Necessary requirement for believing in God

[(Q)]

You're projecting...speaking out of your ignorance...desperately trying to make sense of something you just don't understand.

Take for granted? No, but... the fact remains we know something you don't...knowledge of a sort that far surpasses anything you 'know'.

I'm here to impart knowledge...knowledge that has been imparted to me through study of God's Word...knowledge that you would otherwise not have access to. Do with it what you will.

I rarely show "scorn"...but I don't mince words either. Your souls are at stake, so there are times when I might come across as harsh but...ultimately the motivation behind the time I spend here is your (plural) welfare.

Again, like Sandy, we have another evangelic fundamentalist Christian with the same holier-than-thou, condescending, patronizing attitude who doesn't have a clue other than what his indoctrination has given him.

It is tragic to say the least that these individuals have been mentally maligned in this way and will never know the world around them for what it is, and would rather live their lives perched atop their mounted sermon, despising and condemning all who question or disagree with their worldview.

 

[lightgigantic]

Again, like Sandy, we have another evangelic fundamentalist Christian with the same holier-than-thou, condescending, patronizing attitude who doesn't have a clue other than what his indoctrination has given him.

It is tragic to say the least that these individuals have been mentally maligned in this way and will never know the world around them for what it is, and would rather live their lives perched atop their mounted sermon, despising and condemning all who question or disagree with their worldview.

and you are leading us by example as an alternative?

 

[(Q)]

:yawn:

Thanks for driving home my point.

 

[spidergoat]

certainly doesn't explain why there are numerous theistically inclined scientists and philosophers in the past and present - also doesn't explain why teh great achievements of culture in terms of architecture, literature (greece, India, china, Italy etc) and other social structures have been achieved by cultures that have a prominent focus on transcendental values

They were all greatly, magnificently, awesomely wrong. They built vast monuments to their delusions, some of which were used to observe the torture of Christians in luxury and comfort.

 

[Photizo]

Thanks for driving home my point.

That's just your interpretation.

 

[scorpius]

I'm here to impart knowledge...knowledge that has been gained through years of studying God's Word....

first WHERE in the bible does it say its the WORD of god?

and IF it was why it has so many contradictions,inconsistent with our empirical KNOWLEDGE on the age of Earth, universe.,and everything,
could be that whoever invented this god and wrote the bible didnt have a scientific knowledge we now have,way back then

www.skepticsannotatedbible.com

I rarely show "scorn"...but I don't mince words either. Your souls are at stake, so there are times when I might come across as harsh but...ultimately the motivation behind the time I spend here is your (plural) welfare.

not to worry bud..souls are just a lot of hot air,they dont exist..
www.atheists.org/Atheism/mind.html

 

[scorpius]

What would be the necessary requirement for believing in God?

I guess you have to be GULLIBLE,HYPNOTIZABLE and/or have a LOGIC gene missing or supressed.

I noticed theists dont use or understand what REASON is.=no logic!

 

[lightgigantic]

I guess you have to be GULLIBLE,HYPNOTIZABLE and/or have a LOGIC gene missing or supressed.

I noticed theists dont use or understand what REASON is.=no logic!

or so you would have us believe ....

 

[lightgigantic]

They were all greatly, magnificently, awesomely wrong. They built vast monuments to their delusions, some of which were used to observe the torture of Christians in luxury and comfort.

I think you miss the point
generally we don't see anything great in the way or art, philosophy. architecture, systems of morality, etc coming from deluded persons/communties

 

[Sarkus]

I think you miss the point
generally we don't see anything great in the way or art, philosophy. architecture, systems of morality, etc coming from deluded persons/communties

Provide an example of a "deluded" community.

The problem with your argument is that the delusion under consideration is so entwined within the fabric of nearly all societies that there is no understanding of their deluded state. Hence they would not, to you, seem to be "deluded societies".
YOU don't see these societies as "deluded".
YOU are part of that delusion - and hence you can not see any alternative.

So, to answer your question - please have a look at ANY Christian, Muslim or any society where religion is prevalent - and take a look at their art, philosophy, architecture, systems of morality etc.
There you have your "deluded society" and the items you seek.

If you don't agree (which you won't, obviously) then please give an example of what YOU would see as a "deluded community"?


Further, it is a well-accepted notion that there is a disproportionate representation of mental illness (including delusions) in the creative community - per this at any rate.
I'm sure you could actually find other supporting evidence if you bothered to look - just try not to continue spouting your confidence statements.

 

[greenberg]

You're projecting...speaking out of your ignorance...desperately trying to make sense of something you just don't understand. That said, what you call "some external authority" has an open door policy--therefore, all have access to Him.

Take for granted? No, but... the fact remains we know something you don't...knowledge of a sort that far surpasses anything you 'know'.

I'm here to impart knowledge...knowledge that has been gained through years of studying God's Word...knowledge that you would otherwise not have access to. Do with it what you will.

I rarely show "scorn"...but I don't mince words either. Your souls are at stake, so there are times when I might come across as harsh but...ultimately the motivation behind the time I spend here is your (plural) welfare.

Perhaps we should just consider you to be our God, right?
We don't need Jesus, we need you, right!



For crying out loud! We don't exist for you, do we?
You don't care about us, you don't care about what we know and what we don't know.
You're just here on your trip, taking advantage of whatever spiritual/philosophical insecurity we might have.

And with ever bout of our resistance, your faith, your conviction grows stronger. There is no way that we could get through to you. Your communication is strictly one-way, from you to us. We don't really exist for you.

 

[lightgigantic]

Provide an example of a "deluded" community.

The problem with your argument is that the delusion under consideration is so entwined within the fabric of nearly all societies that there is no understanding of their deluded state. Hence they would not, to you, seem to be "deluded societies".
YOU don't see these societies as "deluded".
YOU are part of that delusion - and hence you can not see any alternative.

So, to answer your question - please have a look at ANY Christian, Muslim or any society where religion is prevalent - and take a look at their art, philosophy, architecture, systems of morality etc.
There you have your "deluded society" and the items you seek.

If you don't agree (which you won't, obviously) then please give an example of what YOU would see as a "deluded community"?


Further, it is a well-accepted notion that there is a disproportionate representation of mental illness (including delusions) in the creative community - per this at any rate.
I'm sure you could actually find other supporting evidence if you bothered to look - just try not to continue spouting your confidence statements.

I think you miss the point

basically the argument on offer is aka dawkins god delusion - namely that there are persons who see pink elephants, persons who think they are charlie chaplain, persons like the yorkshire ripper etc and that the only ultimate difference between these persons and persons who make theistic claims are the numbers

this argument has numerous problems

one is that using general evidence that people get something wrong to indicate that someone is getting something specifically wrong is flimsy (for instance I can provide many examples of persons who got lost or were bewildered about where they are situated geographically - is that sufficient to indicate that you are deluded as to what city you are located in?)

further problem is that most people don't see pink elephants, most people don't think they are charlie chaplain, most people don't kill other people etc etc so its not clear how he is offering even a "general" indication

and finally, if you compare the cultural achievements (science, art, philosophy) it also tends to indicate a further distinction between the two categories

to try and skirt this issue and simply cajole around in UPPER CASE letters about the nature of delusion simply indicates a lack of thought going into the argument

 

[Saquist]

I wouldn't put them into the same categories for 'requirements' considering they were probably indoctrinated by their families and friends.

Yes...lets not give credit where it might be due eh...

 

[Non-Logical-Idea-Guy]

What would be the necessary requirement for believing in God?


Most of the requirements for believing in God that are listed in this thread seem to be only sufficient requirements.

What about the necessary requirements? Is there such a thing as a necessary requirement for believing in God?

If there is no such requirement, what would this imply about believing in God?

You must accept that there is something out there that is bigger and better than you are. As silly as it seems most people seem to struggle with this idea, such people tend to be aethists.

 

[Sarkus]

I think you miss the point

I'll take that as an indication of your inability to answer the questions asked of you. Fair enough.

basically the argument on offer is aka dawkins god delusion - namely that there are persons who see pink elephants, persons who think they are charlie chaplain, persons like the yorkshire ripper etc and that the only ultimate difference between these persons and persons who make theistic claims are the numbers

And that is, unfortunately for you, the grossest simplification of the argument I think I have ever come across, and as a result you completely miss the point of his argument and argue against strawmen of your own making. Now where have I seen you do that before....

So before you attack an argument:
(a) make sure it is the one actually being made;
(b) make sure you understand it;
(c) be prepared to counter the argument made, not some logically fallacious argument of your own devising.

 

[peta9]

The uncompromised Word of God is just that, His Word. You know in your spirit if what you're reading is true or not. That is IF God lives inside of you. If not, you have no discernment.

This is a quote from Sandy, one of the resident evangelists.

This is a well-worn and used argument by theists. The only problem is "spirit" would apply and reside in everyone since this monotheistic god is responsible for all of creation. Therefore this argument is laughable. Of course we can discern what we read is true or not by using our intellect, sometimes our intuition. But that's no different than stating dogs see in black and white and we can see in color. Or that christians are mentally deficient and deem the bible to be fact way before any evidence is in.

 

[Enterprise-D]

You must accept that there is something out there that is bigger and better than you are. As silly as it seems most people seem to struggle with this idea, such people tend to be aethists.

- Why must there be something out there bigger and better than the best human?
- Why do Christians get to define it as "God"?
- Why do Muslims define it as "Allah"...and define "Allah" as a different concept to christianity's god?
- Why do these and other theist groups feel it is their obligation to beat and induce such beliefs on resistant or unsuspecting planetary citizenry?
- On what grounds must this "something bigger and better" be any sort of god at all?


In other words, the awe-inspiring panacea you've typed there defines absolutely nothing of substance.

 

[greenberg]

You must accept that there is something out there that is bigger and better than you are.

You seem to think that I don't accept that "that there is something out there that is bigger and better than I am".
I do accept that.

But I refuse to take this superiority for granted.
I refuse to accept this superiority simply because someone declares it.


There are several people whom I deem superior to myself. But I haven't acknowledged this superiority simply because they demanded me to, or because they declared themselves to be superior to me.

 

[Sarkus]

There are several people whom I deem superior to myself.

Aw, shucks. That's so nice of you to say.

 

[(Q)]

You must accept that there is something out there that is bigger and better than you are. As silly as it seems most people seem to struggle with this idea, such people tend to be aethists.

My question to you would be WHY should we accept that? How is that you're completely convinced there IS something out there bigger and better than us?