Atheists...

[Zetetic11235]

At most I might consider Thomas to be counted among the agnostics, however he insists that he is rather suited to Christianity. You Boagie, are indeed an Atheist, in that you deny the possibility of god totally, rather than admit that you know nothing about god, for how can you make statements about that which for you isn't there, and thus cannot make assertions about god's properties including its existence, especially without defining god, though you would likely find nonsensical descriptors such as omnipotence. It is precisely your problem, I think, that your intent is misdplaced and as such you tend to overstep your bounds in asserting the truth of such universalities as the absence of god. For though it might be a personal truth for you, there are no ethical or any reasonable grounds to assert such truths in general.

According to the faithful, knowledge of god does not spring from power of reason but power of faith. The two do not intersect, lest the beliefs take unwarrented liberty and tread upon faith in logical inquiry, for; upon such a slight one might be right in their disagreement with the other, but it is never so when such a transgression hasn't passed.

I think rather than quibble over such questions of belief, realizing that any debate on the matter is illfounded and often in ill tase, it would be more beneficial to discuss what is good in religious texts in order that these points might be recognized in other major religious texts and the wisdom of the might be extracted for universal benefit. Surely we all could find some good in some of these texts, just as we find good in the text of any intent. The buddhist texts, the Tibeten book of the Dead, The New Testament, the ethical writings of the Rabbi's. These texts have value and wisdom in them. We should not discredit them for the bad we find and forget to reap the good.

[Khethil]

I think you're on a good, productive track here Zet; and thanks for a mature, considered tone.

This thread, I'm guessing, will probably go on forever. Yea, I know it all gets old (no one laments this more than I), but that fact alone is telling and speaks to how important - how prevalent - this entire issue is.

So I'll again sound off with my perspective, if I may.

Originally Posted by Zetetic11235

Surely we all could find some good in some of these texts, just as we find good in the text of any intent. The buddhist texts, the Tibeten book of the Dead, The New Testament, the ethical writings of the Rabbi's. These texts have value and wisdom in them. We should not discredit them for the bad we find and forget to reap the good.

Yes, they indeed do! Given the amount of interpretation and qualification, they have as much potential as any myth, story or writing. The important moral teachings of Curious George, perhaps - or maybe a Teletubby book as well. If we apply an "it's your interpretation"-kind of mindset, we can qualify any writing into some measure of worth.

Biblical adherence/reverence seems awful silly to me. But I understand that this is just me, and I'm often wrong. So wherever one takes comfort; have a happy - I'm glad for you!

[boagie]

Do not wake them, for as long as they sleep, they are not here.

[krazy kaju]

Thomas, if we really cannot know if God does or does not exist, wouldn't it be rational to not believe in him?

Why should you believe in anything for which there is no proof? You don't believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster by any chance?

Oh, and what are all you old farts doing in this thread? It's the young philosophers forum!

[Mr. Fight the Power]

Originally Posted by krazy kaju

Thomas, if we really cannot know if God does or does not exist, wouldn't it be rational to not believe in him?

Why should you believe in anything for which there is no proof? You don't believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster by any chance?

Oh, and what are all you old farts doing in this thread? It's the young philosophers forum!

We must consider the possibility of subjective evidence or that we may be far too strict on our standards for justification of knowledge.

"I know because I just know" could certainly be a justification if we are dealing with a supreme being, as he could create knowledge that is completely contained within itself.

It only seems rational to me to keep one's beliefs to him/herself, whether one believes or not, as god transcends the boundaries of logic and argumentation.

[Didymos Thomas]

Yes, they indeed do! Given the amount of interpretation and qualification, they have as much potential as any myth, story or writing. The important moral teachings of Curious George, perhaps - or maybe a Teletubby book as well. If we apply an "it's your interpretation"-kind of mindset, we can qualify any writing into some measure of worth.

Except that Curious George, et al, do not have near the depth of the other mentioned texts.

It's just like any other sort of literature: the rudimentary stories have been retold a thousand times through the ages. It's the treatment that draws praise.

Do not wake them, for as long as they sleep, they are not here.

I suggest just the opposite - wake up. If you spend all of your life asleep, you never lived.

Thomas, if we really cannot know if God does or does not exist, wouldn't it be rational to not believe in him?

Yes.

But I suggest that we can know. It's a matter of experience, not of logical investigation. Logic and reason are immensely useful tools, but they do have limits.

Oh, and what are all you old farts doing in this thread? It's the young philosophers forum!

That's why I stayed away so long. But then I noticed some other old farts misrepresenting faith tradition, so I couldn't help but jump in, add what little I know.

[Holiday20310401]

Am i the youngest here? The only true young member?

But I have concluded that God doesn't mean enough to me to be found or "find me" if not construed by logic and reason.

God to me is not what an individual makes of it. If we are so inclined to give a religion a perspective then it seems only appropriate to say that God is a product of humanity's benevolent insights in general that are similar in many people, not just one person.

God is the light of humanity's striving for perfection. Its actuality if at all concrete is simply a representation of an insanity, an asymptote, of pure perfection that simply was not meant to have direct potential on us. So God in a lot of ways doesn't matter, and is hardly living among us.

But on here it is abundant.

[boagie]

Do not wake them, for as long as they sleep, they are not here.

I suggest just the opposite - wake up. If you spend all of your life asleep, you never lived.

Thomas,

The referance was to those who find this world so intolerable that they must devalue it in favour of an imaginary world--escape through belief. The quote is actually taken from the prisoners of a nazi death camp, finding one of their peers asleep they thought it a disserves to wake him and bring him back to such a wretched reality. Why, its almost biblical!!

[Didymos Thomas]

The referance was to those who find this world so intolerable that they must devalue it in favour of an imaginary world--escape through belief.

And many people do find the world intolerable, and use belief to express their nihilistic death wish. Just look at fundamentalism.

The quote is actually taken from the prisoners of a nazi death camp, finding one of their peers asleep they thought it a disserves to wake him and bring him back to such a wretched reality. Why, its almost biblical!!

Have you read the text you refer to?

Either way, my response refers to a Buddhist call - wake up. End the indolent slumber that keeps you comfortably out of reach of reality.

[Zetetic11235]

Holliday, I am 19 as of July. You are less than two years younger than me. I suspect Didymos is not too much older, I could easily be wrong.

Boagie, you seem suited to skepticism, do you not see that all ideas are inductive and upon enough skepecism you could almost entirely disassemble your world view to the point of being half functional? Do you know how much of what we consider truth is a sense fantasy?

Many would argue that all of philosophy is fantasy, and indeed it is the closest kin to religion. Yet how often do we see good in philosophy, somthing so akin to religion in its aim and somtimes even in its methods.

There is wisdom in Confucious, just as there is wisdom in Socrates, there is wisdom in the greek myths, just as there is wisdom in the writings of Hume.