Varg

[Varg]

It's a cool name, though. And distinctive

[Mark of the Cross]

[quote name='Servus_Mariae' date='08 November 2009 - 08:08 AM' timestamp='1257628083' post='1997830']
Then why the certainty as to the rejection of theism? Agnosticism seems a more acceptable step...not asserting that God exists but not assuming He doesn't either.

Why the certainty God doesn't exist?
[/quote]
You're unlikely to get an answer to that! I've never seen a Cobra. Do I conclude that Cobra's don't exist and are just video special effects. Or do I leave the subject open and conclude that they probably exist but might not. I think atheists are actually agnostics in denial.

[Fidei Defensor]

[quote name='Servus_Mariae' date='07 November 2009 - 04:08 PM' timestamp='1257628083' post='1997830']
Then why the certainty as to the rejection of theism? Agnosticism seems a more acceptable step...not asserting that God exists but not assuming He doesn't either.

Why the certainty God doesn't exist?
[/quote]
It's a poor tactic to try to default people into your religion because you think their logic is faulty.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='fidei defensor' date='11 November 2009 - 09:54 PM' timestamp='1257998098' post='2001070']
It's a poor tactic to try to default people into your religion because you think their logic is faulty.
[/quote]
Ours is better than all the other ones.

[Servus_Mariae]

[quote name='fidei defensor' date='11 November 2009 - 10:54 PM' timestamp='1257998098' post='2001070']
It's a poor tactic to try to default people into your religion because you think their logic is faulty.
[/quote]

Agreed. I'm not trying to do this however. I was not trying to get him to make a jump from atheism to Catholicism. I just want to hear the reasoning behind a certainty in atheism. Notice...I didn't say "Catholicism is a better alternative to Atheism" I said Agnosticism is a better alternative to Atheism. Varg has clarified however that he does not reject the notion of God...so that's been to rest.

Your statement does arouse a new inquiry from me however...does this not undermine what you, Hassan, and Varg attempt in pointing out your perceived illogic of Christianity? I am not trying to submit an accusation here...I just want to know how you reconcile your above quote with pointing out what you deem to be illogical in Christianity.

[Fidei Defensor]

You make a valid point. While I cannot speak for others, I can say that personally, I argue against what I see as illogical in Christianity not to pull people away or bring them to atheism, but rather, out of my own need to seek answers about what I see. If I get a satisfactory answer, I won't dismiss it just because it doesn't fit with my world view.

[Servus_Mariae]

Makes sense. Fair enough.

[Mark of the Cross]

[quote name='fidei defensor' date='13 November 2009 - 03:45 AM' timestamp='1258044357' post='2001308']
You make a valid point. While I cannot speak for others, I can say that personally, I argue against what I see as illogical in Christianity not to pull people away or bring them to atheism, but rather, out of my own need to seek answers about what I see. If I get a satisfactory answer, I won't dismiss it just because it doesn't fit with my world view.
[/quote]
We should all be doing that. As a devout Christian I have to confess that there are many aspects of Catholic belief that don't sit well with my world view.

[Winchester]

[quote name='fidei defensor' date='11 November 2009 - 10:54 PM' timestamp='1257998098' post='2001070']
It's a poor tactic to try to default people into your religion because you think their logic is faulty.
[/quote]
Hitler said the same thing.

[bonkers]

[quote name='pat22' date='07 November 2009 - 01:29 AM' timestamp='1257575347' post='1997621']
just curious. do you claim to have a theory on how the world came to be?
[/quote]

You know, like a lot of atheists, we don't claim to know how the world came to be. It's a big universe, and perhaps our tiny little pee wee minds aren't big enough to comprehend it. I'm not opposed to the idea god *could* exist, but like many people, I think the burden is on the believing people to prove it, otherwise it's just another theory. At the very least if you claim to know something which is absolutely true you should at least substantiate it with some tangible evidence, not this disease called faith. I'm content not knowing, and more content not knowing than believing something for which there is no evidence.

[Winchester]

Ah the "no evidence" thing.

You don't accept the evidence that's there, you mean. You want DNA or a footprint. You ignore the nature of God and apply faulty requirements.

"The evidence does not convince me", is the proper response for one who is secure in his belief.

[Servus_Mariae]

[quote name='bonkers' date='13 November 2009 - 05:45 AM' timestamp='1258109120' post='2002063']
You know, like a lot of atheists, we don't claim to know how the world came to be. It's a big universe, and perhaps our tiny little pee wee minds aren't big enough to comprehend it. I'm not opposed to the idea god *could* exist, but like many people, I think the burden is on the believing people to prove it, otherwise it's just another theory. At the very least if you claim to know something which is absolutely true you should at least substantiate it with some tangible evidence, not this disease called faith. I'm content not knowing, and more content not knowing than believing something for which there is no evidence.
[/quote]

I have a few questions about this. Why do you leave the burden of proof upon the believers? I only ask because when you look at the universe, you see a system of order pushed and pulled by cause and effect. As Winchester pointed to, DNA and other complexities of life exist yet, from an atheistic perspective it is probable that these things fell into being by chance, yet would not allow this generous credibility for chance with regard to anything else. I would think that the default position would be that someone had devised this universe and to prove otherwise would be the greater challenge.

Also, would you define what you mean by faith? I happen to agree that what many are calling faith today is a disease. Truly, allot people assert that something is true with the evidence being "...because I believe it". This relativism is a real problem. It's real name isn't faith however, I would call it sentimentalism; people believe things because they want them to be true, not because they are true. This is found everywhere mind you and in both Christian and Atheist. Sentamentalism is not faith. How would you define faith?

[Mark of the Cross]

[quote name='bonkers' date='13 November 2009 - 09:45 PM' timestamp='1258109120' post='2002063']
You know, like a lot of atheists, we don't claim to know how the world came to be. It's a big universe, and perhaps our tiny little pee wee minds aren't big enough to comprehend it. I'm not opposed to the idea god *could* exist, but like many people, I think the burden is on the believing people to prove it, otherwise it's just another theory. At the very least if you claim to know something which is absolutely true you should at least substantiate it with some tangible evidence, not this disease called faith. I'm content not knowing, and more content not knowing than believing something for which there is no evidence.
[/quote]
Do you believe in the atomic theory of the structure of matter? Do you believe in the existence of multiple galaxies spread throughout a universe? Do you believe dinosaurs existed? Most things cannot be proven, we can only give them varying degrees of probability. You are aware of your own mind therefore you have to give credence to the fact that you exist with a probability of 100%. Everything else is less than 100%. I believe in atoms, galaxies and dinosaurs because numerous rational people say they exist. Basically I accept the existence of God because Billions of people do and it is more logical than the theory that this world is here per chance. I can prove God exists to my own satisfaction by 'experiment' which is an accepted scientific method. What I cannot do is prove to you that God exists. When in a very ill and confused state I hear a thought in my mind which is very wise and comforting, I think this must be God speaking to me. But I cannot say to you, "Come here and listen and you will here God talking to me." You won't hear anything and will just dismiss me as another schizophrenic hearing voices that are not real.
PS. I have generalised anxiety disorder and as a result I have undergone numerous psychiatric examinations throughout my life, but have never hallucinated or been diagnosed with schizophrenia.

Edited November 13, 2009 by Mark of the Cross

[Fidei Defensor]

[quote name='Mark of the Cross' date='13 November 2009 - 05:25 PM' timestamp='1258151103' post='2002354']
Do you believe in the atomic theory of the structure of matter? Do you believe in the existence of multiple galaxies spread throughout a universe? Do you believe dinosaurs existed? Most things cannot be proven, we can only give them varying degrees of probability. You are aware of your own mind therefore you have to give credence to the fact that you exist with a probability of 100%. Everything else is less than 100%. I believe in atoms, galaxies and dinosaurs because numerous rational people say they exist. Basically I accept the existence of God because Billions of people do and it is more logical than the theory that this world is here per chance. I can prove God exists to my own satisfaction by 'experiment' which is an accepted scientific method. What I cannot do is prove to you that God exists. When in a very ill and confused state I hear a thought in my mind which is very wise and comforting, I think this must be God speaking to me. But I cannot say to you, "Come here and listen and you will here God talking to me." You won't hear anything and will just dismiss me as another schizophrenic hearing voices that are not real.
PS. I have generalised anxiety disorder and as a result I have undergone numerous psychiatric examinations throughout my life, but have never hallucinated or been diagnosed with schizophrenia.
[/quote]
The problem is that those "billions" who believe in God came to believe in a much different way than the billions who came to believe in things like gravity or the atomic theory. There is no process of proving God. There is in science.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='fidei defensor' date='13 November 2009 - 07:43 PM' timestamp='1258159398' post='2002397']
There is no process of proving God.
[/quote]

There is a process of knowing God through the light of reason from created things.