The joy of religion - part xxxxxxxxx

[realibrad]

And this is why you're supposed to be part of a church or spiritual group of some type to sort this shit out so you aren't 30 and having an existential crisis about your belief in god. Forums and the internet in general are a terrible medium for this sort of thing.

I wouldn't say I'm having an existential crisis, because I don't believe that anything is going to happen to me. For me to be worried about my afterlife, I must first believe there is an afterlife and I don't. I have had no need or compulsion for a religion. Most I have talked to believe in something because of a compulsion and the others rationalize it as why not.

I lack the feeling, and I don't see an valid rational which leaves me where I am.

Also, churches don't make sense either. Again, you have to either feel compelled to a church, or it has to be logical. I have yet to see a logical church, so it would only leave feelings which I lack.

The only real reason I am on this topic is because it interests me to see how people think in general. I have also found it to be a great way to learn, so I engage people in discussions. I listen to their arguments and test that information against what I know and then to the inverse.

 

[realibrad]

Not trying to be cryptic here but perhaps the god you don't believe in doesn't exist in the way you imagine it to be.

Agree, it is a horrible game of hide and seek, at least it was for me anyway, with me being my own worst enemy. A deeply personal battle within yourself is not fun.

I personally don't believe in the construct of hell (eternal damnation) and don't believe it's congruent with what little I know about God. But some chose to believe that paradigm and I'm OK with that. Anyway, I think you're too caught up in the trappings of the Christian paradigm although it can be a very effective path. Like I said, it's a 'come as you are party'...fight the battle and don't sweat the details.

If there is a god, then I hope its not an abrahamic god. Really, I have not heard a good version of god ever. When you get into the polytheistic views, it does not get much better.

Its not that I want to or don't want to believe, its that I lack the evidence or feeling to believe. I don't think I am a bigot to religious people, but I do disagree with the logic that is usually given as to why they believe.

If there is a god, then it has damn well hidden itself beyond any rational reason I can think of.

 

[Moonbeam]

If there is a god, then I hope its not an abrahamic god. Really, I have not heard a good version of god ever. When you get into the polytheistic views, it does not get much better.

Its not that I want to or don't want to believe, its that I lack the evidence or feeling to believe. I don't think I am a bigot to religious people, but I do disagree with the logic that is usually given as to why they believe.

If there is a god, then it has damn well hidden itself beyond any rational reason I can think of.

Actually He is hidden because of every rational reason you can think of.

 

[realibrad]

Actually He is hidden because of every rational reason you can think of.

If that is the case, then its a dumb thing to do. He creates us, to test us, knowing full well who will and wont succeed and then does what? If you believe most of the religions, hell. If you say religions dont know, then he could be more clear.

Seems dumb to do it the way it has done it.

 

[Moonbeam]

realibrad: I say hate is not the right word because of how I understand the meaning of the word. Hate is a very strong feeling of dislike, and my feelings toward something I don't have a belief in would seem weird to me. I'm not saying I choose not to hate, I just don't hate toward a god I lack believe in. I can dislike the story of the Christian god, because the Christian god supposedly created all things, good and bad and then made us horribly flawed. Then, if we fail the test of life, we go to hell forever because we failed while given our weak tools of human perception.

If the Christian god were real, then I feel that god would be a bad god. The amount of suffering in this world is far to great for something that has the power to stop it. A child in Africa who is raped because people dont want to get aids is sick any god that has the power to stop that and does not would not be worthy of any positive feelings from me.

The Christian Bible was written by man as inspired by god supposedly. That means it could be flawed. The question would then be what part is right, and what part is wrong. Logically I can't say, so it would have to be emotional, and I seem to lack the feelings to point to what is right or wrong.

So here I am. A person who has no feelings about what god is in a world where evidence is nowhere to be found.

So there you are, a person who has all sorts of feelings about what god is in a world where evidence is nowhere to be found. You are telling me you have no feelings and I am telling you that you do and you insist that you don't even though it is plane and clear that you do. So once again, forget about hate, since you are too cowardly to admit you feel it, and look at the fact that the god you don't believe in would be a bad god if he exists. Where do you get that opinion? I don't want to hear a bunch of logical reasons why such a god would be bad. I know such a god would be bad. I hold the very idea of such a god in profound contempt and I know why I do, because I feel it. You do too and you would know it too if you weren't such a milquetoast. Take it from Foghorn Leghorn here, you gotta spine up if you're going to bring home a chicken.

 

[Moonbeam]

If that is the case, then its a dumb thing to do. He creates us, to test us, knowing full well who will and wont succeed and then does what? If you believe most of the religions, hell. If you say religions dont know, then he could be more clear.

Seems dumb to do it the way it has done it.

Ah, so God is a stupid motherfucker. Nice, I like it. But I didn't tell you that so who the f did?

 

[soulcougher73]

Ah, so God is a stupid motherfucker. Nice, I like it. But I didn't tell you that so who the f did?

He could have just came to that conclusion based on what he has learned or studied about Christianity without anyone telling him. Using his logical reasoning skills.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

He could have just came to that conclusion based on what he has learned or studied about Christianity without anyone telling him. Using his logical reasoning skills.

He believes in a god that doesn't exist...it's no small wonder that he's an atheist.

 

[realibrad]

He believes in a god that doesn't exist...it's no small wonder that he's an atheist.

I would say that is my opinion on the Christian god. I have opinions on other gods too.

Take a god like Zeus. His powers are limited. He has no real ability to stop the vast majority of things. He is also a dick. But, the differences is that Zeus is limited and not all knowing.

Different gods are nicer vs others.

The problem is that the argument that one god is wrong, but the other is the right one, is that it cannot be verified through my means. Nobody here is really going to argue empirical evidence, just feelings. If it takes feelings to sift through the wrong ones, to get to the right one, then I seem to lack the tool. Moonie keeps saying I have it, but my logic hides it. Why would god give us minds to then not use. Why would he make me in such a way that conceals himself? God did not have to make himself so hard to find.

 

[Moonbeam]

realibrad: I would say that is my opinion on the Christian god. I have opinions on other gods too.

Take a god like Zeus. His powers are limited. He has no real ability to stop the vast majority of things. He is also a dick. But, the differences is that Zeus is limited and not all knowing.

M: I had a hangnail once that really bothered me. I have a lot of opinions about hangnails.

r: Different gods are nicer vs others.

M: What you are saying is that of the gods you don't believe in, but the notions that you have of their reality, some you like better than others. If you don't believe in absolutes how in the hell do you determine what is nice and what is bad. Where do your standards come from?

r: The problem is that the argument that one god is wrong, but the other is the right one, is that it cannot be verified through my means.

M: But you just fucking said you do that. Some are nicer than others.

r: Nobody here is really going to argue empirical evidence, just feelings. If it takes feelings to sift through the wrong ones, to get to the right one, then I seem to lack the tool. Moonie keeps saying I have it, but my logic hides it. Why would god give us minds to then not use. Why would he make me in such a way that conceals himself? God did not have to make himself so hard to find.

What the fuck are you basing the notion that some gods are nicer than others other than on feelings?

 

[realibrad]

M: I had a hangnail once that really bothered me. I have a lot of opinions about hangnails.

The point is to establish that I do not look at god either being the Christian god, or nothing at all. The Christian god is just one possibility among many. I have opinions but not feelings toward them.

M: What you are saying is that of the gods you don't believe in, but the notions that you have of their reality, some you like better than others. If you don't believe in absolutes how in the hell do you determine what is nice and what is bad. Where do your standards come from?

You actually made a thread about this very topic and I commented there too. My standards come from maximizing utility. A society built around individuals who lie, cheat, and steal is not likely to be very productive as the rational individuals will forgo long term investment as short term protection is needed. A society that does not invest in its future is likely to be outgrown by one that does. Evolution.

M: But you just fucking said you do that. Some are nicer than others.

You misunderstood the context of the words right and wrong. Right as in real, wrong as in not real. The right god would the one true real god if there is such a thing.

What the fuck are you basing the notion that some gods are nicer than others other than on feelings?

This goes back to how I view utility and morality. I would guess that you view that all morality has to come from a higher being, and that people cannot establish true morality. I disagree with that idea. One action is not always right or wrong inherently. That being said, utility is a great place to start as a measure. A society that feeds upon its weak will make the strong individuals stronger, but give the incentive of the weak to not invest in the future and be less productive. We have seen throughout history that cultures where people at all levels that feel safe enough to invest are more prosperous. Those ideals then become inherent to peoples minds and morals and instinct are formed.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

He believes in a god that doesn't exist...it's no small wonder that he's an atheist.

This is like a new level of stupid for you.

 

[Moonbeam]

This is like a new level of stupid for you.

Well it's more accurate, maybe to say, the God he doesn't believe in doesn't exist, which makes his atheism both logical, but also, in my opinion, rather trivial. I mean, Jesus, who could believe literally in gods so full of hate. They are obviously projections of the lowest common denominators of human emotional states.

My guess is that the first part of what I said is what he meant.

 

[Moonbeam]

realibrad: The point is to establish that I do not look at god either being the Christian god, or nothing at all. The Christian god is just one possibility among many. I have opinions but not feelings toward them.

M: You do not have opinions without feelings. Opinions are personal biases based on feeling evaluations.

r: You actually made a thread about this very topic and I commented there too. My standards come from maximizing utility. A society built around individuals who lie, cheat, and steal is not likely to be very productive as the rational individuals will forgo long term investment as short term protection is needed. A society that does not invest in its future is likely to be outgrown by one that does. Evolution.

Nobody cares that does not have an emotional attachment to their society so you are either lying about caring or you have such feelings.

r: You misunderstood the context of the words right and wrong. Right as in real, wrong as in not real. The right god would the one true real god if there is such a thing.

M: You make no sense. You say you lack the tools to determine the right God from the wrong one after just having told me some gods are nicer than others. How could the right God not be nicer than the wrong God. Haven't you rejected gods because you don't find them very nice?

r: This goes back to how I view utility and morality. I would guess that you view that all morality has to come from a higher being, and that people cannot establish true morality. I disagree with that idea. One action is not always right or wrong inherently. That being said, utility is a great place to start as a measure. A society that feeds upon its weak will make the strong individuals stronger, but give the incentive of the weak to not invest in the future and be less productive. We have seen throughout history that cultures where people at all levels that feel safe enough to invest are more prosperous. Those ideals then become inherent to peoples minds and morals and instinct are formed.

M: You are as full of opinions about morality as you are about gods. But there is no God for you so there can be no morality. Where do you get the idea that prosperity is better than poverty? Think in a utilitarian way. Poverty causes the weak to be weeded out of the gene pool, but prosperity allows the week to breed. And ideals do not become inherent creating instincts by becoming commonplace. That is Lamarkian. Primate social structure set the stage for the evolution of greater and greater complexity increasing survivability, including the capacity to see oneself in others and understand and predict or attend to the other's condition.

So what you are telling me even if you don't see it is that your morality is a product of instinct, not rationality at all. Reason is just the way your instincts get translated into ideas. You turn instinctual feelings into words to assure yourself of their reasonibility. You probably do that because you have no faith in the irrational instinctual origins oh your feelings (opinions).

 

[realibrad]

M: You do not have opinions without feelings. Opinions are personal biases based on feeling evaluations.

No. Opinions do not inherently need to be based on feelings. It is not mutually exclusive, but its also not inherent.

Nobody cares that does not have an emotional attachment to their society so you are either lying about caring or you have such feelings.

This statement has me totally lost. I'm not sure if you are saying that I said I don't have an emotional attachment to society which I never said, or, that a person can only do good for society if they have an emotional attachment which is incorrect.

First, I care about humanity on top of wanting to improve my life. If I make my society around me better, then its better for me as well as others, a win win. I have no idea why you think I am lying, but you have become more and more hostile as this has gone on.

Second, people can do good for society even if they do not care about society. This is a fundamental part of economics. Someone can invent something that improves all our lives for the sole purpose of monetary gain.

M: You make no sense. You say you lack the tools to determine the right God from the wrong one after just having told me some gods are nicer than others. How could the right God not be nicer than the wrong God.

Are you saying god has to be nice? The Christian god can be or do anything. If the bible is historical fact, then that god would not be nice. The new test. god seems much nicer, but still not nice. What makes god inherently nice? If god were real, I would hope god is nice, but I see no reason to believe that the real god, if there is one, is nice. Can you explain further?

Haven't you rejected gods because you don't find them very nice?

Its not that I have rejected, its that I have not accepted. Further, I don't not accept god(s) because I don't think they are nice. I don't accept them because I see no evidence for them. Hitler was a horrible person, but I accept that he was a real person. Me liking someone or something does not make it real or not.

M: You are as full of opinions about morality as you are about gods. But there is no God for you so there can be no morality.

I already explained this in the post you just quoted. Morality does not need to come from god inherently.

Where do you get the idea that prosperity is better than poverty? Think in a utilitarian way. Poverty causes the weak to be weeded out of the gene pool, but prosperity allows the week to breed. And ideals do not become inherent creating instincts by becoming commonplace. That is Lamarkian. Primate social structure set the stage for the evolution of greater and greater complexity increasing survivability, including the capacity to see oneself in others and understand and predict or attend to the other's condition.

My definition of prosperity is likely different from yours. You are correct that in the long run, suffering will be less if people who cannot keep up in society do not breed. That said, there is also utility to be gained in genetic diversity. A population of people that are different means it can think different, act different, resist things better ect. There is a balance of making the poor able to be more productive, and not propping up those will are not productive. Currently, we live in a society where not all people are poor because of their own choices, but, we are talking pure theory here.

There is a reason the US has lead in innovation for so long.

So what you are telling me even if you don't see it is that your morality is a product of instinct, not rationality at all. Reason is just the way your instincts get translated into ideas. You turn instinctual feelings into words to assure yourself of their reasonibility. You probably do that because you have no faith in the irrational instinctual origins oh your feelings (opinions).

Morality can be connected to instinct sure. Evolution supports the idea that instinct can be created given enough time through natural selection. If someone is born with a mutation that gives them a brain that is better able to empathize, then they could pass that on if they are able to breed. Now, if that trait makes the person more appealing, it will catch on and get into the gene pool faster. If that predisposition showed utility, then it could eventually become instinct as it propagates.

Now, empathy is important to society for the reason I explained before. So, this is how you can show that instinct can be rational. Thus, you can have morality through evolution, as a more "moral" society is likely to be more productive.

 

[Retro Rob]

If there is a god, then I hope its not an abrahamic god. Really, I have not heard a good version of god ever. When you get into the polytheistic views, it does not get much better.

This begs the question from me:

Why does a god have to be likable for you to begin to believe he/it exists?

It seems to me that most atheists don't really believe in the Christian God, because they don't like him.

Talk about emotional reasons for believing in God...there are plenty who reject God for emotional reasons...

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

This is like a new level of stupid for you.

Thanks for pointing that out...feel better now?

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Well it's more accurate, maybe to say, the God he doesn't believe in doesn't exist, which makes his atheism both logical, but also, in my opinion, rather trivial. I mean, Jesus, who could believe literally in gods so full of hate. They are obviously projections of the lowest common denominators of human emotional states.

My guess is that the first part of what I said is what he meant.

Yes, and thank you for clarifying my intent....which I thought was obvious but see that it was not.

 

[realibrad]

This begs the question from me:

Why does a god have to be likable for you to begin to believe he/it exists?

It seems to me that most atheists don't really believe in the Christian God, because they don't like him.

Talk about emotional reasons for believing in God...there are plenty who reject God for emotional reasons...

You are confused because you are jumping in very late here.

If you had read the post I just made, you would have seen this comment from me.

Are you saying god has to be nice? The Christian god can be or do anything. If the bible is historical fact, then that god would not be nice. The new test. god seems much nicer, but still not nice. What makes god inherently nice? If god were real, I would hope god is nice, but I see no reason to believe that the real god, if there is one, is nice. Can you explain further?

For me to believe in god, it would not need to be nice. Nice does not make a god more or less real.

 

[Retro Rob]

You are confused because you are jumping in very late here.

If you had read the post I just made, you would have seen this comment from me.



For me to believe in god, it would not need to be nice. Nice does not make a god more or less real.

My bad and you're right.

Thank you.

I think whether or not God is "nice" shouldn't really matter, but when engaging atheists on this topic, they only quote passages and say "how can you believe in a God that does X"?

My normal reaction would be "how does that bear on his existence anyway"?

So really, emotion drives THEM as well and their lack of belief.

How many times have you heard: " I read the Bible and stopped believing in God"?

I hear that a LOT.

 

[Moonbeam]

You are confused because you are jumping in very late here.

If you had read the post I just made, you would have seen this comment from me.



For me to believe in god, it would not need to be nice. Nice does not make a god more or less real.

Geez, for me God would have to be better than anything I can conceive. How a nice god wouldn't be a better conception of God than a vindictive jerk, makes sense to me.

 

[realibrad]

Geez, for me God would have to be better than anything I can conceive. How a nice god wouldn't be a better conception of God than a vindictive jerk, makes sense to me.

I can see why you would want that to be true, but why does it have to be true? Again, if god were real, I would hope that it would be nice, but I see no reason to believe it has to be.

 

[Moonbeam]

My bad and you're right.

Thank you.

I think whether or not God is "nice" shouldn't really matter, but when engaging atheists on this topic, they only quote passages and say "how can you believe in a God that does X"?

My normal reaction would be "how does that bear on his existence anyway"?

So really, emotion drives THEM as well and their lack of belief.

How many times have you heard: " I read the Bible and stopped believing in God"?

I hear that a LOT.

You are a person of faith. For you the capacity to believe in the irrational is a test that you pass. My faith went 'fuck this' when it came to believing in an asshole. If there is a god that gave me moral sense to be able to feel right from wrong, I sure as hell am not going to make any exceptions for him. You just take it on faith that god can be an asshole. I take it on faith that he can't be. I say that the people who wrote the Bible projected their asshole selves when they described god and they didn't have the fuckingist idea what they were talking about. In my opinion its folk with these silly literalist views that create so many god damned atheists.

 

[Retro Rob]

Geez, for me God would have to be better than anything I can conceive. How a nice god wouldn't be a better conception of God than a vindictive jerk, makes sense to me.

Well, I can understand why atheists want a warm and fuzzy God, one who never condemns, is accepting of everything, responds to requests as a genie would, basically, a god created in THEIR image.

 

[Moonbeam]

I can see why you would want that to be true, but why does it have to be true? Again, if god were real, I would hope that it would be nice, but I see no reason to believe it has to be.

Of course you don't see. That's the whole point. Where the fuck did your hope come from. Your whole world view is hopeless. For you God could be the Devil. You don't know anything because you have no proof. Numb is what I would call you.