|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Belief in Deity vs Belief in Fictional Four | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluescat48 Member (Idle past 4190 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: |
that's what it sounds like, totally weird.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Equinox Member (Idle past 5142 days) Posts: 329 From: Michigan Joined: |
Stile writes:
I would say the fundamental difference between belief in a deity and belief in the Fictional Four is current social acceptance. It is currently socially acceptable for an adult to believe in a deity. It is currently not socially acceptable for an adult to believe in any of the Fictional Four. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense - a clear and concise answer to this whole thread. It also explains encouragement. An older (or younger) person is encouraged by many to believe in a socially acceptable fictional being, and discouraged from believing in the opposite. Have a fun day everyone- Equinox -Equinox _ _ _ ___ _ _ _You know, it's probably already answered at An Index to Creationist Claims... (Equinox is a Naturalistic Pagan - Naturalistic Paganism Home)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18262 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
Stile writes: That makes sense to me! The P.C. Deity or the popular Deity. Or are they one in the same?
I would say the fundamental difference between belief in a deity and belief in the Fictional Four is current social acceptance. It is currently socially acceptable for an adult to believe in a deity. It is currently not socially acceptable for an adult to believe in any of the Fictional Four.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Mylakovich Junior Member (Idle past 5684 days) Posts: 20 From: Cambridgeshire, UK Joined: |
A deity that is indistinguishable from nature is the same as no deity at all. So why suppose unnecessarily?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Watson75  Suspended Member (Idle past 5671 days) Posts: 75 Joined: |
The question I want to pose is this: Why (how?), if belief in God is categorically equivalent to belief in the Fictional Four, does a rational, intelligent human being like Antony Flew recover (or discover for the first time) belief in the existence of a deity? It's not! And don't let anyone tell you otherwise my friend. Belief in God is a Universal truth, known deep inside all of our souls, which God gave us. If you deny that inner truth, is fair enough for God to throw you to the depths of hell! Just a warning. And if that's not enough for you, just think about this fact. The easter bunny and spaghettie monster are made up stories. God is not made up, but he did make up you! Where else would you have come from, nowhere? Does that make sense to you>? That makes just about as much sense as the Easter Bunny, and we all know that makes no sense and doesn't exist! That's a fact. So people really need to start openning there eyes to the facts! It makes perfect sense to believe in a creator, and not the easter bunny. So don't worry. And if you think believing in God is equal to beleiving in the easter bunny, then I think you're juts not to smart. Maybe you should go back to elementary school, and take some candy from your bunny! (I'm sorry, not real, it's just a guy in suite!) "Give me Jonas, or give me death!"
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stile Member Posts: 4295 From: Ontario, Canada Joined: |
What I said, in Message 26:
quote: And let's take a look at your message:
Watson75 writes:
A very nice social acceptance for anyone professing a belief in God.
It's not! And don't let anyone tell you otherwise my friend. Belief in God is a Universal truth, known deep inside all of our souls, which God gave us. If you deny that inner truth, is fair enough for God to throw you to the depths of hell! Just a warning.
No evidence, of course. But we do have social acceptance for professing a belief in God, alongside with being threatened for not professing the belief.
And if that's not enough for you, just think about this fact. The easter bunny and spaghettie monster are made up stories. God is not made up, but he did make up you! Where else would you have come from, nowhere? Does that make sense to you>?
This paragraph is left for the reader to find the specific instances of the following: That makes just about as much sense as the Easter Bunny, and we all know that makes no sense and doesn't exist! That's a fact. So people really need to start openning there eyes to the facts!-social acceptance for professing a belief in God -insulting anyone for not professing a belief in God -any type of evidence to support either position (a trick question...) It makes perfect sense to believe in a creator, and not the easter bunny. So don't worry. And if you think believing in God is equal to beleiving in the easter bunny, then I think you're juts not to smart. Maybe you should go back to elementary school, and take some candy from your bunny! (I'm sorry, not real, it's just a guy in suite!)
And to end everything we have more social acceptance for God, more insults for not accepting God, and the exact same lack of any physical (based in reproducible-reality) reason to believe in God's existence as for the Easter Bunny. Thank-you, Watson75, for providing such a great example on how a belief in God is only different from a belief in the Fictional Four in terms of social acceptance. As I've recently discovered, your time has here has been cut short and you will be unable to reply. Thanks for the help anyway.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18262 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
This is an interesting and occasionally amusing argment! (or non-argument, as it were!)
As many of you know, I am a believer. I had a positive experience, (an epiphany as it were)way back in 1993, and then became indoctrinated with the collective beliefs of organized religion. I have been unafraid to question most of what I believe, excepting the actual choice to believe that God is real and alive, which I have stubbornly clung to and am afraid to set aside, even though if He were real, it wouldn't change things anyway! I no longer try and argue with people much, nor push my beliefs very strongly. I never get angry when folks tell me that God is a figment of my dogmatic imagination...I figure that either He exists or He does not exist, and nothing anyone can say or demonstrate will change that irrefutable fact. What amuses me, however, is how some christians try so hard to prove God to everyone. I mean, if God is real, can't God handle His own P.R.? To me, it quite simply makes more sense that a Creator existed before created matter did. While it is plausible that the universe required no creator, the default position, from my human perspective, is that it is up to we humans to provide alternate hypothesis based on our logic, reasoning, and perspectives on reality as we know it to be. One question that is often asked is if the entire idea of God is totally a relative concept---relative to each individual based on their chosen world view. Again, we may never know for sure one way or the other.....and rather than fret about questions that we can't answer, why not simply deal with the questions that we can answer? Life is too short to waste too much time dealing with hypothetical scenarios. "All that we call human history--money, poverty, ambition, war, prostitution, classes, empires, slavery--[is] the long terrible story of man trying to find something other than God which will make him happy."--C.S.Lewis * * * * * * * * * * “The world has achieved brilliance without wisdom, power without conscience. Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants.”--General Omar Bradley * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * "The free man owns himself. He can damage himself with either eating or drinking; he can ruin himself with gambling. If he does he is certainly a damn fool, and he might possibly be a damned soul; but if he may not, he is not a free man any more than a dog." -GK Chesterson
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stile Member Posts: 4295 From: Ontario, Canada Joined: |
Phat writes: ...I figure that either He [God] exists or He does not exist, and nothing anyone can say or demonstrate will change that irrefutable fact. What amuses me, however, is how some christians try so hard to prove God to everyone. I mean, if God is real, can't God handle His own P.R.? To me, it quite simply makes more sense that a Creator existed before created matter did. While it is plausible that the universe required no creator, the default position, from my human perspective, is that it is up to we humans to provide alternate hypothesis based on our logic, reasoning, and perspectives on reality as we know it to be. Well said, Phat. While my personal position is that unrequired causes should be left out until something indicates their presence, I have no problem with anyone thinking differently for their own reasons in order to live their own life. It is only when we try to impress "undisputed" knowledge onto others, be they children, family, or strangers, that we should make sure we have hard rational evidence to defend our convictions. Anything less is simply sharing opinions (which has it's own bright stage). That is... don't say "things work like this..."Unless you can show that things work like this.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1941 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
Stile writes: It is only when we try to impress "undisputed" knowledge onto others, be they children, family, or strangers, that we should make sure we have hard rational evidence to defend our convictions. Anything less is simply sharing opinions (which has it's own bright stage). An example of philosophical empiricism writ large (my bold) -
That is... don't say "things work like this..." Unless you can show that things work like this. The worlds of advertising/lobbying/finance/politics/etc have applied rational thinking in their coming to precisely the opposite conclusion. This philosophical theists view is that "the gospel is the power of God unto salvation for everyone who believes.." and that it (the gospel) doesn't require its demonstration - just proclamation (via word and deed). It's just a view, like and opposing yours. So lets all just settle back down again at base camp, shall we? Edited by iano, : No reason given. Edited by iano, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stile Member Posts: 4295 From: Ontario, Canada Joined: |
iano writes: This philosophical theists view is that "the gospel is the power of God unto salvation for everyone who believes.." and that it (the gospel) doesn't require its demonstration - just proclamation (via word and deed). In other words: "Things work like this... just because they do".
It's just a view, like and opposing yours. So lets all just settle back down again at base camp, shall we? Correct. Your view is just a view that is indistinguishable from the views of the Fictional Four. "Santa exists, and he does these things..."-no evidence included "God exists, and he does these things..."-no evidence included The only difference is social acceptance. If you'd like to discuss your view as opposed to my view, you can return to one of the many threads that are still awaiting your response:
Message 144
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18262 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
Mylakovich writes: A deity that is indistinguishable from nature is the same as no deity at all. So why suppose unnecessarily? Lets ask Mr.Dictionary a couple of questions! 1) belief \be-lef\ n 1 : confidence, trust 2 : something (as a tenet or creed) believed syn conviction, opinion, persuasion, sentimenta belief need not be labeled as either a fact or a fantasy. It merely is an opinion or a sentiment. 2) suppose \se-poz\ vb supposed; supposing 1 : to assume to be true (as for the sake of argument) 2 : expect 3 : to think probable supposal n Debates and arguments are caused by assumptions and expectations based on opinions and sentiment. We hardly expect to find verification within a belief context. As a believer, my only plea is that belief not be relegated to a fictional status since it is but a belief, anyway.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18262 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.1 |
A deity that is indistinguishable from nature is the same as no deity at all. So why suppose unnecessarily? Why not? For some of us, belief is much more comforting than no belief. That being said, I dont try to impress the necessity of God onto those whom dont already share basic Christian dogma with me. For those who do share similar dogma, all sorts of opinions are shared, and the most logical ones usually reinforce the group dogma to another degree.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Perdition Member (Idle past 3238 days) Posts: 1593 From: Wisconsin Joined: |
Why not? For some of us, belief is much more comforting than no belief. So, for you, a comforting lie is better than a discomforting truth? Would you prefer, if someone near and dear to you had died, that others simply pretend that your loved one has gone on an indefinite vacation without access to any mass communication technology rather than simply tell you that they're dead? I would much rather know the truth rather than believe something just because it makes me feel good in the short term.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2106 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
This brings to mind a Heinlein quote:
History does not record anywhere at any time a religion that has any rational basis. Religion is a crutch for people not strong enough to stand up to the unknown without help. But, like dandruff, most people do have a religion and spend time and money on it and seem to derive considerable pleasure from fiddling with it. Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stile Member Posts: 4295 From: Ontario, Canada Joined: |
Perdition writes: So, for you, a comforting lie is better than a discomforting truth? Would you prefer, if someone near and dear to you had died, that others simply pretend that your loved one has gone on an indefinite vacation without access to any mass communication technology rather than simply tell you that they're dead? What's wrong with such a thing? Religion may be a crutch. But, if you have a broken leg, a crutch is an extemely useful tool. Even if you're simply taking a long hike with perfectly fine legs, a walking stick can be very nice to have along. Now, if that belief ever starts to be used to force any ideologies upon other people... I certainly agree you have a very large point. However, if such a thing doesn't happen, I don't see any reason to denigrate the use of a crutch by some people who happen to find it comforting. "Being free to do whatever you please unless you're hurting another person in the process" works both ways. There's nothing in there that states that everything everyone does must be completely scientific on all levels at all times.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024