Agnosticism and Origins

Thank you for your reply. I don't know. I don't know exactly what you mean by that. I don't want to insinuate anything or offend, but I can't help but think it sounds like the emphasis was on YOU being something rather than understanding and loving who God is. I don't know who told you about "that feeling", but I have always disagreed with those who mistake a relationship with God for "that feeling". It is about thought and action and life, not a self-induced chemical stimulation of the emotional centers of the brain that some call a "religious experience". Although emotion is a natural response to the relationship many times, it is not THE relationship itself. I don't know about you, but I've asked and I've been answered many times over..P.S. don't think I'm trying to convert you (I saw the warning on your site!) I'm just trying to figure out exactly how a believer's and unbeliever's thinking diverge.

Well you might want to wrap your mind around the fact that many of us are disbelievers rather than unbelievers.

Sadly, it's not even just the teachings of Paul. Rather it is some bombastic compendium, the Best of Paul, or Paul's Golden Epistles, hawked by snake oil salesmen whose sole purpose in life is their own aggrandisement.IMHO, you have a far greater chance of being saved than the likes of Gene Scott, Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, Jim Bakker or Billy Sinday.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Thank you for your substantial response.Didn't you once mention that Adam & Eve were put on Earth for the following purpose:

quote:

---

To glorify God, prove his justice and righteousness to the angels, to create a unique spiritual species that will of it's own free will learn about God and reside with him in a personal relationship in eternity.

---

So you seem to believe that there's a reward waiting for you in the afterlife, and presumably a less desirable end awaiting the likes of me. Of course I deny the very notion of the afterlife, and the burden is on the believer to establish (at least to himself) that there is in fact a reason to believe in one. So what if you had no reason to believe you'd be any better off after death than I? You also believe that your prayers have been answered, and that's certainly a perk of belief. What if God made it clear He wouldn't listen to your prayers, and you're on your own? What I mean to suggest is that belief is never an end in itself. You only believe in a God who's worth worshipping.You like to say that we reject all religious considerations out of hand, but it's abundantly clear that most of us have had some sort of religious background that we basically outgrew. Nobody has mentioned a particularly traumatic episode that sent us fleeing from belief, or professed an abiding hatred for honest, rational believers. Why do you have such a difficult time accepting that lack of belief can be a normal, healthy decision that people make?regards,
Esteban HambreThis message has been edited by MrHambre, 08-17-2004 03:38 PM

I'm answering these questions without looking at other replies, so I apologize if some of these answers."What was the biggest thing that caused you stop believing in God?"Realizing that I believed in God for the wrong reasons from the very outset. I did it to make my family proud and to fulfill the expectations of people within the church."When did you stop believing in God?"For me, perhaps the question should be "When did you realize you didn't believe in God". Somewhere around 18-20."When did you start believing in evolution?"I have never "believed" in evolution. However, ever since the age of 12 I have accepted it as the best theory for describing the biodiversity we see today. I also found that I had to hide this acceptance from my family. This also poured into Sunday school classes where I nodded like a "good christian" when people would proclaim the evils of evolution. I never felt like I had to defend evolution to these people since they seemed so blinded by their own importance."Do you think God: a) probably does not exist b) probably does exist c) is unknowable d) it doesn't matter"C) Unkowable. There isn't any evidence for God specifically, but there is decent subjective evidence for the supernatural in general. Miracles can be found in every religion, as are unexplainable coincidences often accredited to prayer and God. If God were real I shouldn't need faith to know that he exists. On one hand people claim that God is very evident, yet when asked for the evidence they claim that you can only reach God through blind faith. This twisted logic is what finally made me realize that I couldn't even convince myself of the existence of the christian God. However, I have been wrong in the past so I will not claim that God does not exist, only that it hasn't been shown to me."If God should exist, how would you feel about him?"That he doesn't run things well. He claims to be watching after his flock, yet the same atrocities happen to every culture regardless of religion. He claims to love us, yet doesn't mind sending us to hell. Everything He claims seems very illogical, and the counter-argument "God doesn't think like we do" precludes me from having any feelings whatsoever. So, I would say I would have mixed feelings of anger, love, and apathy."Any comments about mine or my friend's position?"Yeah, one major comment. Evolution never entered the decision on continuing with christianity. Believe it or not, the very thought of evolution disproving God is very strange to me. The Bible is Man's writings and therefore God shouldn't be held accountable for Man's authorship or mistakes in interpretation. In fact, most of my biology professors in college went to the same church, and yet they wholeheartedly supported evolution. Wheaton College near Chicago is a christian university that also supports evolution. How about this question, did finding out the Sun was the center of the solar system and that the earth is not the center of the universe make you question your faith? If you say no, then how do you reconcile this with scripture which states that the earth is the center of everything and the sun orbits the earth? It is the same thing with evolution. If God created the Earth, then it shouldn't conflict with His Word. If they do conflict, then it is Man's interpretation of the Word that is wrong.

quote:

---

So you have also first rejected God's existence based on a lack of "supernatural" evidence and then reinforced your position by equating God, if He should exist, with a "galactic goat named Pablo".

---

Actually, the question is "why has hangdawg rejected Pablo the galactic goat based on a lack of the supernatural". Many people reject God and the Easter Bunny for the same reason, they were made up by people and there is no evidence for their existence. I am not trying to put words in Mammuthus' mouth, but I think you are misunderstanding the athiest mindset. Athiests reject ALL supernatural deities and are not singling out the Christian God. To put it another way, athiests only reject one more god than you do, and they reject that god for the same reason you reject the rest.

Hi Dawg, no offense.I am having difficulty expressing myself concerning this. You have to understand that a large part of this was many years ago. At the time my emphasis WAS on god, but now it is difficult to describe what was going on with ME without references to MYSELF.As far as "that feeling", I'm more trying to describe the understanding, the "knowing" that god was there. It never came. So many people try to tell me that if I genuinely asked...I would find the answer. If you did, I'm happy for you, but I wanted you to know that it "ain't necessarily so".

---

Asgara
"Embrace the pain, spank your inner moppet, whatever....but get over it"http://asgarasworld.bravepages.com
http://perditionsgate.bravepages.com

quote:

---

So you have also first rejected God's existence based on a lack of "supernatural" evidence and then reinforced your position by equating God, if He should exist, with a "galactic goat named Pablo".

---

In fact yes. I have no evidence for the existence of Pablo the galactic goat, or Vishnu, or a christian god, or any god, gods, or supernatural beings. As a scientist, I have found that methodological naturalism has been the most successful of all human endeavors to describe the natural world. Introducing anthropocentric or completely foggy ideas of supernaturlism and other forms of superstitition do nothing to enrich or enhance my life and are an absolute detriment to scientific inquiry. While such beliefs may be of emotional comfort to many, I have not needed that crutch in my life. And my only conflict with those who do comes when they claim that their unsupported beliefs in the supernatural are somehow equivalent to the tested and supported theories of science and should be treated as such. Otherwise, I am not particularly interested in what the beliefs of others are.

Sorry for coming into this so late, but I just found it. Being an agnostic that had a pretty good exposure to Xianity while growing up I figure my answers might be additionally helpful... The problem was I could never start believing in the Xian God. The words that people said about the Xian God and the world of the Bible were completely alien to me. It was like Tolkein, but uglier and no real plot.I tried to get my head around it... being one of those annoying kids that pressed the sunday school teacher for answers until I was sent to make Moses figures from clothespins. I then tried to fake it. No dice.Since I still felt some sense of spirituality I looked into other religions (which means other Gods). A couple seemed to be interesting but time and time again their methods were failures.The only thing with consistent results (as a method) and without question spoke to me about what I was experiencing came from abandoning religion as it was handed to me and pursuing rational understanding of raw experience: methodological naturalism.It was a little dry on the emotional side of things, but it just would not fail on real life experience. If there were Gods, they'd show up.So short answer: No connection to real life experiences (I couldn't feel it), nor did it have methods to understand the world around me (no practical value). Like I said, I never really believed in the Xian God. I suppose I didn't start thinking he had no chance of existing till 10-12. Any further inkling it might be possible was removed in college while taking a course studying the Bible.I stopped believing in other Gods throughout ages 10-19. Some remain possible I suppose, but that is only because I am an agnostic and admit the possibilty of just about anything.The reason I have essentially 100% belief the Xian God does not exist is that it is so obviously the work of men ripping off other (previous) religions. If the Xian God does exist, it is not the form the Bible makes him out to be and so is lost to civilization. I have been curious about an idea that Xianity was essentially a gnostic religion (the truth hidden behind a facade of familiar adaptations) and when mainstream Xians wiped them out, we lost the real word... THAT could be. Doubtful, but could be.I still believe their could be a "spiritual" force of some kind. But if there is, it is simply unknowable from our position. Maybe 10. I forget when I first heard about evolution, but I do know it made a lot of sense. It had NOTHING to do with my religious sense. Xianity fell all on its own. I think such things are generally unknowable until those beings make themselves known in some real way. Until that time it doesn't really matter.Given the astounding lack of evidence for them, and their apparent unwillingness to make themselves known (which seems odd if there are Gods), I 'd say they probably don't exist.As far as the Xian God as described in the Bible? It is a fairy tale. I suppose it is possible in some ultimate way of "possibility", but I am near 100% certainty that it is not true. The God that exists in the Bible, at least most of it, I would hate without reservation. He is a self-proclaimed angry and jealous God. For a supposed omniscient and omnipotent being, that is ridiculous and I'd count him as one of the biggest bastards there was.Other Gods have their strong and weak points. Polytheistic Gods would at least have an excuse for why the world is the way it is. Despite my position, I always feel that others may not share my viewpoint on the Gods, or the Xian God in particular.Certainly if you FEEL that God is real and the words of the Bible describe your everyday experiences, then why not believe in it?Here are some caveats however. By describing your "everyday experiences" I am NOT talking about the flood or genesis. I think it is pretty clear that many passages are not meant to be literal, and it is a mistake to believe in the literal truth of the Bible. (Something you may have experienced in another thread you have disappeared from on that point).You DO NOT need to believe in a literal translation of the Bible in order to be a good Xian, so neither you nor her should take the Bible's lack of literal truth to be some hit against the religion... you should just give up that interpretation of your faith.Your doubt should come from something more meaningful. Like if she starts finding out that science keeps giving her truths as she experiences the world, but the Bible gives her nothing, then THAT would be a point of starting to question.Hope this has been helpful.This message has been edited by holmes, 08-18-2004 10:06 AM

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Hello again,I hope you don't mind me chipping in again, I don't usaully stray too much away from the ID, Origin, and Evo boards, so this is a little light relief for me. I think this is the trouble (if that is the right word for it), with committing myself to the 'go on prove it' way of thinking. While I came to the conclusion a while ago that I couldn't in all honesty rule out the existance of an omnipotent being in some sense, the evidence that I would need to prove he existed would be nothing short of a gigantic finger coming out of the blue and a resonating voice proclaiming: Oi! Stop that!!!Although I agree that quantum theory etc is simply mind-blowing in its' complexity, it doesn't really point me in either direction - it just sounds cool (I mean, Infinite Elvis's - how wierd is that). But how would I know that the bible was right and the koran, for example, was wrong?This message has been edited by Ooook!, 08-18-2004 06:31 PM

Why does one have to be right and the other wrong?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Because Christ = God is not the same as Christ DNE God. 2 does not equal 3. The Bible and the Koran cannot BOTH be right.

I think I see what you are saying: that there might be some kind of central truth running through both of them (or through all religions I suppose if you want to extend the idea) - is that right?The problem I have with that is that religions tend, at one point to deal in absolutes to some degree, and that doesn't normally equate to harmony of messages. Also if you look at the collection of world religions they seem to be, to my eyes, fairly diverse message-wise. Any universal truth running through them is gonna be pretty dilute, wouldn't you think?*yawn* Oh dear, definitely bed-time! And on a school-night too . I'll reply to any responses tomorrow.Cheerio!

See, that's where right now we disagree.Is the GOD of the Jews the same GOD as of the Christians?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Thank you for your reply. Of course not, you should swing on in here more often. lol.. So you would need supernatural evidence to believe. That's fair enough I spose. So you believe that all reality can exist with a "natural" cause so to speak. In other words, you think that given enough time and knowledge, scientists could find and validate a theory that operates according to principles and laws that explains existence? Read'em both and see which one fits reality best to you?