- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Satanic Temple puts up display at Michigan Capital
Posted on 12/23/14 at 3:45 pm to catholictigerfan
Posted on 12/23/14 at 3:45 pm to catholictigerfan
I honestly find the argument from morality to be the most compelling.
0
Posted on 12/23/14 at 3:45 pm to Strophie
quote:So what is your premise regarding infinite matter?
I wasn't saying that I believe that matter or the universe being infinite was "illogical and impossible,"
Posted on 12/23/14 at 3:54 pm to Strophie
quote:No need to jump the shark Strophie.
But I get the feeling that that won't change your interpretation of my post.
You're not insisting "no evidence" or "all evidence" exists one way or another as far as I can tell. I certainly am not.
The subject extends beyond reaches of current science, and so I find it fascinating. As an aside, as someone not particularly attached to a particular Religion, I also find religious philosophy interesting across a broad spectrum.
Posted on 12/23/14 at 3:54 pm to ctiger69
quote:
ctiger69
quote:
As a Christian I could probably list a 1000 pieces of evidence to support my faith in there is a god. You would then try to figure out why each one of them is wrong in your mind and you would try to prove it.
An Atheist can not list any pieces of evidence to support that there is no God. It is a 100% blind faith.
Willfull ignorance Exhibit A.
Posted on 12/23/14 at 3:56 pm to ctiger69
quote:
After all, believing in something that you have zero evidence to support requires a ton of faith.
Pretty much the definition of any religion.
Posted on 12/23/14 at 3:58 pm to genuineLSUtiger
quote:or atheism.
Pretty much the definition of any religion.
We just do not know.
Posted on 12/23/14 at 3:59 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
or atheism.
We just do not know.
what do you mean by know?
Posted on 12/23/14 at 4:07 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
No need to jump the shark Strophie.
You're not insisting "no evidence" or "all evidence" exists one way or another as far as I can tell. I certainly am not.
Apologies Tiger, that wasn't intended to be snarky. As I said, I feel like we've been arguing semantics, so it was more an indictment on my ability to cogently get across what I'm attempting to convey. Sorry if that was taken differently.
As to my take on the origin of matter, I don't have an answer. I honestly have no clue. I probably prescribe to the multiverse theory, but that would still be reliant on a "beginning" in the sense you're asking for, and I can't provide that.
As I said, I don't claim to have any answer to the origins of the universe. All was was stating was that, to my mind, adding God (in the Abrahamic tradition) to the mix only muddied the waters further.
If we get to the generic idea of "God" as the "origin of the universe," sure, we could probably agree. But that's an entirely nebulous version of *something*, and not the specific God of the Christian (or Islamic, or Jewish) faith.
This post was edited on 12/23/14 at 4:11 pm
Posted on 12/23/14 at 4:10 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
or atheism.
Posted on 12/23/14 at 4:15 pm to Strophie
quote:
And please realize that my personal mindset is not for lack of wanting to believe. When I felt my faith wavering, I read every ounce of Christian apologetics I could find. But my research required me to view the other side, too, and the evidence therein was much more pervasive to me, and made the arguments in defense of the truth of Christianity seem simple minded by comparison.
This pretty much sums up my experience. It wasn't until I started reading and looking at sources of information outside of the Christian circle jerk that I stumbled upon the true history of the Christian church and religion. That was the end of religious faith for me. I believe in a spiritual essence that flows through all of nature. It is the underpinning and source of all religious impulse throughout human history. But an individual's religious belief is mainly a result of social and geographical factors. And the fact that you are conditioned as a young child to believe basically what your parents believe. Whether Hindu, Buddhist, Muslim or Christian. Or Mormon or Scientologist. There is no disputing these things.
Posted on 12/23/14 at 4:24 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
NC_Tigah
The fact you get mad at all this is what makes it great. Hope they continue it.
Posted on 12/23/14 at 4:24 pm to genuineLSUtiger
quote:
true history of the Christian church
Quite an embarrassing tale.
Posted on 12/23/14 at 4:29 pm to Strophie
quote:It's very possible, but it's important to define terms.
I think at this point we're just arguing semantics.
quote:I would say "possible" rather than "plausible", since plausibility speaks to its existence being more likely rather than merely possible. Perhaps it is too minor a point to even discuss, but I don't discount the possibility of its existence, though I don't believe it really does exists.
We're using the terms "believe" with different underlying meanings. I agree with you in that I don't "believe" in the Flying Spaghetti Monster. But by that, I don't mean "I have faith that the Flying Spaghetti Monster doesn't exist," because that statement presupposes that his existence is plausible,
quote:Like I said previously, faith is trust or confidence in something or someone in its most basic form. While I lack faith in the existence of the FSM, I have faith that it doesn't exist. Two sides of the same coin. I deny the affirmative that the FSM exists while I affirm the negative that the FSM doesn't exist.
but I'm taking it on Faith that he's fake. Instead, I'd argue that when you say: "I believe (have faith) that the flying spaghetti monster does not exist"
you are coming from the premise that there's no way something so illogical would have a basis in reality, and further, there's no evidence to the contrary. That's less "faith" than it is lack of faith, by definition.
Anyways, I feel like we're at a headway here. I'll reiterate that the main point I was defending from way further up thread was that atheism is, by definition, a LACK of belief, not a belief system in and of itself.
Those who say "I don't believe that God exists" have to affirm that they believe that God does not exist. While they lack faith in God's presence, they have faith in His absence.
Posted on 12/23/14 at 4:44 pm to catholictigerfan
quote:It's nonverifiable, at least currently.
what do you mean by know?
Posted on 12/23/14 at 4:51 pm to ShyftingTiger91
quote:
The fact you get mad
quote:
ShyftingTiger91
Mad as in "lunatics on the grass" or mad as in angry. We're all a bit crazy at times, but if you're thinking 'angry' . . . you've not seen me angry. Certainly not in this thread.
Posted on 12/23/14 at 4:53 pm to genuineLSUtiger
quote:Link to the reading materials that made you feel this way?
I stumbled upon the true history of the Christian church and religion. That was the end of religious faith for me.
Posted on 12/23/14 at 4:53 pm to ShyftingTiger91
quote:Oh, I'd enjoy discussing that silliness, if you'd care to return.
true history of the Christian church
Quite an embarrassing tale.
Posted on 12/23/14 at 4:56 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
It's nonverifiable, at least currently.
it depends by what you mean by verifiable.
Scientifically well no. There are many things we believe are true or exist that can't be proven by science. Is there such thing as Love? I would say yes but you can't prove that by science. Sure there is a chemical reaction in the brain when you see someone you are attracted too, but I do believe that there is something deeper than just chemical reactions in the brain.
Is there such thing as objective beauty? Again another question that can't be answered by science.
I think you can know God but you can't know God with absolute certainty. But we are getting into a completely different realm of philosophy, aka epistemology.
I feel like we simplify this stuff way to much. Into something like is there evidence of God, can know God, etc. Questions like this are very simplisitic and don't really get at God.
You come to a knowledge of God's existence by examining the origins of the universe and matter in itself.
You can't know the being of God, meaning you can't know God like you know another human being an animal or a piece of information. But you can know that God must exist, meaning you in a sense know of God's existence, and also in a sense know God. But knowledge is not simple it is multilayered. I know this computer I'm typing on, but knowing another human person is different, and knowing God (if that is possible) is at a way different level.
Knowledge in terms of religion is another matter all together.
I fear knowledge has only become about science, a reductionism and not about what knowledge is.
This post was edited on 12/23/14 at 5:02 pm
Posted on 12/23/14 at 4:57 pm to Strophie
quote:Indeed we could.
I probably prescribe to the multiverse theory, but that would still be reliant on a "beginning" in the sense you're asking for, and I can't provide that.
As I said, I don't claim to have any answer to the origins of the universe. All was was stating was that, to my mind, adding God (in the Abrahamic tradition) to the mix only muddied the waters further.
If we get to the generic idea of "God" as the "origin of the universe," sure, we could probably agree.
Posted on 12/23/14 at 5:01 pm to Strophie
quote:
If we get to the generic idea of "God" as the "origin of the universe," sure, we could probably agree. But that's an entirely nebulous version of *something*, and not the specific God of the Christian (or Islamic, or Jewish) faith.
This is what we are trying to do.
A simple, ubiquitous, and necessary being exists. this is what we are trying to prove.
Not the God who became flesh and was born of a virgin exists. That is a matter of faith (and I mean faith in terms of the Catholic Church talks about it)
Page 30 of 43
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News