Enmos
Valued Senior Member
Ok, from another angle.. if humans are not born tabulae rasae, how come they believe in God in stead of knowing he exists ?
Do atheists indocrinate their children into their belief system?
- Thread starter S.A.M.
- Start date
Ok, from another angle.. if humans are not born tabulae rasae, how come they believe in God in stead of knowing he exists ?
From their perspective, they know God exists, I suppose.
When it comes to belief in God, the concepts of "belief" and "knowing" can become specific, have a different meaning and use than they ordinarily do - in that "believing in God" becomes synonymous to "worshipping God", from the perspective of the "believer"; and of course to worship something, it is implied one has knowledge of it.
Then you have nothing to hope for. You want it now like a kid wants something in a toyshop. The fact that you want it now doesn't entail that it's available now.
That is a circular argument.
The wall is of your own creation and you will continue to bang your head against it, if you cannot acept that there are things we don't know at present and which we may never know.Life doesn't come with any guarantees.
iceaura,
I'd rather you paid attention to your continual illustration of it. Such as:
1) alot of theists are well-educated too.
2) you base such an important statistic on your own aquaintences? How many do you have? How does that manifest itself throughout the world, in India alone there are over 17 million catholics.
3) "theists" don't worry about raising ignoramuses?
This just says it all really.
You are so far gone in your fanatical belief (i use the term fanatical, because i see other reason for such disregard), you aren't even aware of the toxic elements in your statements.
Thank you, for making it so easy .
Jan.
I'd rather you paid attention to your continual illustration of it. Such as:
icaura said:
1) alot of theists are well-educated too.
2) you base such an important statistic on your own aquaintences? How many do you have? How does that manifest itself throughout the world, in India alone there are over 17 million catholics.
3) "theists" don't worry about raising ignoramuses?
This just says it all really.
You are so far gone in your fanatical belief (i use the term fanatical, because i see other reason for such disregard), you aren't even aware of the toxic elements in your statements.
Thank you, for making it so easy .
Jan.
And you're willing to accept lies instead, apparently. If urgency is more important than accuracy, religion is a your ticket, I suppose.
This is certainly true, but statistically speaking, he has a point. The better your education, the higher your test scores, the more groundbreaking your research, etc., the less likely you are to be a believer.
greenberg,
In what way does it look like doubt?
My point is, all scripture do say that. There isn't any "as long as.." about it.
Perception of what makes a scripture valid, varies among individuals, groups, nations and so forth. What makes scripture valid to me, is its oneness over time, place and circumstance. I don't think primitive man could concoct anything as complex as scriptures, and although modern man is somewhat more capable of consrtucting something of that size (even though I have doubts), its content would not be so wise (to say the least).
What did you mean by "...regardless of what else it might say about God?"?
Perhaps they are. I have to assume most human beings can, becaue everyone I know, and have ever known, can.
Yes.
I doubt very much that being aware of the absolute truth, is something like a big book of answers, whereupon if you do your homework you may gain a distinction or pass.
The absolute truth must include you, and I think this is where understanding starts.
If that's what he does, that's what he does, but at some stage he is going to come face to face with the reasons why he did. That's where the truth starts, IMO. It is different for each individual.
Think about it.
Surely that should be the natural state of being, as opposed to being superior.
Any person who is serious about serving God, would regard himself as lowly.
Then what does that tell you about them?
No you don't. If someone makes other peoples life a living hell, especially children who have no defence, and in later years claim they were acting on the words and deeds of Jesus, and no such action was ever performed or encouraged by Jesus, then basically they're either lying, ignorant, or both. But they are certainly not following the footsteps of Jesus.
That's just my opinion.
Sorry I didn't mean for you to answer it here, as it is very personal.
What part of you philosophical worldview, wonders whether you have a self?
And how do you think you will decide whether or not you have one?
Jan.
In what way does it look like doubt?
My point is, all scripture do say that. There isn't any "as long as.." about it.
Perception of what makes a scripture valid, varies among individuals, groups, nations and so forth. What makes scripture valid to me, is its oneness over time, place and circumstance. I don't think primitive man could concoct anything as complex as scriptures, and although modern man is somewhat more capable of consrtucting something of that size (even though I have doubts), its content would not be so wise (to say the least).
What did you mean by "...regardless of what else it might say about God?"?
Perhaps they are. I have to assume most human beings can, becaue everyone I know, and have ever known, can.
Yes.
I doubt very much that being aware of the absolute truth, is something like a big book of answers, whereupon if you do your homework you may gain a distinction or pass.
The absolute truth must include you, and I think this is where understanding starts.
If that's what he does, that's what he does, but at some stage he is going to come face to face with the reasons why he did. That's where the truth starts, IMO. It is different for each individual.
Think about it.
Surely that should be the natural state of being, as opposed to being superior.
Any person who is serious about serving God, would regard himself as lowly.
Then what does that tell you about them?
No you don't. If someone makes other peoples life a living hell, especially children who have no defence, and in later years claim they were acting on the words and deeds of Jesus, and no such action was ever performed or encouraged by Jesus, then basically they're either lying, ignorant, or both. But they are certainly not following the footsteps of Jesus.
That's just my opinion.
Sorry I didn't mean for you to answer it here, as it is very personal.
What part of you philosophical worldview, wonders whether you have a self?
And how do you think you will decide whether or not you have one?
Jan.
Surely that depends on what you well educated in, doesn't it.
And unless you are well educated in anti-theism, what is criterea that makes well-educated people less likely to believe in God?
Jan.
I don't think it's down to education per se. It's more a question of intelligence and the ability to use one's reason rather than emotion or commonsense to arrive at conclusions. There is a connection in the sense that only intelligent people will make it into higher education.
Almost without exception, the Christians with whom I have debated lack such an ability. They accept contradictions and paradoxes as if they were self-evident. This is particularly true of Fundamentalists who, like many other Christians will say that God made us but, despite being omnipotent, he made defective beings. Why, for example, with foreknowledge, did he create sinners. His omniscience deprives us of free will, so it follows that he deliberately made sinners who will suffer future punishment for God's handiwork.
If you consider the hundreds of religious sects with their particular understanding of scripture, it becomes evident that many of their adherents are guillible and that their holy books are ambiguous , to put it politely.
I have spoken to you previously about the gang rape referred to in Judges but you insisted on putting your own gloss on it, when it is perfectly clear what is being described. You had what you regarded as answers but when I pressed you , you were unable to justify them, despite which you continued to defend your position. That, in essence, is the problem when dealing with a religious mindset.
No.
Pick one. There are statistical studies for almost any criterion you could imagine. IQ, SAT scores, scientific eminence, university ranking, GPA, college graduation, salary, etc.
That's a cheap shot.
How do you figure? You're intentionally selecting an answer that you know can't be demonstrated over one that can, expressly on the basis that the unsupportable answer is generally advised to be held with 100% certainty. It's far easier to claim certainty when there's no evidence to contradict.
That's another cheap shot.
You don't seem to be aware of the thoroughness of my relativism, and my doubt.
Maybe you should explain it to me.
"I Need Truth Now" seems an inherently absurd request.
In that it is an uncertainty about which religion is "the right one", there is uncertainty whether there is such a thing as "the right religion" and how to find out which one that is. For someone who grew up within Christianity, this is a perfectly reasonable line of inquiry.
Agreed.
For example, two scriptures might both say that God is the One Supreme Original Cause, but one goes on to say that God will judge and send those who don't believe into eternal hellfire, and the other says no such thing and instead says that beings inherit their next lives in accord with their karma.
In practice, this makes all the difference for the person - at least for me.
Here is a good example of how not just anything can be taught to just anyone: In some Buddhist traditions, practitioners can take the vow to not teach emptiness to the untrained. The topic of emptiness and proper understanding of it is deemed as so important in those traditions that a specific vow exists about it. Even though emptiness is one of the central topics in Buddhism.
I wonder that perhaps some teachings about God should be treated in a similar manner: because misunderstanding and falling into wrong views (which lead to wrong actions) is so easy, these topics and the people learning about them should be treated with utmost care in order to not cause unnecessary suffering.
You know, I've had Christians telling me the same things you do here. Yet those same people would behave like I described above.
True, and I was uncomfortable writing it. However, I anticipated it might shed some light on my situation and perhaps someone will see something, point it out, that might help me.
The relativist, constructivist part.
From a philosphical perspective, the issue seems unresolvable - official Western philosophy hasn't solved the problem of identity.
I have no idea.
I'm sorry, but I really don't feel like doing that.
About a half of my posts here are about it.
Why? It's absurd to think one could afford to put it off.