seebs

But, at the same time, he's clearly within the capacity of humans to understand.

Sure. So? It *could* be that my cats are super-intelligent psychic animals which can teleport, and are just studying me - and I even have evidence to support this theory - but I don't have to believe something just because it's *possible*.

I have found common threads in what people trying to understand God come to believe; it is clear that we bring preconceptions to the table, but I don't think that is sufficient to rule out the theory that God does exist and interact with us.

I have heard lots of theories about why it might be *useful* for it to be hard to answer these questions. I'm mostly agnostic on these questions; I don't need to know, although I enjoy thinking about these things.

Perchance

Good morning, seebs.

I can see why, since our senses seem to tell us only about the physical world and not something outside it. But in that case, how did we learn about God at all? And if someone can have a personal experience of God that does not depend on the senses, would that not lead to a more detailed knowledge? Yet how can anyone have experience of him, if he is unknowable?

(Unless there are two different kinds of knowledge being referred to here).

The Bible? I had assumed that most of God's properties (other than perhaps omnibenevolence and omnipotence) were worked out later by Christian theologists, the 'unknowable' part being among them.

Hmmm, all right. We must have different sorts of minds. If I had had similar experiences, I would probably still be saying, "Maybe." . But then, I called myself agnostic for a long time, and still am on some issues.

I know you've said in the past that you feel the two ideas "Love God" and "Love thy neighbor" are very important. Can you give an example of one of the long boring stories? .

I think I don't think the same way because I regard gods (all of them, not just the Christian God) as a cultural construct. People may have strange experiences all the time, but I believe they wouldn't try to fit them to the notion of a god unless the god-concept were already present. Faith also, in the Christian definition, seems to be an idea that's taught, at least so far as it seems to rely on non-natural evidence.

That reminds me of a question I wanted to ask you, a hypothetical one: If you had been born in another society but still had the experiences you've had, do you think that you still have fitted them to the Christian God?

That's one of the problems, though. Attributes of things in the natural world are attributes precisely because they have limits, or opposites. If something is powerful, you don't think of it as weak. Yet if something is without limits, then the only retreat is incomprehensibility. (A lot of people have trouble thinking of the infinite size of space, and I'm one of them). The way of claiming that something is incomprehensible, without limits, and yet at the same time possessed of an attribute strikes me as a way of trying to have the cake and eat it too.

And, I think, because so many explanations of God's benevolence can be taken as natural without losing stride. "Sometimes, things just happen."

Are these the only two categories? I would say there are others who grow up in Christian homes and believe all their lives, devoutly or not, without ever really converting.

Certainly, if someone reports an experience of joy that I didn't share, I can't say what may or may not have happened. But humans do seem to have a natural instinct to seek pleasure and avoid pain, and a lot of people want to be happy. I think this is one of the reasons a lot of deities seem to magically suit themselves to human desires.

Ah, all right. When I say "unknowable," I mean "cannot be known." I think that's why I've been having trouble with some of what you're saying. I'll keep your definition in mind for the future.

A pleasure talking to you!

-Perchance.

Lupian

I like to simplifiy matters, so to this discussion question I say that you either believe or you do not believe in God.
If you do not believe, then you don't care about understanding that which you discount the existence of. If you do believe in the concept of a God, then the nature of the understanding is a personal one, since God has not made clear, in my opinion, what his nature or purposes are in the Universe. In fact, to me, God is a source of confusion. As a believer, you may choose to understand whatever you want about God, but it may not have much factual or scientific basis attached. It is faith based.
I respect one's right to believe in whatever God he wants, as long as he leaves me alone to worship (or non-worship) in my way.

seebs

This is exactly the case.

Somewhat, yes, but the Bible does have at least one or two things basically saying "no, you won't entirely understand".

At one level, I'm saying "maybe". At another, I've made a decision. I am willing to run with a working hypothesis, and the distinction between "this is true" and "I believe this to be true" is a fuzzy one sometimes.

Oh, most of the Hebrew history isn't exceptionally relevant to an understanding of God, except in that it raises interesting questions like "did God really give those orders, or did someone else?".

I have no idea. Some of the experiences were responses to prayers, so I'm not sure how to translate those into the hypothetical, but really, I don't think I can second-guess myself accurately enough for an answer to be interesting. I tend to think so, but I recognize that there's a huge bias making this answer essentially meaningless.

Imagine, if you will, that space *is* infinite, and it is never possible for us to understand just how far it goes. We can still make yardsticks that work pretty well.

I currently don't believe so; I don't think anyone starts out believing anything. In my mind, accepting the stuff you're told counts as converting from a lack of opinion on the issue to whatever you were told about.

If it were entirely fictional, I think I could write a religion that were a lot easier. I tend to think the emphasis on love for other people who are in no way part of my belief system is suspicious; it doesn't seem like a trait that would compete well.

Likewise!

I think the problem is that "knowing" is a process, not a boolean state. I would call God "partially unknowable", not "totally unknowable".

Ockhamite

Welcome Lupian

I agree....the question of understanding is pointless for those who don't believe.

As for.... god has not making himself clear......merely shows your're guilty of critical thinking. Believers need no coherence of understanding while factual and scientific knowledge just gets in the way of their faith.

Your tolerance is common among atheists, but don't expect it from xians. i found this in my local paper today.

"To love our brother is to want the best for him, heaven. If we truly love our brother, we don't let him die in sin, instead we instruct him on the error of his ways, we pray for him and we show him by God's grace that he can be freed from the slavery of sin."

If you get whacked with 'God's grace' ....it could hurt.

seebs

Don't *expect* tolerance from anyone; it's a bad bet. You might feel you have a *right* to tolerance, but empirically, people aren't very tolerant.

I don't see that statement as any less tolerant than some of the "These people are deluded, we should try to correct them" stuff I see around here all the time. Same thing; if you have a belief about the truth or falsehood of a position, you will always want people to agree. Don't like it? Don't evolve from a primate.

I would guess that the majority of people on both sides are basically tolerant, and that the majority of those tolerant people smile and nod when someone on their side expresses such thoughts, and get angry when someone on the other side does.

You have to second-guess yourself a bit.

Ockhamite

Seebs...

The history of xian tolerance toward unbelievers is written in blood, ripped-out entrails and burnt bodies, down through the ages. If you, as a xian wish to express remorse, regret, and distance yourself from those deeds; I'm listening.

Let me go first...I apoligize for all the awful things that unbelievers have done to xians. Let me list them

?
?
?
?
If i failed to list any you are aware of, please remind me.

Gemma Therese

How about starting at the treatment I have received on this board from such gems as B. Shack, Ron Garrett, and Fenton?

Especially after being as pleasant as possible, despite the overt opposition.

Gemma Therese

seebs

Well, since I didn't *commit* most of them, there's not much remorse I can show. Regret? Sure; I regret it when people do bad things.

Distance myself? That gets tricky. It is popular among Christians to distance themselves from abuses by saying "those people weren't real Christians". While I do not wish to endorse, say, the Salem witch trials, I also don't wish to imply that I am qualified to judge the hearts of the perpetrators. I have done horrible things which seemed, at the time, to be good ideas.

So... I wish to distance myself from such things in that I hope to avoid doing anything similar. I do not wish to pretend some substantial moral superiority to the people who did such things, because I do not know their hearts, and I can only hope that they came to understand and repent of their errors.

Furthermore, I have always been one of the people for whom it is easier to avoid the evils I at least understand. If I am peaceful, it is because I know what it is to be angry. So... I dunno.

I do indeed regret that Christians have done bad things. I am, of course, sad to hear when anyone is hurt, whether or not the one doing the hurting is Christian.

However, I'm not one of the people who insists that Christians are universally loving and beautiful people. I think we all *try*, but that doesn't mean we're any good at it.



This depends somewhat on what you consider "unbelievers". How about Greco-Roman pagans? Norse pagans? Communists? Muslims?

Consider for a moment the occasional efforts of the Soviet Union to eliminate religion; I don't know that many people were killed, but I would suspect that some amount of "oppression" may have gone on; same goes for Communist China.

I think that, during the early days, Christians were often oppressed. It seems to me that entirely too few of them learned the lesson, which is "it is wrong to harm people for believing differently than you do".

In the modern world, attacks on theists are normally limited to contempt, spite, and mild harassment. Normally. However, the contempt, vast generalizations, and general attacks on something important to people strike me as serious injuries. I do not believe that it is either just or polite to insult someone's beliefs. Now, to be fair, I think some "blasphemous" humor is very funny - but not the mean-spirited stuff, in general.

Consider; do you ever say things to Christians that might be seen as expressing contempt for them? If so, then you're quite possibly in the same boat as the Christians who go around spewing hateful nonsense about atheists.

Not that this compares with, say, burning people at the stake, but to be fair, I'd guess more devout Christians than non-believers were burned at the stake, what with all the false accusations.

It's a complicated issue, and I don't see an immediate way out of it, except for everyone who notices the problem to try very hard to remain calm and nonjudgemental, and not blame people for the actions of other people.

Yellum Notnef

Oh cry me a river Grandma..:boohoo:

What did I ever do to you? I made a harmless joke about an unimportant religious fanatic with mental issues. I`m SOOOOO very sorry that you happen to have her poster pinned up on your bedroom wall.
People make fun of all kinds of shit here like Michael Jackson etc,but I don`t see any fans of Michael Jackson taking it personally and crying about the horrible treatment they have recieved here.
And I don`t remember mentioning YOU or ANYONE else here when I made my comment. YOU are the one who decided it to take it so personally so it`s YOUR fucking problem. DEAL WITH IT OR PACK UP YOUR SHIT AND TAKE IT ELSEWHERE.
You are on a website called infidels.org for crying out loud,what did you expect to hear when you came barging in to tell us all how much you love the Catholic church?
News flash gemma.....we don`t give a rats ass.

It`s become clear to me that the only reason you`re here is to find some of that good old Catholic persecution we`ve all heard so much about.
Now that you have been persecuted amd misunderstood like the rest of your mentally ill sainted icons you can piss off.
I`m sure the Pope is keeping a record of this and someday you`ll get your own star on the Catholic walk of shame.

Btw,
don`t bother sending me another private message asking why I hate you. I didn`t hate you then and I still don`t hate you now. I`m just sick of your bullshit.

This makes post #4 if you`re still counting.