Koyaanisqatsi

I reiterate:

Choose what it is you are going to argue; only you exist (solipsism) and this is over, or that others exist outside of your own mind and therefore the cogitive tools of logic and the scientific method apply.

free12thinker

Don't look now WJ, but you are putting your realm of existence on the same field as God's: "If you want me to say there is a possibility that God doesn't exist objectively, I have to assume I know the essences of God's existence to start (not to mention my own), in order to make this same objective judgement."

You have mentioned before that understanding God, through the information we have on ourselves is useless since god is outside of the realm of logic. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm........

But anyway, moving right along. I think you're looking too hard into our conscious sentient existence (whew, these big words are hurting my eyes). It's not that complicated, buddy. Sex equates to pregnancy. Pregnancy equates to building of human body. Human body is operable in different ways, all better explained by doctors of science who work on the human body every day. Pregnancy will lead to birth. We are breathing. We have minds. We are now conscious as opposed to unconscious. And since we are alert, attentive and awake, than thus equates to a conscious sentient existence. You are constantly separating our physical state from our mental state, as if they are two separate life forms.

brighid

Wj –

But you aren’t saying God, in the generic sense, you are stating that JESUS must exist – except you have failed to identify WHY must THIS God exist! Fideism says (if I am basically understanding it) that God has chosen to hide himself, that reason cannot be trusted and that to know one must believe! Ok – so how do YOU conclude that THIS is the proper path to take to achieve a relationship or “knowing” of THIS GOD (and not any other)? What TOOLS did you use to formulate this particular conclusion while relegating all other possible conclusions to the proverbial dumpster?

Something may exist – but you must prove that JESUS as defined by your and Christian theology MUST exist – or DOES exist(ed).

You cannot and you left in a serious quandary. Your concept of this Something (call it God) HAS been shaped by the environment you were raised in and that you currently live in. That environment is prejudicially shaped by Christianity! You have asked for an absolute, yet you cannot even provide it within your own fideism. You WANT to believe in a God, but because Christianity has some pretty serious problems you CHOOSE to adhere to a smoke and mirrors religious PHILOSOPHY. This philosophy allows you to have loop holes to wiggle in and out of when the corners of questioning get tight. It allows you to ignore reason in favor of some disconnected and unknowable (unless you are “blessed” or some other jibberish) God so you can comfortably maintain what reason clearly demonstrates as WRONG in its very unique specificity!

What kind of garbage is this fideism? You can’t know unless you “believe” which by definition is not possible, God is mysterious and obscure (making it difficult to prove – quite the slippery dick isn’t HE?) and reason is weak so distrust it? Yet every day for your very existence you must use reason in all other avenues of your life, but DISTRUST it in the potentially most important aspect of determining TRUTH! So, what it boils down to is your religious philosophy is like that of a greased pig – try holding on to that!!


B

Koyaanisqatsi

I reiterate:

Choose what it is you are going to argue; only you exist (solipsism) and this is over, or that others exist outside of your own mind and therefore the cogitive tools of logic and the scientific method apply.

snatchbalance

wj

It's really a simple question, is it possible that there is no god? Or, in your mind, is that possibility out of the question?

As an aside, the mind/body dilema, is no longer much of a dilema(to me anyway). Neuroscience has provided many answers over the last several years; but that's a whole different subject.

SB

[ May 21, 2002: Message edited by: snatchbalance ]</p>

snatchbalance

WJ

BTW, if you prefer to think of my position as that of an agnostic, that's no problem.

I don't KNOW, but I still consider myself an atheist. In one way I agree with you(I think). One shoudn't be afraid of paradox.

SB

[ May 21, 2002: Message edited by: snatchbalance ]</p>

Koyaanisqatsi

I reiterate:

Choose what it is you are going to argue; only you exist (solipsism) and this is over, or that others exist outside of your own mind and therefore the cogitive tools of logic and the scientific method apply.

WJ

Snatch!

To answer you more suscinctly from a similar default position, through deduction God doesn't exist; thru induction God exists.

I believe this relates to how two persons view or approach the same problem (of what it means for something to exist). And no, I don't agree the mind-body problem has been solved within the context of our discussion. If science solves or discovers the origns of consciousness, our problems of religion and the concept of God [the logic of] will slowly go away. Or at least there will be less of a compelling reason to 'believe' in metaphysics other than a sort of pure humanistic/psychological mysticism of sorts.

In other words, if science figured it out, why would we be having this discussion? There would be less of a need to infer or link such causes and origins of metaphysical phenomena viz. conscious existence to a Being-God. Almost everything would be explained thru apriori logic.

Edit:....logic and the associated laws of nature.

(?)

Walrus

[ May 21, 2002: Message edited by: WJ ]</p>

Darwin's Finch

WJ: Don't you know better than to piss off a New Yorker? Answer the man!!

free12thinker

Finally you're getting it. I will now paste your quote, and I will reply.
YOUR QUOTE : "In other words, if science figured it out, why would we be having this discussion? There would be less of a need to infer or link such causes and origins of metaphysical phenomena viz. conscious existence to a Being-God. Almost everything would be explained thru apriori logic."

WJ, we are getting there. There is more science and less religion in peoples views on how it all began. There are less and less links to a Being-God. People are less dependent on the notion and idea of God. If you don't believe me, ask the Christian Coalition, or the Christian Science Monitor, or the Family Values Association or every other conservative family/values group who have gripes about America's lack of religion in today's society. About sciences "attempts" at belittling the acheivements of god.

We are having this discussion because you're not there yet.