov 2006 06:19:03 -0700, Pangur Ban
<PangurBanTheist@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
leo wrote after much deliberation:
Bill M ha escrito:
When it comes to the fear of death, all logic is abandoned in favor of
inventing a god that will save them after death in their heaven.
I am not sure that any religious people "truly believe" as a result a
search and independent process of reasoning.
The exception proves the rule. I am the exception to the above.
If you want us to believe that you came to it as a result of "a search
and independent process of reasoning" you would have to explain
exactly what this process was rather than just asserting it.
Because it cannot be reached as a logical conclusion from information
or evidence which simply isn't there.
You would also have to explain why you were searching for something
you didn't already believe in.
I don't think you want your reasoning to be demolished here.
I chose my religious beliefs after study of several religions, internet
searches, much thought, and self-examination. This was a multi-year
process. I stripped away as many man-created accretions from the
various religions as I could identify (sure didn't leave much) and
dropped those tenets peculiar to any specific religion. What was left
was examined (by me) for reasonableness, effects on me, and possible
effects on others. I chose my beliefs by what I think were fairly
rigorous standards.... a moral system, if you will, as it contains none
of the nonsense about sin, hell, heaven, angels, virgins in the
afterlife, resurrection of the dead,etc.
I have always believed in a deity (no proof, no evidence, no facts
then), I simply felt that all the religions or religious sects I
examined were sheer nonsense. I also have no fear of death - one of
the usual motivations for believing in a deity.
What motivated my search for a "religion" was proof - for me. My proof
was and is intensely personal and private. That began my search.
Later my proof was buttressed by two similar proofs received by a very
close friend. He has remained ambivelant about religion and does not
"practice" any.
Most respectfully and politely stated, I will not present my proof on a
ng; I might - if I firmly trusted an individual - discuss my proof
face-to-face. My friend is the only person with whom I have discussed
my proof; no other living person do I trust enough to share. My proof
is what all religion ought to be - a personal and private matter.
I am not advocating or demanding anyone accept my ideas or beliefs; I
simply mentioned that I feel I am an exception to the "rule" that most
theists believe without thought or reason.
We don't know if you're an exception to the rule or not, you won't
tell. Personally, I don't think you are, but you certainly are nice and
polite with an intellectual curiousity, all splendid character traits.
The only way you would be an exception to the rule would be if you
presented a proof of your god and that proof would be valid. Otherwise,
you're dodging the issue like everyone else. That does not mean I don't
like you.
No, I most politely won't tell. :-) I am not here to convince anyone
of the validity of my beliefs. That's just not important to me; my
beliefs harm no one and I feel no need to defend them If my proof
satisfies me, that is enough for me. I feel no need to validate it by
presenting it others. I am confident enough of myself to rely on my
own judgment. *shrug* If others have differing knowledge or even
beliefs and do no harm - like the majority of folk on this ng - I offer
them the same acceptance I always hope to receive.
My politeness is partially just me, and partially (big part) my
beliefs. I am intensely curious - read nearly every thread - but don't
need to comment on each.
I don't intend to "dodge" as that has the connotation of being
deceitful and I am not....I just chose not to share.
*grin* I like you too....just don't ask me to meet you after study
hall! >:|
Seriously, thank you for the acceptance.... I do appreciate it.
My point was really that I'm not so sure you're the exception to the
rule you think you are.
That's perfectly alright. I don't need to convince you one way or the
other. You will decide - or not - one way or the other. It will not
change me or my opinions or beliefs. As i stated above, I need
validation from no one.
--
Pangur Ban - nonchristian theist
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Richo" |
|
| Title: Re: prove about god's delusion |
13 Nov 2006 07:01:18 PM |
|
|
leo wrote:
all religions are saying their message is from god himself via some
profet or other intermediary.
No - not true.
There are more religions in the world apart from Judaism Christianity
and Islam.
Cheers, Mark.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Clover" |
|
| Title: Re: prove about god's delusion |
13 Nov 2006 07:04:04 PM |
|
|
On 13 Nov 2006 17:01:18 -0800, "Richo" <m.richardson@utas.edu.au> wrote:
leo wrote:
all religions are saying their message is from god himself via some
profet or other intermediary.
No - not true.
There are more religions in the world apart from Judaism Christianity
and Islam.
True. But pretty much all religions claim for themselves some form of "divine
origin" or another. Most of them make the additional claim that they're the
_only_ "True Religion(TM)". Not all, of course, but most.
--
L8r,
Uncle Clover
************************************************
In my experience, one's degree of wisdom tends
to bear an exponentially inverse relationship
to one's outpouring of words.
Clearly, I've a _long_ way to go... ;-)
************************************************
The true mark of a civilized society is that its
citizens know how to hate each other peacefully.
************************************************
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
