I am an atheist

[_A]

Forgive me if I’m wrong, but you seem to believe that you don’t believe anything… Kinda reminds me of that Green Day song where they sing “I have no belief, but I believe I’m a walking contradiction”…

I accept some things as you might say ‘believe’ them (i.e. - the building codes that make the buildings safe). If I saw some evidence that suggested that the building codes were not effective, I would quickly re-evaluate that acceptance.
The ‘belief’ described by the faithful is not something shaken by a bit of evidence. I don’t have that kind.

 

[i_have_no_names]

I accept some things as you might say ‘believe’ them (i.e. - the building codes that make the buildings safe). If I saw some evidence that suggested that the building codes were not effective, I would quickly re-evaluate that acceptance.
The ‘belief’ described by the faithful is not something shaken by a bit of evidence. I don’t have that kind.

But you didn’t quite answer me… Or maybe I worded it wrong. Here, how’s this: Do you believe that you don’t believe that you believe?

 

[_A]

But you didn’t quite answer me… Or maybe I worded it wrong. Here, how’s this: Do you believe that you don’t believe that you believe?

Anything you think of in me as a ‘belief’, I aim to leave open to new evidence.
If that doesn’t answer your question, could you rephrase, please?

 

[i_have_no_names]

Anything you think of in me as a ‘belief’, I aim to leave open to new evidence.
If that doesn’t answer your question, could you rephrase, please?

So if I gave you evidence that you believe, you’d believe? …This is getting ridiculous. I’m out.

 

[phooney]

@Socrates4Jesus

Sorry for the delay in my response, I read your post and then had to go away for a while, and forgot you had responded! My bad.

“There is a basic principle of scriptural interpretation (which also applies to interpreting any ancient text) that context dictates the meaning.”

But if there HAD been a tidal wave, and I had said that the scripture indicated that the conquerer was supposed to throw the city into the sea, it would have been possible to use the piece I originally quoted to claim the prophecy was still fulfilled on the grounds of contextual meaning.

I think perhaps for this reason alone we may have to agree that this example is not specific enough. However, if you want to still respond to the other problems I had with it, then by all means I would love to hear your thoughts, you are a very thoughtful and considerate person as far as I can gather.

As my thread seems to have died a death now,did you have a chance to look into the evidence I mentioned regarding the pentateuch authorship?

 

[_A]

So if I gave you evidence that you believe, you’d believe? …This is getting ridiculous. I’m out.

I guess I don’t understand, but have a nice day. Thank you for contributing.

 

[Hellisreal]

We have absolutely no evidence to prove love, does that mean love does not exist?

I know, this is a very dumb question, because some would say we will never truly know love until we are in heaven

bear with me I am not too good at asking the right questions.

 

[_A]

@Socrates4Jesus

Sorry for the delay in my response, I read your post and then had to go away for a while, and forgot you had responded! My bad.

“There is a basic principle of scriptural interpretation (which also applies to interpreting any ancient text) that context dictates the meaning.”

But if there HAD been a tidal wave, and I had said that the scripture indicated that the conquerer was supposed to throw the city into the sea, it would have been possible to use the piece I originally quoted to claim the prophecy was still fulfilled on the grounds of contextual meaning.

I think perhaps for this reason alone we may have to agree that this example is not specific enough. However, if you want to still respond to the other problems I had with it, then by all means I would love to hear your thoughts, you are a very thoughtful and considerate person as far as I can gather.

As my thread seems to have died a death now,did you have a chance to look into the evidence I mentioned regarding the pentateuch authorship?

I had a bit of a look, but I must admit that I am not a bible scholar…never really got too deep into it. I do know that it was maintained, edited and rewritten for hundreds of years under the careful guidance of perfectly fallible men.

 

[stringbeanduck]

One thing about you atheists is that yall can’t understand faith. Open your mind. So you can’t see God when you want that does not mean He is not real. You can’t see wind but its real.

 

[Hellisreal]

So if I gave you evidence that you believe, you’d believe? …This is getting ridiculous. I’m out.

We can’t ignore the fact that everything we believe is up for scrutiny, and should be.

Any person asking/seeking why their disbelief is not valid- deserves a hearing.

It is rational not ridiculous. We have faith and reason, the better question would be to A is:

Is it unreasonable to have faith?

Not run away and name call.

 

[_A]

We have absolutely no evidence to prove love, does that mean love does not exist?

I know, this is a very dumb question, because some would say we will never truly know love until we are in heaven

bear with me I am not too good at asking the right questions.

That means that love has no weight as evidence yet. Perhaps it needs a more complete, clear description before whatever it is can be said to exist.

 

[_A]

One thing about you atheists is that yall can’t understand faith. Open your mind. So you can’t see God when you want that does not mean He is not real. You can’t see wind but its real.

Wind can be detected, measured and confirmed by independent observers.
Your god cannot be discerned from an imaginary god by any instrument of science.

 

[Hellisreal]

One thing about you atheists is that yall can’t understand faith. Open your mind. So you can’t see God when you want that does not mean He is not real. You can’t see wind but its real.

Lets change some of the words above around a bit, and see how this works for you?

“One thing about you catholics is that yall can’t understand people that are not like you. Open your mind. So you cant see life without a god, that does not mean there is one. You cant see life without a god, but I do. My life is very real”

Not a deal closer if you ask me.

 

[_A]

Is it unreasonable to have faith?

Not run away and name call.

Thank you, Hellisreal, I will try to answer. For me, with the knowledge I have, it would be unreasonable to have faith.

 

[Hellisreal]

Thank you, Hellisreal, I will try to answer. For me, with the knowledge I have, it would be unreasonable to have faith.

Okay, and that’s fair.
I can’t aruge with your dogma to reject what we can not test. But, I am curious if you feel that it is harmful/dangerous (or worse) to believe (assuming here we are speaking of the catholic christian faith now) or is it benevolent to believe?

Or, lastly- could it be a good thing?

This in no means would be a proof that it is correct, or proof God exists- its just a question to establish what is unreasonable or what could make it such -for me to understand better what you said (Grasping and trying to see it from your point of view)

 

[stringbeanduck]

Well it seem wind and God have somthing in common. They can’t be seen. Wind can be detected and measured by instruments. The presence of God can be detected though mircles in the tabernacle, and sacrments. However the difference is wind is detected by a scientific intrument. God is detected by your heart. You see there has to be some difference betweeen theology and science.

Lets change some of the words above around a bit, and see how this works for you?

“One thing about you catholics is that yall can’t understand people that are not like you. Open your mind. So you cant see life without a god, that does not mean there is one. You cant see life without a god, but I do. My life is very real”

Not a deal closer if you ask me.

Seems like your defending him. He came to a catholic forum. What do you expect me to say? Well just so you know I have thought about life where there is no God. And you no what, its sad. Have you thought about waking up and there being no God. I find it a empty cold world.

A, what is the chance that life happened by chance?

 

[Hellisreal]

I was defending him, and I think God is okay with that.

 

[_A]

Okay, and that’s fair.
I can’t aruge with your dogma to reject what we can not test. But, I am curious if you feel that it is harmful/dangerous (or worse) to believe (assuming here we are speaking of the catholic christian faith now) or is it benevolent to believe?

It certainly can be harmful. Also, it looks like (from within) that catholics are doing it right(‘it’ being worship), and everyone else is doing it wrong (and probably going to hell for it). This is kind of like racism, but not exactly. seeing all the unsaved as destined for hell is surely not a complimentary way to look at that many people.

Or, lastly- could it be a good thing?

Honestly, I can’t think of a single good thing that can be done by someone who believes that cannot be done by someone who does not believe, so I cant say that belief is good.

-for me to understand better what you said (Grasping and trying to see it from your point of view)

Thank you for making the effort to understand. I hope my answers are of help in that direction.

 

[_A]

God is detected by your heart. You see there has to be some difference betweeen theology and science.

I have consulted all my faculties and did not detect any gods. Does that mean, in keeping with your statement, that gods do not exist?

Well just so you know I have thought about life where there is no God. And you no what, its sad. Have you thought about waking up and there being no God. I find it a empty cold world.

I think you are getting it, now. In this sad, empty and cold world, we are finding - over and over - people doing kindness, creating art, and dedicating their lives to the betterment of the human race - knowing that there is no reward at the end. I think it is inspiring, like this poem (I am reposting here because some folks on dial up might not want to go look for it)
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

A, what is the chance that life happened by chance?

I am not informed enough to reasonably figure out the odds, but it has happened, so it’s unlikelihood is a moot point.

 

[Hellisreal]

It certainly can be harmful. Also, it looks like (from within) that catholics are doing it right(‘it’ being worship), and everyone else is doing it wrong (and probably going to hell for it). This is kind of like racism, but not exactly. seeing all the unsaved as destined for hell is surely not a complimentary way to look at that many people.

But, I need to know what you mean by unsaved- and I think you misunderstand the catholic position of who is going to hell…but- I will not assume that, I am just wondering if you have just been feeling this way or if you have any evidence to support this idea?

Honestly, I can’t think of a single good thing that can be done by someone who believes that cannot be done by someone who does not believe, so I cant say that belief is good.

So, its neutral or benevolent then? It can not be worse or better if the same result (work) can be done by both right?

Thank you for making the effort to understand. I hope my answers are of help in that direction.

I can’t tell you how much effort I have made, yet failed at in this.