Lentic Catachresis

I am a strong atheist in regards to Gawd. I reject the opinion of those who say "how can we know either way...?"

The bible is (alleged to be) the word of Gawd. So this seems like a good place to start trying to understand the rationale behind believing. But we can see clearly that it is full of logical inconsistancies and information that is simply false.

Other religions such as deism, are by definition unknowable and unverifiable. I take a postion of agnosticism (although being a skeptic Im inclined to dismiss the concept).

Also "why debate God?"
Because my life is controlled (to varying degrees) by half-wits like Bush, Blair, Pope, Bin Laden etc.

[ August 08, 2002: Message edited by: Lentic Catachresis ]</p>

WJ

"Also "why debate God?"
Because my life is controlled (to varying degrees) by half-wits like Bush, Blair, Pope, Bin Laden etc."

This political/psychological issue keeps coming up and I think it is a poor excuse for debating EOG. I've read that many empirical scientists remain puzzled that atheists worry more about God tthan those who aquiesce to the possibility of its existence. On the surface, I can not help it but to agree.

To this end, the 'strong' atheist must ask his/herself a question: why don't I get the hell out of the counrty and go to a 'godless' one, because I feel so damn oppressed?

I mean, I hear this all the time (the political argument) and in its essence, provides for no justification in continuing to worry about a some thing that has no real personal value or meaning!

What do you say to people who in turn say: if you don't like it, get the hell out?

What would be a convincing argument, I think, is a rebuttal that say's godlessness is pragmatically sound. And I don't believe there is an atheist out there who can argue conclusively that it is. I mean, can we get to the essence of the matter? It seems the politically active atheist has some sort of philosophical/psychological baggage (not that theists don't) that drives all the reasoning and rationale in making certain lifestyle choices that they do, without acknowledgement of a generic sense of 'god' as a possible source.

(please... not tryng to sell god or convince anyone to believe in god or anything like that; just seeing another inconsistency here.)

<img src="confused.gif" border="0">

The AntiChris

I believe my car will start tomorrow morning. It usually does, but......

I don't believe I'm going to win the lottery this week. I know it's possible, but.....


I know God doesn't exist (along with santa, fairies, elves and goblins). However, as with everything else I "know", I accept that it's possible that something may occur in the future which may cause me to change my opinion.

Chris

Keith Russell

Greetings:

My Christian wife often asks what kind of evidence would convince me that God exists.

She beleives that no evidence could.

I think she's right.

No matter what is discovered, unless I choose to believe that it is God, for me it's just another thing in the universe, another part of existence/reality/truth.

Unless I choose to believe that it is God, and unless I choose to respond to it as I believe I should, then--for me--it is not God.

And, I do not believe that there is any way a theist (or Christian) could ever prove that anything in reality should be worshipped, or grants eternal salvation to believers, and damnation to non-believers, etc.

So, when I say 'God is not possible', I mean it: the statement is true, and is certainly not based on faith.

Keith.

wordsmyth

I consider myself a strong atheist in regard to most every religions (ancient & modern) definition and belief about God(s), however I consider myself agnostic in that it is possible there was a first cause creator of the known universe. Some people might consider me a weak atheist in regard to the latter, however.

What evidence would make me believe in God(s)?

I would say anything that defies any and all natural explanations. (i.e. something that could not be explained as anything other than the effect(s) of a supernatural being. (A burning bush that is not consumed, the Red Sea parting, etc. However, I would need to witness these events first-hand rather than relying on the 2000+ year old word of undeniably superstitious people who had an obvious theological agenda.)

For the theists...

What evidence would make you disbelieve in (your) God(s)?

Theli

Wj...

I don't see what you mean here.
What approach are you refering to?
How can it be paradoxical?
And why shouldn't I want to debate god's existence if my approach is paradoxical?

Theli

Wj...

This sounds really oppressive.
So, you are saying that all groups of people who are/feel oppressed in any way should just shut up and leave your country?

Synaesthesia

I think many strong atheists are such on philosophical in addition to evidential grounds. God is, quite simply, an instance of magical explanation. Such forms of 'understanding' are inherently flawed and we should generally reject them as we would reject any arbitrary system of ad hoc theories.

WJ

Theli!

"I don't see what you mean here.
What approach are you refering to?
How can it be paradoxical?
And why shouldn't I want to debate god's existence if my approach is paradoxical?"

It is paradoxical because how can you debate a some thing that doesn't exist(?). You shouldn't want to debate God because your own use of logic would be compromised by the apparent inconsistency in your methods from which you use in determining all that can be known about [your and] God's existence. Make sense?

If you believe whatchamacallit's don't exist, why bother to ponder it?


"So, you are saying that all groups of people who are/feel oppressed in any way should just shut up and leave your country?"

No, I'm saying in a country that placed a high value in a God, from both a pragmatic and religious sense, where individual's feel oppressed by this basic value, trust or ideal (which many atheists believe) should get the hell out of the country. Relocate to a godless country where you would seemingly feel more comfortable.

Make sense?


Walrus

tommyc

WJ, your post was intended for Theli, but I’ll just add some thoughts of my own. (I’ve just come back from the pub, so it might not be too coherent)

You can debate something that doesn’t exist as long as there are people who believe it does exist, whom you can debate against. Can you not understand this? Or are you simply employing a common apologist stance because you have no real argument concerning the existence of God?
So you are saying that because you believe something you should not ever consider discussing it, or hearing other people’s viewpoints? I am sure most atheists, even strong atheists, would feel it is a worthwile debating topic, even if only to try to help others understand the contradictions and intolerance of organised religion. Or even, come to think of it, just because it’s fun.

I believe Theli was merely saying that there was a certain amount of oppression against atheists in his country, but Im sure he will say that the benefits of the country still outweigh that.