and those like you are MUCH less rational...than they would ever believe they are
Analysis of Christopher Hitchen's argument against God
- Thread starter OPTIONAL777
- Start date
and those like you are MUCH less rational...than they would ever believe they are
Do you believe in the Devil?
"it is both. reason is the product of man's mind applied to reality."
Try and make a proof of the above statement. Understand, that if you rely on "reality" as proof of "reality" you are not being logical...as ultimate reality could logically be far from your experience of "reality."
It is inescapable...it is the elephant in the room...that the use of physical senses and intellect is just a guess made by the intellect...and does not produce anything but a feeling of certainty, not a conclusion of certainty based on objective methodology.
Science is grounded in objective methodology...but the earth of science itself, the human mind, senses, and sense of reason are untested and untestable.
It was once said that free will was like a goat on a rope, meaning that within a boundary there was freedom, but also not true free will due to the constraints of the rope.
I'll repeat: I'm fine with the conclusions and faith of atheists, it doesn't conflict with my faith in any way...I just find it absurd that people who are proclaiming to be without faith, are doing so standing on a soapbox of faith of their own making.
Try and make a proof of the above statement. Understand, that if you rely on "reality" as proof of "reality" you are not being logical...as ultimate reality could logically be far from your experience of "reality."
It is inescapable...it is the elephant in the room...that the use of physical senses and intellect is just a guess made by the intellect...and does not produce anything but a feeling of certainty, not a conclusion of certainty based on objective methodology.
Science is grounded in objective methodology...but the earth of science itself, the human mind, senses, and sense of reason are untested and untestable.
It was once said that free will was like a goat on a rope, meaning that within a boundary there was freedom, but also not true free will due to the constraints of the rope.
I'll repeat: I'm fine with the conclusions and faith of atheists, it doesn't conflict with my faith in any way...I just find it absurd that people who are proclaiming to be without faith, are doing so standing on a soapbox of faith of their own making.
Quote from killthesunshine:
it is both. reason is the product of man's mind applied to reality.
that's my honest answer, so continue your argument..
Define your Devil..
it seems to me your position is that the mind and senses are fallible and imperfect, so how do you (I) know there is no god.
I apply this to you, how does your admittedly imperfect mind know there is??
:eek:my point is simply how do you come to DISbelieve anything? you don't believe everything do you? You don't have FAITH in ALL do you? So how do you decide when to NOT BELIEVE?
thank you bigarrow. i'm doing pretty good right, i think i got him running like his head is on fire and his ass is catching
I believe in God, I don't think I have claimed to know God.
People have different belief systems. Atheists have their own belief system, believing that reason is the way in which to determine the existence of God is a belief system. Bottom line though, the practice or continuity of holding a belief in God or non God is a practice of faith.
I do not see my faith as superior or inferior to others, it is just my own personal choice of faith...just as you have chosen your own faith.
People have different belief systems. Atheists have their own belief system, believing that reason is the way in which to determine the existence of God is a belief system. Bottom line though, the practice or continuity of holding a belief in God or non God is a practice of faith.
I do not see my faith as superior or inferior to others, it is just my own personal choice of faith...just as you have chosen your own faith.
Quote from killthesunshine:
it seems to me your position is that the mind and senses are fallible and imperfect, so how do you (I) know there is no god.
I apply this to you, how does your admittedly imperfect mind know there is??
I can disbelieve in things according to the rules of a system which can establish boundaries of existence or non existence. The physical sciences has rules that apply to the nature of the physical world, and according to that system, you follow the rules of that system.
God, by my definition is beyond the physical existence, and also within every part of the physical existence...so to disbelieve in God would require stating how God could not exist.
God is existence itself, so God could not cease to exist. God has no opposite value, God is all values, and no particular value at any particular time and space.
It is going to sound wrong to your "logical" mind, simply because the way in which we know the physical world is by comparing and contrasting, defining boundaries, seeing differences, moving within the boundaries of time and space...and God is not subject to any of those physical rules and limitations. Our knowledge is partial knowledge, and God is not partial, but complete. So how could partial knowledge achieve knowledge of God?
God, by my definition is beyond the physical existence, and also within every part of the physical existence...so to disbelieve in God would require stating how God could not exist.
God is existence itself, so God could not cease to exist. God has no opposite value, God is all values, and no particular value at any particular time and space.
It is going to sound wrong to your "logical" mind, simply because the way in which we know the physical world is by comparing and contrasting, defining boundaries, seeing differences, moving within the boundaries of time and space...and God is not subject to any of those physical rules and limitations. Our knowledge is partial knowledge, and God is not partial, but complete. So how could partial knowledge achieve knowledge of God?