6 of 28
6
will freethinkers accept god if they find evidence?
Posted: 21 March 2013 08:03 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 76 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1741
Joined  2007-10-22

Added that to my favorites.  shock

 Signature 

Gary the Human

All the Gods and all religions are created by humans, to meet human needs and accomplish human ends.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 26 March 2013 06:15 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 77 ]
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  32
Joined  2013-03-18

Humans create many different things but religion seems to be some kind of common thread that runs through all of humanity.  This seems to b e a special, separate thread that is different than any others that may exist, making the creation of religion quite different from the creation of a spear.  The spear is an answer to a need but religion is not.  What is the common connection among humans?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 March 2013 05:46 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 78 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  4
Joined  2012-10-01

As I previously stated, the common “thread” among humans is that all who exist will die.  The need a “god” satisfies is the irrational need to believe we will live forever.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 March 2013 06:02 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 79 ]
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  32
Joined  2013-03-18

No, death is in the same category as birth, breathing, eating, sex, it is a common biological function.  The category of common ‘belief’ is psychological, and belief of a deity seems to be a common thread among all of humanity, not learned or taught, but it can be molded by the political charlatsans.  I highly suspect that ‘god’ is real but nothing more than a mental construct, occupying a portion of the brains of living things that have brains.  That would easily explain lots of ‘spiritual’ bullshit and paranormal claims, and other things like mind reading, precognition, etc.  Assuming that ‘god’ is a computer function is all brains that can communicate with all others in the manner of a cellphone.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 March 2013 06:30 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 80 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1283
Joined  2011-03-12

The belief in deity may be common, but it’s not universal. Buddhism has no god head or pantheon, though it does believe in an afterlife as well as reincarnation. Curiously enough, the religion that did not offer a belief in an afterlife and it wasn’t even an agreed upon concept even up to the time of Jesus Christ is Judiasm.

I’ve pointed this out to Christians, and they never fail to be surprised by this.

 Signature 

Question authority and think for yourself. Big Brother does not know best and never has.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 March 2013 06:42 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 81 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  345
Joined  2006-11-27

This is totally off the cuff, but I think that our ability to relate cause and effect drives the universal human invention of “God”.  We seem to be the only animal which has this ability developed to a degree that is clearly and regularly observable.  Science is the embodiment of this ability, just as music is the embodiment of our ability to recognize tone, harmony and rhythm.  This ability has been key to our success as a species, but the desire to identify cause and effect can lead us to draw poor conclusions.  Hypothesizing the existence of a supernatural force, “God”, initially seems like a wonderful, useful explanation, but it’s really just another way of recognizing that the cause and effect are hard to discern.  The problem with a God hypothesis is it shields us from knowing that we don’t know.  If there is a tendency for us to imagine Gods, I believe it is rooted in our fairly unique desire to understand cause and effect.  If this is true, any advanced civilization/culture may well have passed through a religious phase.  None of this means that some sort of God exists.

 Signature 

If we’re not laughing, they’re winning.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 March 2013 08:54 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 82 ]
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  32
Joined  2013-03-18

Some will say ‘science’, some will say ‘magic’, but the ‘god’ thing seems to get involved in everything, everywhere, automatically.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 March 2013 08:57 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 83 ]
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  32
Joined  2013-03-18

An ‘afterlife’ is christendom’s terroristic replacement for the whip cross the back of the chattel slave after conversion to a serf.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 March 2013 09:35 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 84 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  345
Joined  2006-11-27

No, I don’t agree.  Science can not be equated to “God”.  The only similarity is that both are attempts to explain phenomena, but the God concept utterly and universally fails whereas science is undeniable successful.  “God” is, basically, a wrong answer, and equates to science only in the way 2+2 =5 equates to 2+2=4

 Signature 

If we’re not laughing, they’re winning.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 April 2013 09:47 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 85 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  908
Joined  2005-01-14

Every now and then we hear of an atheist who “converts” to Christianity.  But as far as I know, none of them ever comes up with a good solid explanation of WHY.  That includes Leah Libresco.  She was a supposedly “prominent” atheist blogger who converted last July.  I only just now heard of her.  Anyway, reading her big post on the subject, the nearest thing I can make out is that she had been predisposed that way for years.  She just finally decided that morality must have been given to human beings from some kind of supernatural source.  Period.  The bottom line is that she just wanted to believe.  That’s the only reason anybody believes in the supernatural isn’t it?:

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 April 2013 12:32 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 86 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2245
Joined  2012-10-27
advocatus - 03 April 2013 09:47 AM

Every now and then we hear of an atheist who “converts” to Christianity.  But as far as I know, none of them ever comes up with a good solid explanation of WHY.  That includes Leah Libresco.  She was a supposedly “prominent” atheist blogger who converted last July.  I only just now heard of her.  Anyway, reading her big post on the subject, the nearest thing I can make out is that she had been predisposed that way for years.  She just finally decided that morality must have been given to human beings from some kind of supernatural source.  Period.  The bottom line is that she just wanted to believe.  That’s the only reason anybody believes in the supernatural isn’t it?:

Probably.  I’d say she was never a true atheist but someone who was using the atheist label in the hopes that her god would notice and bring her back into the fold.A lot of believers use this trick, ” atheist” being such an insult to a god.  Of course he would be shocked and saddened.

I know all about the True Scotsman fallacy, but to me, if an “atheist” embraces religion either again or for the first time, s/he was never an actual atheist to begin with.  People tend to tread water while hoping to the “see the light,”  and saying one was an atheist makes such a good story when they do. One is either a true atheist or not an atheist at all.  It’s something like being a little bit dead. if you wake up you weren’t dead. If you find god you were never an atheist. It’s the acid test.

Lois

[ Edited: 03 April 2013 12:34 PM by Lois ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 April 2013 07:52 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 87 ]
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  32
Joined  2013-03-18
Lois - 03 April 2013 12:32 PM
advocatus - 03 April 2013 09:47 AM

Every now and then we hear of an atheist who “converts” to Christianity.  But as far as I know, none of them ever comes up with a good solid explanation of WHY.  That includes Leah Libresco.  She was a supposedly “prominent” atheist blogger who converted last July.  I only just now heard of her.  Anyway, reading her big post on the subject, the nearest thing I can make out is that she had been predisposed that way for years.  She just finally decided that morality must have been given to human beings from some kind of supernatural source.  Period.  The bottom line is that she just wanted to believe.  That’s the only reason anybody believes in the supernatural isn’t it?:

Probably.  I’d say she was never a true atheist but someone who was using the atheist label in the hopes that her god would notice and bring her back into the fold.A lot of believers use this trick, ” atheist” being such an insult to a god.  Of course he would be shocked and saddened.

I know all about the True Scotsman fallacy, but to me, if an “atheist” embraces religion either again or for the first time, s/he was never an actual atheist to begin with.  People tend to tread water while hoping to the “see the light,”  and saying one was an atheist makes such a good story when they do. One is either a true atheist or not an atheist at all.  It’s something like being a little bit dead. if you wake up you weren’t dead. If you find god you were never an atheist. It’s the acid test.

Lois

PTSD!!!  The real cause of the success of christianity.  Scream ‘burn in hell’ long enough and loud enough at someone and it destroys the brain, turning one into as compliant, obedient, unquestioning robotic zombie.  ...the TERROR…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 April 2013 08:15 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 88 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1741
Joined  2007-10-22

Arthur K:

“But for day-in: Day-out lifelong bracing there is probably nothing so effective as religion;  it makes powerful and talented people more humble and patient; it makes average people rise among themselves, it provides sturdy support for many people desperately trying to stay away from drink or drugs or crime.  People who would otherwise be self- absorbed or shallow or crude or simply quitters are often enabled by their religion, given a perspective on life that helps them make the hard decisions that we would all be proud to make.”  D. Dennett Breaking the Spell Pg. 55

A.K.  Religon is a wide spread human invention that has been very useful in the creation and maintainence of human socities, it has both its positive and negative histories, until you understand this, you are merey an athiest fundamentalist, no better than a relgious fuindamentalist trying to impose their own “vision” on the rest of us.  The task of we humanists is not to destroy religion but to replace it with a social construct, not based upon the myths of the past but on the rational, scientific methods of today.

 Signature 

Gary the Human

All the Gods and all religions are created by humans, to meet human needs and accomplish human ends.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 April 2013 08:21 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 89 ]
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  32
Joined  2013-03-18
garythehuman - 21 March 2013 08:03 AM

Added that to my favorites.  shock

They first had to assume a ‘god’, ‘creator’, ‘higher ingtelligence’ etc. a characteristic that seems to be a common thread through all of the human race.  I think I may have disovered why, but my hypothesis is incomplete as of yet.  As for ‘higher intelligence’, if the human race continues it’s quest for more knowoledge into infinity, it will surely surpass the intelligence that might exist now in any form.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 April 2013 11:05 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 90 ]
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  32
Joined  2013-03-18
garythehuman - 04 April 2013 08:15 AM

Arthur K:

“But for day-in: Day-out lifelong bracing there is probably nothing so effective as religion;  it makes powerful and talented people more humble and patient; it makes average people rise among themselves, it provides sturdy support for many people desperately trying to stay away from drink or drugs or crime.  People who would otherwise be self- absorbed or shallow or crude or simply quitters are often enabled by their religion, given a perspective on life that helps them make the hard decisions that we would all be proud to make.”  D. Dennett Breaking the Spell Pg. 55

A.K.  Religon is a wide spread human invention that has been very useful in the creation and maintainence of human socities, it has both its positive and negative histories, until you understand this, you are merey an athiest fundamentalist, no better than a relgious fuindamentalist trying to impose their own “vision” on the rest of us.  The task of we humanists is not to destroy religion but to replace it with a social construct, not based upon the myths of the past but on the rational, scientific methods of today.

My findings is that the whole success of christianity is due to PTSD, brain damage caused by terror.  First one must be made to believe that he will receive unimaginable torture forever, the brain is destroyed to the point that they cannot run their own lives, and the priests, preachers, and their lies then take over.

Profile
 
 
   
6 of 28
6