I am an atheist

[_A]

What we inherited from Adam is the flesh. By one man, flesh entered into the world, and all flesh has a death sentence, baby or not.

This fits with an impersonal, cold and heartless universe. The eternal life story is the falsehood. I have tried to see evidence of this, but it does not exist.

Now, let mankind tell you God is evil, and unless you come to know God, you will also believe it as told.

Peace>>>AJ

I never believed that Yahweh is evil. I believe the character described as Yahweh in the bible is evil and hateful by my standards (not to mention the standards of the law where I live). I don’t think the bible is anything more than a book, though, so to say that the character in that book is evil, I would have to know that the character was a real entity, and that the book was accurately and honestly written.
As far as I know, the churches wrote, assembled and edited the bible for the last few hundred years. They have promoted their own cause here (look at how rich the vatican is, for example) and I suspect them of self-interest.

 

[look3467]

This fits with an impersonal, cold and heartless universe. The eternal life story is the falsehood. I have tried to see evidence of this, but it does not exist.>>>A

Yes, I agree. But what makes the difference is that there is a personal relationship one can have through via our own spirits as touching a greater spiritual entity, one that is part of our element.

We may not acknowledge it as such, but its there, in every living soul.

It is the conciseness of good and evil, regardless of whether we believe or not.

If you as an unbeliever, know when an evil is done you, then your conscience deciphered it for you.
This is written in the bible as a truth for the heathen: Rom 2:14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
Having not the law, yet are a law unto them selves is saying that every soul has a conscience to know the difference between good and evil.
That conscience is a spirit that can only be given by God.

Read: Rom 2:15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another

In other words, an unbeliever can show the works of the law, as though he had the law.

Peace>>>AJ

 

[look3467]

This fits with an impersonal, cold and heartless universe. The eternal life story is the falsehood. I have tried to see evidence of this, but it does not exist.

I never believed that Yahweh is evil. I believe the character described as Yahweh in the bible is evil and hateful by my standards (not to mention the standards of the law where I live). I don’t think the bible is anything more than a book, though, so to say that the character in that book is evil, I would have to know that the character was a real entity, and that the book was accurately and honestly written.
As far as I know, the churches wrote, assembled and edited the bible for the last few hundred years. They have promoted their own cause here (look at how rich the Vatican is, for example) and I suspect them of self-interest.

One thing about the bible, is that any interpretation can be extracted from it to suit the needs of any one individual.

But there is a general theme underling the whole of the bible, and any interpretation must align with that theme in order to be on the right path.

God is love, and anything other than that is mankind’s assumptions.

Peace>>>AJ

 

[justinthemartyr]

It takes faith to believe. I do not believe. The burden of proof is on the person making the claim. You claim there is a god. I don’t yet have reason to believe you. This is not a position of faith.You say that I am arrogant for saying that I do not have sufficient reason to believe in Yahweh, yet you think you know many details about him which you quite clearly could not know, and certainly can not provide evidence for. Who is being arrogant?

 

[justinthemartyr]

A]

you do believe, in the non existence of God.

therefore it takes more faith to believe in that, than in the existence of God. The world and her population have proven this in the fact that the vast majority of the world believes in and always has believed in God. Even those without any contact to the civilized areas of the world which have never been introduced to any type of belief or religion believe in God.

It is inherent and it is usually the self justifying behaviour of the individual that makes them criticize relion and belief in God. The easiest way to keep something at arms length is to criticize it.

The only scoffers at prayer are the ones who have not tried it enough.

When I finally came to know God He removed the desire for homosexuality, drinking alcohol and taking drugs and stealing from me, all of which I had from the youngest days of my existence.

Thank God.

 

[_A]

spirits…spiritual entity…our element…soul…evil…heathen…God

I went through your post looking for stuff that is not clear or understandable. Those are the words. If you can define each of these, then present evidence that they exist (especially the ‘soul’) then we can both enjoy their use for our discussion. If you cannot provide definitions of these words, and offer proof that they are not simply imaginings, please use more clear language.

Again, what is the difference between your Yahweh and a made-up imaginary god? I am not being flip, I would like to know what differences are available to someone like me, who does not choose to believe.

 

[_A]

A]

you do believe, in the non existence of God.

Nope. I don’t believe. I have looked at the evidence so far (nearly 40 years) and have seen nothing that would make me want to believe.

therefore it takes more faith to believe in that, than in the existence of God. The world and her population have proven this in the fact that the vast majority of the world believes in and always has believed in God. Even those without any contact to the civilized areas of the world which have never been introduced to any type of belief or religion believe in God.

I think this logical fallacy is called argument ad populum. I call it ‘the majority are often wrong’.

When I finally came to know God He removed the desire for homosexuality, drinking alcohol and taking drugs and stealing from me, all of which I had from the youngest days of my existence.

Thank God.

Why would you wish to supress the desire to drink the same drink that is celebrated at every mass (wine)? How did he remove it? Was there a procedure that can be measured, or is this more ‘personal experience’ testimony? If it is the personal experience, how do you tell the difference between a visit by your god, and a really convincing hallucination?

 

[justinthemartyr]

so you do believe in God then, thank you.

You say that you do not believe in God, yet you say that you do not believe in the non existence of God.

this is a total contradiction.

 

[justinthemartyr]

Nope. I don’t believe. I have looked at the evidence so far (nearly 40 years) and have seen nothing that would make me want to believe.
I think this logical fallacy is called argument ad populum. I call it ‘the majority are often wrong’.Why would you wish to supress the desire to drink the same drink that is celebrated at every mass (wine)? How did he remove it? Was there a procedure that can be measured, or is this more ‘personal experience’ testimony? If it is the personal experience, how do you tell the difference between a visit by your god, and a really convincing hallucination?

A hallucination is something not real, and therefore has no direct physical affect on a person.

I asked God for forgiveness for my sins and asked Him to be my Lord and saviour and BAM! all those desires were removed from me and everything that drove me previous to this was reversed.

 

[_A]

so you do believe in God then, thank you.

You say that you do not believe in God, yet you say that you do not believe in the non existence of God.

this is a total contradiction.

The problem is that you are hoping that I will ‘believe’. I do not.
I don’t believe in the theory of evolution, either (though leading scientist all agree that it is an observed fact as well as a theory). If I need to make a prediction, I use the best available theory, still without believing it.
Belief gets in the way of learning new things. That is why I am so opposed to it. Why would a god give us the ability to think critically and reason, then favour those who believe and punish those who are skeptical? I think the real answer is much simpler - there are no gods and never were.

 

[notself]

A hallucination is something not real, and therefore has no direct physical affect on a person.

I asked God for forgiveness for my sins and asked Him to be my Lord and saviour and BAM! all those desires were removed from me and everything that drove me previous to this was reversed.

You just described a mental change. Desire is mental. Being “driven” to do something is mental. You changed your mind through prayer. Your mind then reduced your craving which can be mental or physical (as in addiction).

Actually there isn’t much that is physical since the brain can control even supposedly automatic functions. The placebo effect comes to mind.

 

[_A]

A hallucination is something not real, and therefore has no direct physical affect on a person.

I asked God for forgiveness for my sins and asked Him to be my Lord and saviour and BAM! all those desires were removed from me and everything that drove me previous to this was reversed.

You still have nothing to differentiate your experience from an hallucination. How do you know that you didn’t BAM! Imagine it all?
Where is your evidence? Is there any fact at all that suggests that the ruler of the universe takes an interest in your life? Is there any fact at all that suggests this has more to it than an hallucination?
Remember, if you are victim of a hallucination, you would believe what you saw - that is what an hallucination is. So if you were hallucinating, how would you know?
Most important to me, how do I tell the difference between your ‘experiences’ with your god and a made up hallucination?

 

[_A]

A hallucination is something not real, and therefore has no direct physical affect on a person.

I should address this. You and I (and the vast majority of humans) hallucinate nearly every night. (dreams and nightmares). As to the physical effects of such hallucinations, they are plenty. I will start with mentioning sleepwalking, and the potential physical effects of that, if you need more examples of how your above statement is incorrect, just ask.

 

[notself]

You still have nothing to differentiate your experience from an hallucination. How do you know that you didn’t BAM! Imagine it all?
Where is your evidence? Is there any fact at all that suggests that the ruler of the universe takes an interest in your life? Is there any fact at all that suggests this has more to it than an hallucination?
Remember, if you are victim of a hallucination, you would believe what you saw - that is what an hallucination is. So if you were hallucinating, how would you know?
Most important to me, how do I tell the difference between your ‘experiences’ with your god and a made up hallucination?

Not all mind states are hallucinations. For example, through prayer, the one praying re-conditions the mental tendency toward sex, drugs and rock and roll. There does not have to be a God for prayer to condition the brain. Prayer can work as a repetitive instruction in the form of a petition while in a state of concentration or mental focus. One does not have to hallucinate to have prayer be effective. One can misinterpret the effectiveness of prayer to be from outside the mind.

 

[_A]

Not all mind states are hallucinations. For example, through prayer, the one praying re-conditions the mental tendency toward sex, drugs and rock and roll. There does not have to be a God for prayer to condition the brain. Prayer can work as a repetitive instruction in the form of a petition while in a state of concentration or mental focus. One does not have to hallucinate to have prayer be effective. One can misinterpret the effectiveness of prayer to be from outside the mind.

According to this description, there is little to prayer other than what one gets from meditation. I am OK with that, but you may meet some opposition to that idea here.
I think that if you pray enough to Hewhay, you will believe in him, and further, you will believe he has a personal interest in you. Nevermind the fact that that particular being doesn’t exist. This touches on one of the reasons why I won’t go deeply into prayer again just to prove that there is a god. I always called it self-hypnosis, but you seem to have more information on it. Can you elaborate?

 

[notself]

According to this description, there is little to prayer other than what one gets from meditation. I am OK with that, but you may meet some opposition to that idea here.
I think that if you pray enough to Hewhay, you will believe in him, and further, you will believe he has a personal interest in you. Nevermind the fact that that particular being doesn’t exist. This touches on one of the reasons why I won’t go deeply into prayer again just to prove that there is a god. I always called it self-hypnosis, but you seem to have more information on it. Can you elaborate?

It could be a form of autohypnosis if you agree with the following definition of hypnosis. I would remove the word artificially in the case of autohypnosis and substitute self.

An artificially induced altered state of consciousness, characterized by heightened suggestibility and receptivity to direction.

Meditation on the breath or body can cause an altered state of consciousness called jhana, but in this state one continues observe the experience. As pleasant as it is, people experiencing jhana are warned not to get caught up in it.

The purpose of prayer is to get caught up. There is a type of prayer/meditation called Metta Bhavana which is the concentration aimed towards developing feelings of loving kindness toward all beings. Since one is specifically attempting to autosuggest good will, it could be construed as self hypnosis with the goal being to carry loving kindness into every day action. You start with yourself. I begin by saying:

May I be well and happy
May I be safe and free from harm
May I be free from anger and ill will.

When I feel a sense of love and well being towards myself, then I substitute “I” with names of family, friends, acquaintances, enemies and finally all beings. The very purpose of this meditation is to reprogram the brain to develop kindness and compassion.

I could just as easily say,

May I be sober and happy
May I be safe and free from drunkenness
May I be free from the craving for alcohol.

Over time, I could weaken my tendency to crave alcohol and intoxication. This would be especially effective if I repeated this “prayer” throughout the day during times of stress and craving.

Mind control can be a good thing.

 

[_A]

It could be a form of autohypnosis if you agree with the following definition of hypnosis. I would remove the word artificially in the case of autohypnosis and substitute self.

Thank you for your response. Food for thought.

 

[phooney]

@Socrates4Jesus

“Yes, but Ezekiel also indicated that many kings (not just Nebuchadnezzar) would bring about the demise of the mainland city of Tyre.”

Yes indeed, but this relatively low level of detail is far, far below what one would expect of an all-knowing entity.

“I think it is important to consider the evidence with an open mind. If you can at least accept the possibility that an omniscient God exists, then you can imagine that he or she or it would be aware of your objection that this was a self-fulfilling prophecy. Indeed, this God would in fact know, hundreds of years before a word left your mouth, what your objections would be.”

I certainly admit the possibility, but from our previous discussion, I’m sure you can agree, it is more rational for me to lack that belief until I have evidence. Yes, if true I can see that an omniscient deity would know about my objections before I did. Not only hundreds of years… but for all time before I made them.

“This God would understand that if the prophet had mentioned Alexander the Great by name, you might now be calling foul, claiming that the evidence this was self-fulfilling was without question!”

I see where you’re coming from here! Yes, I agree, by naming him in advance, it would be far more likely that Alexander the Great would hear about the prophecy and go out of his way to fulfill it. However, it would still be better than “Nebuchadnezzar or many nations at any point in time from now until infinity could fulfill this prophecy” At least this way, he would need to predict that the specific person would be in power as a military leader from a specific time, from a specific place and would use specific tactics. I would reject any such example that actually changed his name to “Alexander the Great” though!

“If i were to point out how the Jewish prophet Daniel provided the name of king Darius long before the man was king, would this be sufficient to convince you that an omniscient being might have had something to do with the predictions in the Bible?”

I’ve just read Daniel, and I don’t see him mentioning Darius before the previous king was slain and Darius came into power, with Daniel serving him. Sorry if I have missed the reference you were referring to, again it is getting very late. If only I was unemployed, I could respond to you in the daytime!

“tornadoes etc”

Well, in regards to Tyre, if the site of the city has been found, and the wreckage bridge remains have been found, the history of the history has been found or never lost, I would say the city has been found to the maximum extent it could possibly been found. If, by your reasoning, this is not good enough to be considered ‘found’ then I don’t know what other conditions you would place on it FOR it to be found.

 

[phooney]

@AliciaCL

Thanks for the suggestion, I hope to listen to this at some stage this weekend.

@justinthemartyr

The burden of proof isn’t on those that haven’t made an assertion. This thread is really long, so I can understand if you haven’t read all of it. You won’t get anywhere with your argument from popularity, most people used to believe the world was flat and they were wrong. The rational thing to do is follow wherever the evidence leads. As far as all the different religions are concerned, there is hardly a consensus amongst the faithful, so this is a somewhat oversimplification of relative populations anyway.

I’m reasonably sure A doesn’t believe there is no god, though again I don’t presume to speak for him. Myself, I also don’t believe there is no god, I merely lack the belief that there IS one, for the time being anyway. Only evidence will sway me otherwise. I have seen A slip a couple of times and say there is no god though. This is an easy thing to accidentally say, I mean, if we were arguing about the existence of the tooth fairy I could see people slipping up and saying “there is no tooth fairy”. So your last paragraph is a bit of a strawman argument and finishes up with a bald assertion.

Welcome to the discussion though!

 

[Pax]

I already did prove that I am superior to Yahweh. I challenged him to a thumb war, and he lost by default (he didn’t compete).
…
…

Over to you, sir.

This is absurd and I demonstrated why it is absurd in an earlier post. You did not repsond to what I said concerning this thumb war silliness.