God used Evolution to create man

[justlookinla]

There is no universal atheistic philosophy any more than there is a universal theistic one. Should I assume you view the world in the same way as a Hindu?

No, we view the world differently, but we both have a theistic view of the world. With the atheist position, there is a basic commonality in the rejection of a 'higher power' though, isn't it?

 

[AV1611VET]

You're going to have to explain what you mean.

Maybe you're looking for the Infotech bus to arrive and get you out of your doldrums; when in actually you need Jesus Christ?

 

[PsychoSarah]

I'm just having a hard time accepting that. One normally doesn't embrace a basic view of life without some consideration and thought. Especially when you, as well as many of us on the forum, have considered the meaning of our existence and the source of our existence.

Oh, I definitely thought about it, and still do, but the overall skepticism that is the source of my angst has no singular source. However, to be fair, I wasn't always seeking faith, and at one sort of philosophical low point I almost ended up an antitheist. I was near giving up on trying for religion entirely, and it made me kinda bitter that I had "wasted" so much of my life with it.

I have never really considered finding "meaning in my existence" important, actually. If I have a purpose by design, then surely I shall fulfill it. If I don't have a purpose at all, then I'll just forge my own path. Even if I was irrefutably shown which one of those or other possibilities were true, I frankly wouldn't care in regards to my own personal self-worth.

 

[justlookinla]

Oh, I definitely thought about it, and still do, but the overall skepticism that is the source of my angst has no singular source. However, to be fair, I wasn't always seeking faith, and at one sort of philosophical low point I almost ended up an antitheist. I was near giving up on trying for religion entirely, and it made me kinda bitter that I had "wasted" so much of my life with it.

I have never really considered finding "meaning in my existence" important, actually. If I have a purpose by design, then surely I shall fulfill it. If I don't have a purpose at all, then I'll just forge my own path. Even if I was irrefutably shown which one of those or other possibilities were true, I frankly wouldn't care in regards to my own personal self-worth.

Ok, thanks for your openness and frankness.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Maybe you're looking for the Infotech bus to arrive and get you out of your doldrums; when in actually you need Jesus Christ?

I'm just waiting for a bus, any bus but the so called "Infotech". Although, I'll get on it if it transfers to another bus.

 

[PsychoSarah]

No, we view the world differently, but we both have a theistic view of the world. With the atheist position, there is a basic commonality in the rejection of a 'higher power' though, isn't it?

Nope, only antitheists reject. And their a minority within the minority that is atheism, though a very loud one.

 

[justlookinla]

Nope, only antitheists reject. And their a minority within the minority that is atheism, though a very loud one.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding. Atheists simply reject while anti-theists not only reject but are also hostile to any theistic claims.

 

[Dizredux]

Thank God, Frances Kelsey took that approach to Thalidomide.

Mmmm what key does the gentleman wish to sing "Johnny One Note" in this time.?


Dizredux

 

[PsychoSarah]

Maybe I'm misunderstanding. Atheists simply reject while anti-theists not only reject but are also hostile to any theistic claims.

There are three categories, I'd say. There are agnostic atheists such as myself, who don't believe gods exist, but also freely do not claim to know for sure. This would be the majority of atheists. There is an itty bitty group of gnostic atheists who additionally aren't antitheists, so they don't believe in deities and feel them to be unlikely enough that they would need some excessive evidence to view otherwise. I'd count users such as Loudmouth as falling in this category. Then there is the abysmally tiny group of butt hurt antitheists, who are essentially gnostic atheists with the added distain for those who do believe in deities. The only user I know of on here who fits this consistently is consol, with his many sock accounts.

And that is just not even counting the spiritual atheist religions, such as a denomination of Buddhism.

 

[Davian]

Nope, I'm not saying "like". As an atheist, don't you embrace atheism? By "embrace", I mean to believe in the philosophical life view.

Atheism is not philosophical life view. It is a theological position on deities.

If there were demonstrable, falsifiable evidence for ghosts or gods, ESP and telekinesis, and all that, I would be all over it. Alas, the best we get are some bent spoons.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Atheism is not philosophical life view. It is a theological position on deities.

If there were demonstrable, falsifiable evidence for ghosts or gods, ESP and telekinesis, and all that, I would be all over it. Alas, the best we get are some bent spoons.

Oh gosh, the bent spoons guy

 

[AV1611VET]

If there were demonstrable, falsifiable evidence for ghosts or gods, ESP and telekinesis, and all that, I would be all over it. Alas, the best we get are some bent spoons.

Maybe you could spend a little time with a national pastor in Africa or Haiti and see if they don't change your mind, once they get you beyond the media's cameras and into the "heart of the jungle," so to speak?

Maybe you could go there and spout your technobabble and see how much you impress them? (or get impressed yourself?)

 

[Davian]

Maybe you could spend a little time with a national pastor in Africa or Haiti and see if they don't change your mind, once they get you beyond the media's cameras and into the "heart of the jungle," so to speak?

Maybe you could go there and spout your technobabble and see how much you impress them? (or get impressed yourself?)

Can they do more than bend spoons there?

 

[justlookinla]

Delete.

 

[justlookinla]

There are three categories, I'd say. There are agnostic atheists such as myself, who don't believe gods exist, but also freely do not claim to know for sure. This would be the majority of atheists. There is an itty bitty group of gnostic atheists who additionally aren't antitheists, so they don't believe in deities and feel them to be unlikely enough that they would need some excessive evidence to view otherwise. I'd count users such as Loudmouth as falling in this category. Then there is the abysmally tiny group of butt hurt antitheists, who are essentially gnostic atheists with the added distain for those who do believe in deities. The only user I know of on here who fits this consistently is consol, with his many sock accounts.

And that is just not even counting the spiritual atheist religions, such as a denomination of Buddhism.

The common thread though is a basic rejection of a 'higher power', isn't it?

 

[justlookinla]

Atheism is not philosophical life view. It is a theological position on deities.

Atheism, as does Darwinism, shapes one's philosophical life view. So does theism.

 

[Davian]

Nope, I'm not saying "like". As an atheist, don't you embrace atheism? By "embrace", I mean to believe in the philosophical life view.

Atheism is not philosophical life view. It is a theological position on deities.

If there were demonstrable, falsifiable evidence for ghosts or gods, ESP and telekinesis, and all that, I would be all over it. Alas, the best we get are some bent spoons.

Atheism, as does Darwinism, shapes one's philosophical life view.

I am not a "Darwinist", and I do not collect stamps. How does the latter "shapes one's philosophical life view"?

So does theism.

From what I gather, it makes one quite grumpy.

 

[FredVB]

Does anybody ever bring up necessary existence, or talk about it, in these discussions? Not yet seeing it I can understand that some people would just avoid that. But no one has answers for anything being here, without that considered. There must be existence that is necessary existence, or nothing would exist, ever. We might not understand what such could be, but it is not the alternative, which is nothing and never anything other than nothing, total nonexistence, without existence of space, time, or anything. The alternative is yet staggering if it was never considered. Necessary existence, existence that exists because that existence must exist, cannot have any kind of limit to existence. Limits would be arbitrary but not involving what is essential existence. So everything that is true of this essential existence is unlimited in any way, infinite where that can be applied. This existence would just appropriately be called Creator, because this being would be the explanation of all else that was brought into existence. What else would be God but this? And what else could there be otherwise, but such necessary existence? There is nothing otherwise for anything to exist. In light of that what are we to make of such intelligence that we have that we can have the perspective that we perceive and consider enough of so many things that can be known as truth and know so much about our world and cosmos to consider we know explanations that are the truth about all of it?

Speaking for myself, I didn't respond to it because it was a giant mess of words that didn't seem to make a cogent point.

Is this just a long winded "There is something instead of nothing....therefore God exists"?

Just as I say there are those who will just avoid the reasoning that is shown. But the logic is undeniable. It goes way beyond simply saying there's something, so God exists. There can be no logical denial of necessary existence, which will amount to all that was said of it in the quote above. If there wasn't that, there wouldn't be anything, that is there wouldn't be any material thing at all, there wouldn't be any potential or kinetic energy at all, no spatial dimensions, no dimension of time to have anything available, no power and no mind for any intelligence to be present anywhere, and with absolutely nothing in that way it is completely without logic to say all that was needed for the universe to exist as it does just came into being from nothing existing that is defined that way. To think that persistently is highly illogical, where belief that God is the explanation is without being so illogical, with there being reasonable explanation that is consistent with faith being put in God, that is still reasonable, as opposed to the alternative of denial, such as the dismissiveness that can be seen here. Those showing that just don't want to deal with it, and will avoid having anything to show that there would be acknowledgement of anything like the Creator.

There are a lot of broad generalizations about others that are seen to be easily made. I won't take part in that. There are many kinds of people in any category. What the truth is will still matter, and is desirable for that to be pursued.

Lawful good

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Just as I say there are those who will just avoid the reasoning that is shown. But the logic is undeniable. It goes way beyond simply saying there's something, so God exists. There can be no logical denial of necessary existence, which will amount to all that was said of it in the quote above. If there wasn't that, there wouldn't be anything, that is there wouldn't be any material thing at all, there wouldn't be any potential or kinetic energy at all, no spatial dimensions, no dimension of time to have anything available, no power and no mind for any intelligence to be present anywhere, and with absolutely nothing in that way it is completely without logic to say all that was needed for the universe to exist as it does just came into being from nothing existing that is defined that way. To think that persistently is highly illogical, where belief that God is the explanation is without being so illogical, with there being reasonable explanation that is consistent with faith being put in God, that is still reasonable, as opposed to the alternative of denial, such as the dismissiveness that can be seen here. Those showing that just don't want to deal with it, and will avoid having anything to show that there would be acknowledgement of anything like the Creator.

There are a lot of broad generalizations about others that are seen to be easily made. I won't take part in that. There are many kinds of people in any category. What the truth is will still matter, and is desirable for that to be pursued.

Lawful good

I think you may be on to something here. Why is there something instead of just nothing? Necessarily there must be an infinite reason for reality.

 

[crazyforgod1212]

.