• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Why avoid considering God as noted?

American said:
It must hurt the feelings of atheists everywhere to see this happening in what use to be part of the USSR that promoted atheism. It must create a lot of butt hurt.
Click to expand...

That's a lame "us vs them".....As a humanist, free thinking, non-thiest, agnostic, none of my ideals are set by a group or a committee. I have no allegiance and am free to criticize the actions of all men. There is no one that represents any of the positions I outlined. Same for atheists.

Christians, for the most part can't stand that non-christians like myself have no doctrine, just ideas about how the world works. If you manage to point out that an idea that I hold is false, BAM...I'm free to change my mind.... That is the beauty of ideas vs indoctrinated beliefs.....

Now who's "butt hurt"
 
csbrown28 said:
That's a lame "us vs them".....As a humanist, free thinking, non-thiest, agnostic, none of my ideals are set by a group or a committee. I have no allegiance and am free to criticize the actions of all men. There is no one that represents any of the positions I outlined. Same for atheists.

Christians, for the most part can't stand that non-christians like myself have no doctrine, just ideas about how the world works. If you manage to point out that an idea that I hold is false, BAM...I'm free to change my mind.... That is the beauty of ideas vs indoctrinated beliefs.....

Now who's "butt hurt"
Click to expand...

Yes, how the WORLD works.
 
Cable said:
I notice that many unbelievers in God or Christ are bent on finding alternative explanations for the narrative.
Click to expand...
Are you sure? Could it just be people offering viable possible alternatives to the definitive narrative being presented?

Of course, a lot of “unbelievers in God or Christ” are proponents of other religions so often will be set on an alternative explanation to yours but I suspect that isn’t what you were referring too.

Cable said:
Why? I can understand a skeptical mind, based on reason. But shouldn't that same mind attempt to live in the actual proposed paradigm to give it an honest shot?
Click to expand...
Sure. The issue I’ve faced with that is that the “Christian” explanation actually consists of a whole range of different, sometimes contradictory ones which tend to rely on things incompatible with the nature of the universe as it is commonly understood and phenomena not only unexplained but specifically defined as unexplainable.

I certainly aren’t “bent on finding alternative explanations” but I see no reason to accept any of that on faith or threats of divine punishment.

Cable said:
It takes more faith to believe some of the alternate reasons for the Bible / Christ than it does to take it on it's own merit.
Click to expand...
That’s very much a matter of opinion. Or maybe a matter of faith?
 
Manc Skipper said:
Spirituality and Christianity aren't the same thing. Spirituality needn't even be religious. I'm an atheist, but I can feel uplifted by a glorious sunset, moved by some music, or admire the beauty of a butterfly's wing.
Click to expand...

You mean the pleasure center in your brain responding to the sunrise?
 
Cable said:
I notice that many unbelievers in God or Christ are bent on finding alternative explanations for the narrative.
Click to expand...

Ok, so I've read through this thread, and I'd like to know what you mean by narrative. Just so there isn't any confusion.

Cable said:
Why? I can understand a skeptical mind, based on reason. But shouldn't that same mind attempt to live in the actual proposed paradigm to give it an honest shot?
Click to expand...

"Proposed paradigm"? I dunno, maybe I'm a little slow...But can you explain that to me?

Cable said:
I think we as humans would like to be our own gods (pride) so that we don't have to answer to anyone but ourselves. It's much better this way, as we get to make our own rules. But is it the truth?
Click to expand...

It's nice that you assume the motivations of others, but now that you've created that nice strawman allow me to push it over..... For me at least.

I belong to a group of non-believers and I promise you, truth is discussed at length. It's something that, at least in my group, we find so ironic. Believers aren't looking for truth, someone has already handed it to them (the believers). Your challenge isn't truth, it's maintain the ever smaller gaps in knowledge where the the Christian god exists and trying to figure out how to keep the Christian god relevant.

Cable said:
It's just interesting to me that those who won't believe go to such great lengths to avoid the consideration of the Bible actually being the truth about God.
Click to expand...

And what would you say to a Muslim that said that to you? See, here is the ultimate irony of what your saying. Everything you've said could be said right back to you by someone that believes in a different god. You and I are both non-believers, I just believe in one fewer god than you.

Cable said:
It takes more faith to believe some of the alternate reasons for the Bible / Christ than it does to take it on it's own merit.
Click to expand...

Faith or understanding?
 
I've never understood the "it takes more faith to be an atheist" or from the OP "it takes more faith to believe some of the alternate reasons for the Bible / Christ than it does to take it on it's own merit." How exactly does one quantify faith? I mean, I understand that the intent is to reduce scientific learning down to mere religious belief and thus discredit it. Science and learning and real human knowledge really is superior to plumbing a book of bronze age myths and armchair philosophy, and religious types often want to attack that superiority, but the idea of quantifying faith is just bizarre. Believing in Amon Ra takes 7 faith. Believing the story of Noah takes 11 faith. Believing in transubstantiation takes 14 faith. Scientology takes 32 faith. Is a religious belief better or worse for requiring a higher faith score in order to believe? Wouldn't you want to get the highest faith score and believe the most difficult thing possible? This is a little tangential, but that particular phrase always hits me as just unfathomably strange.

To the OP's central point, Alpaca hit it right on the head.

RabidAlpaca said:
I'm an atheist, and no, we don't go to great lengths to avoid consideration of the Bible. We've considered it, we've researched it, and we've requested some kind of evidence from believers, and we've received exactly nothing.
Click to expand...

We're not trying to oppose the bible. We're not trying to reject it. We're not looking for "alternatives". We gave it all the consideration it deserved as a prominent fixture throughout much of recent history. And then during that consideration, we discovered it to be nonsense, and so discarded it and moved on to the next thing. We don't just take it as written for the same reason we don't take Gulliver's Travels as written, or A Midsummer Night's Dream, or Harry Potter. Because the things in these stories don't stack up against actual reality.
 
Cable said:
I notice that many unbelievers in God or Christ are bent on finding alternative explanations for the narrative.
Click to expand...
And it seems to me that the believers have to turn themselves into pretzels to make their beliefs work. C'est la guerre, non?


Why? I can understand a skeptical mind, based on reason. But shouldn't that same mind attempt to live in the actual proposed paradigm to give it an honest shot?
Click to expand...
Do you say the same thing about Hinduism, Buddhism, Confucianism, and Rastafarianism? Did you live as a Rasta prior to accepting Christianity? Or as an atheist?

And why is Christianity the "default?"


I think we as humans would like to be our own gods (pride) so that we don't have to answer to anyone but ourselves.
Click to expand...
Your characterization is backwards. People rarely reject metaphysical beliefs to justify an ethics. Rather, once one accepts that the traditional sources of ethics no longer apply, one has to figure out how to establish ethics. And if there is no supernatural entity, then why would you expect ethics to be based on anything other than the human experience?


It's much better this way, as we get to make our own rules. But is it the truth?
Click to expand...
It's not "better," in fact it's more difficult -- because you don't have some big dude with a white beard telling you what to do. And yes, it's the truth. ;)


It's just interesting to me that those who won't believe go to such great lengths to avoid the consideration of the Bible actually being the truth about God.
Click to expand...
Did it ever occur to you that maybe, just maybe, physicalists have considered the Bible, and just don't see a believable story?


It takes more faith to believe some of the alternate reasons for the Bible / Christ than it does to take it on it's own merit.
Click to expand...
I beg to differ. I find it much easier to believe in quarks, neurons, evolution and the Big Bang than in the New Testament. YMMV.
 
American said:
Religion is nothing more than the practice of one's spirituality. Why do so many people try to make this complicated.
Click to expand...

Religion is merely one complicated way of interpreting spirituality.
 
Cable said:
....It takes more faith to believe some of the alternate reasons for the Bible / Christ than it does to take it on it's own merit.
Click to expand...

That is not true if you didn't grow up with religion. Without being indoctrinated at very young age, Christianity seems just as irrational and silly as all of the other religions and superstitions throughout history. Scientific theories are easy to accept with an non-indoctrinated mind, an understanding of the process, and an acceptance of the fact that we don't have all the answers yet.
 
Cable said:
I notice that many unbelievers in God or Christ are bent on finding alternative explanations for the narrative.
Why? I can understand a skeptical mind, based on reason. But shouldn't that same mind attempt to live in the actual proposed paradigm to give it an honest shot?

I think we as humans would like to be our own gods (pride) so that we don't have to answer to anyone but ourselves. It's much better this way, as we get to make our own rules. But is it the truth?
It's just interesting to me that those who won't believe go to such great lengths to avoid the consideration of the Bible actually being the truth about God.
It takes more faith to believe some of the alternate reasons for the Bible / Christ than it does to take it on it's own merit.
Click to expand...

Mostly because there are natural explanations for the phenomenon typically attributed to gods and as we increase our knowledge and learn more, more of what we ascribe to gods will become known as science.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Consiidering just one subject of societal behavior, slavery, one can indeed make a case for making our own rules, outside of biblical teachings, as being a good idea.

What the New Testament says about slavery

The idea that each and every biblical passage, even those that contradict each other, is the "true word of God" is a tough thing to defend. Physical laws, those which science can prove, are different than moral laws which are entirely the construct of man. To consider slavery anything but an evil institution, as does the bible, makes the assertion that the bible is the infallable "true path" very hard to accept.
Click to expand...

Your logic makes no sense to me. YOu say the bible contradicts itself, so throw it out as a rule book and let us make up our own rules. So in that latter instance, those cultures who do not follow God do make up their own rules. And when compared to each other are contradictory and easily judged to be evil by most reasonable people. So you really have nowhere to Go for a sound absolute set of rules. That is why I follow Christ.
 
Religious people have trouble accepting that life is sh#t. Life's a piece of sh#t, when you look at it. ;)
 
Ikari said:
Mostly because there are natural explanations for the phenomenon typically attributed to gods and as we increase our knowledge and learn more, more of what we ascribe to gods will become known as science.
Click to expand...

I agree that some attributes ascribed to God and natural. Getting struck by lightning is probably a good example. I think God probably strikes very few folks with a bolt from the sky.
But I think it is a logical mistake to think that because the superstitious things have natural explanations, that all things we don't understand will be explained by science.
The possibility of a spiritual dimension is one. Science won't ever explain that I think.
The concepts of Love, ethical Truth (the way), Goodenss, and Justice are things science won't explain.
 
michijo said:
Religious people have trouble accepting that life is sh#t. Life's a piece of sh#t, when you look at it. ;)
Click to expand...

Too much Python is bad for the soul. Sure, a good laugh here and there, but don't let it set your philosophy.
 
Amadeus said:
I'm not sure what your argument is. Is it that the Bible is literally true, or that other religious beliefs shouldn't be given equal consideration?
Click to expand...

I think Christ was pretty clear on "The Way" so it would seem that Christianity is stating that God is one, and anything else is not God.
Can you get there without Christ? That's up to God. There are a couple of scriptures that one might use to equivocate, but what Christ said was pretty straight forward with his "No man comes to the Father but by me" statement.
He did say though: "I have other sheep, which are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will hear My voice; and they will become one flock with one shepherd"
but I think this was probably applicable to the Gentiles who would eventually hear the Shepards voice and believe.
 
Meh, I don't think most atheists do avoid it. Often atheists were raised as believers or were at least exposed to the idea of God at a young impressionable age. As they get older and wiser, inconsistencies and unanswered questions begin to add up, eventually culminating in rejecting religion as an explanation for certain things.

Most atheists have considered "God as noted" at some point or another. But they find it lacking.
 
Cable said:
I think we as humans would like to be our own gods (pride) so that we don't have to answer to anyone but ourselves. It's much better this way, as we get to make our own rules. But is it the truth?
Click to expand...

It's funny, most atheists would say the same exact thing about religion. That the Bible and all its silliness are the made-up rules and that the non-believers are the ones following the trail of truth.

Atheists aren't atheists because they want to make up their own rules, they are atheists because they believe religion is a fairy tale.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom