Why I'm Anti-Theistic

[whois]

You said - humans had a puny mind. In comparison to what? Your idea of a god?

i do not have an idea of a god.
i have no clue what a god looks like, or does, or how it does it.
in regards to human intelligence, yes, i think it's vanity to think we are the most intelligent things in the universe.
this would be a rational premise in either the god, or godless, scenarios.

I never said that humans were the most intelligent things in the universe either. Please do not misrepresent what I wrote.

i wasn't aware that i did, if so then i apologize.

the reality is, science has no clue whatsoever about how life came to be

- and an argument from ignorance is impressive how?

yes, i think it's impressive, very impressive given the decades we had to work on it, the vast amounts of brain power and computer resources committed to it, and if that isn't enough we have the final functioning product to back engineer from.

And when you say "no clue" - just how accurate is that?

no clue, as in not even a plausible scenario.
IOW, every hypothesis put forth on this matter has an insurmountable problem associated with it.

would you say you are more than what physical laws can account for

- which physical laws exactly? Is this back to explaining consciousnesses again?

physical laws, the laws currently used to explain the properties of the universe and the various objects in it.

 

[asherahSamaria]

i do not have an idea of a god.
i have no clue what a god looks like, or does, or how it does it.
in regards to human intelligence, yes, i think it's vanity to think we are the most intelligent things in the universe.
this would be a rational premise in either the god, or godless, scenarios.

i wasn't aware that i did, if so then i apologize.

yes, i think it's impressive, very impressive given the decades we had to work on it, the vast amounts of brain power and computer resources committed to it, and if that isn't enough we have the final functioning product to back engineer from.

no clue, as in not even a plausible scenario.
IOW, every hypothesis put forth on this matter has an insurmountable problem associated with it.

physical laws, the laws currently used to explain the properties of the universe and the various objects in it.

i think it's vanity to think we are the most intelligent things in the universe. In an infinite universe we most likely aren't, but again - I never said that I thought we are.

very impressive given the decades we had to work on it - I'm not so impressed with this. It's a complex topic - way above my pay grade - and I suspect the resources devoted to it are only a fraction to say, finding a cure for cancers - and we haven't done that either.

physical laws, the laws currently used to explain the properties of the universe and the various objects in it - I think you are referring to consciousnesses and how that works in relation to say physics, chemistry, etc. The answer is I have no idea. I know I experience consciousness but how that relates to say quantum theory i haven't a clue.

 

[whois]

i think it's vanity to think we are the most intelligent things in the universe. In an infinite universe we most likely aren't, but again - I never said that I thought we are.

fair enough.

Very impressive given the decades we had to work on it

- I'm not so impressed with this. It's a complex topic - way above my pay grade - and I suspect the resources devoted to it are only a fraction to say, finding a cure for cancers - and we haven't done that either.

the origins of life is one, if not the most, important concepts in all of science.
the primary reason this field is a failure is not one of a lack of research or resources, its the problem itself.
yes, organic chemistry can indeed be quite complex, but it follows relatively simple rules and laws.
the steps required for origins isn't very unlikely, highly unlikely, but exceedingly unlikely
one molecular biologist puts it this way:
"A succession of exceedingly unlikely steps is essential for the origin of life, from the synthesis and accumulation of nucleotides to the origin of translation; through the multiplication of probabilities, these make the final outcome seem almost like a miracle."

physical laws, the laws currently used to explain the properties of the universe and the various objects in it

- I think you are referring to consciousnesses and how that works in relation to say physics, chemistry, etc. The answer is I have no idea. I know I experience consciousness but how that relates to say quantum theory i haven't a clue.

the original question was relatively simple, and wasn't referring to anything in particular.
"do you believe you are more than physical laws can account for"

 

[asherahSamaria]

fair enough.

the origins of life is one, if not the most, important concepts in all of science.
the primary reason this field is a failure is not one of a lack of research or resources, its the problem itself.
yes, organic chemistry can indeed be quite complex, but it follows relatively simple rules and laws.
the steps required for origins isn't very unlikely, highly unlikely, but exceedingly unlikely
one molecular biologist puts it this way:
"A succession of exceedingly unlikely steps is essential for the origin of life, from the synthesis and accumulation of nucleotides to the origin of translation; through the multiplication of probabilities, these make the final outcome seem almost like a miracle."

the original question was relatively simple, and wasn't referring to anything in particular.
"do you believe you are more than physical laws can account for"

do you believe you are more than physical laws can account for - I'm still struggling to understand the framework for the question. I don't believe I exist or will ever exist outside this universe - so everything that exists in this universe must conform to it's laws. However "laws" has many meanings and I'm sure there are many things humanity will uncover in the future that will mean a new "law" or "explanation" will be understood. If you mean do I believe I am greater than physical explanations can account for, at any time in the future, I don't believe so - because outside the physical is only the supernatural. Unless you are equating consciousnesses with the supernatural?

 

[whois]

do you believe you are more than physical laws can account for - I'm still struggling to understand the framework for the question. I don't believe I exist or will ever exist outside this universe - so everything that exists in this universe must conform to it's laws. However "laws" has many meanings and I'm sure there are many things humanity will uncover in the future that will mean a new "law" or "explanation" will be understood. If you mean do I believe I am greater than physical explanations can account for, at any time in the future, I don't believe so - because outside the physical is only the supernatural. Unless you are equating consciousnesses with the supernatural?

there is no need to feel sheepish or try to explain yourself.
i'm certainly not going to unload a god on you.
i just want you to be objective, that's all.
you see, the vast majority of people feel the same way, and there must be a reason for it.

 

[asherahSamaria]

there is no need to feel sheepish or try to explain yourself.
i'm certainly not going to unload a god on you.
i just want you to be objective, that's all.
you see, the vast majority of people feel the same way, and there must be a reason for it.

i'm certainly not going to unload a god on you - Can I have Loki? He seems to be one of the more fun ones. Though Dionysus is pretty cool too

 

[anonymous person]

i'm certainly not going to unload a god on you - Can I have Loki? He seems to be one of the more fun ones. Though Dionysus is pretty cool too

You want an idol.

 

[asherahSamaria]

You want an idol.

Oh no - these are real gods - people have worshiped them for centuries. I don't actually believe in them of course - but they are as real as any other

 

[anonymous person]

Oh no - these are real gods - people have worshiped them for centuries. I don't actually believe in them of course - but they are as real as any other

You misunderstood what I said.

 

[bhsmte]

You want an idol.

Are you able to pick out idols for others?

I always thought idols were a personal thing.

 

[anonymous person]

Are you able to pick out idols for others?

I always thought idols were a personal thing.

If someone tells me what they idolize, then there is no need for me to "pick out" their idols.

I know what they are because they have told me.

asherahSamaria wants a fun god, a cool god. One that thinks like he does, likes the things he does, goes for the things he goes for, commends what he commends etc. etc.

In other words, he wants a god in his own image. Something carnal, fleshly, something that has base passions and assents to engaging in the worship of their appetite.

This is what Paul was referring to in his epistle to the Christians in Rome. men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator.

 

[anonymous person]

.

 

[bhsmte]

If someone tells me what they idolize, then there is no need for me to "pick out" their idols.

I know what they are because they have told me.

asherahSamaria wants a fun god, a cool god. One that thinks like he does, likes the things he does, goes for the things he goes for, commends what he commends etc. etc.

In other words, he wants a god in his own image. Something carnal, fleshly, something that has base passions and assents to engaging in the worship of their appetite.

This is what Paul was referring to in his epistle to the Christians in Rome. men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator.

To each's own.

 

[anonymous person]

To each's own.

Precisely. Now you know what it means when it reads, God gave them up in such and such or God gave them up to thus and so, or God sent them the desires of their heart but leanness to their soul.

God gives to each what they want.

 

[bhsmte]

Precisely. Now you know what it means when it reads, God gave them up in such and such or God gave them up to thus and so, or God sent them the desires of their heart but leanness to their soul.

God gives to each what they want.

I don't put much credibility into scripture.

You can though.

 

[anonymous person]

I don't put much credibility into scripture.

You can though.

I know you don't. You have your reasons. God knows why you really don't put much credibility into His words the same way you would know why a person to whom you have expressed a desire to have a relationship with and whom you love does not put much credibility into the words you wrote to them in a letter expressing said desire and love. The person who you love may say one thing, but you would know better because you have watched the person going out with another person and having fun with them and never giving any indication that you were missed or even on their mind. Though this person whom you love says one thing, their actions reveal the true cause of why they reject you. They love another.

God sees how you live, knows your thoughts, and what you really want in life. Remember that.

And of course you will come back with the tired old line, I do not believe in God so this might apply to you but not to me etc. etc. Your unbelief does not nullify what I said. It just reinforces it.

 

[bhsmte]

I know you don't. You have your reasons. God knows why you really don't put much credibility into His words the same way you would know why a person to whom you have expressed a desire to have a relationship with and whom you love does not put much credibility into the words you wrote to them in a letter expressing said desire and love. Your love may say one thing, but you would know better because you have watched the person going out with another person and having fun with them and never giving any indication that you were missed or even on their mind. Though your love's words say one thing, their actions say another.

God sees how you live, knows your thoughts, and what you really want in life. Remember that.

And of course you will come back with the tired old line, I do not believe in God so this might apply to you but not to me etc. etc. Your unbelief does not nullify what I said. It just reinforces it.

Hey, whatever you need to believe to feel better.

No skin off my nose, believe what you like.

 

[anonymous person]

Hey, whatever you need to believe to feel better.

No skin off my nose, believe what you like.

I am not saying this to make myself feel better. I feel great. I am saying it because it is true. How do I know? I know because the reason why you do not find the scriptures credible is because you do not like what they say. Oh sure you may bring up things that you have convinced yourself are indications that they are not credible, but you know that the standard to which you hold them is, at the end of the day, unjustifiable. You set the standard for credibility so high when it comes to the scriptures that there is no way they could ever meet that standard, while any other ancient text you would not subject to near as much scrutiny. This is a common tactic many people use to justify setting aside the scriptures. Such tactics are best recognized when one is pressed to defend their claim of the scriptures being unreliable but are unable to do so.

 

[bhsmte]

I am not saying this to make myself feel better. I feel great. I am saying it because it is true. How do I know? I know because the reason why you do not find the scriptures credible is because you do not like what they say. Oh sure you may bring up things that you have convinced yourself are indications that they are not credible, but you know that the standard to which you hold them is, at the end of the day, unjustifiable. You set the standard for credibility so high when it comes to the scriptures that there is no way they could ever meet that standard, while any other ancient text you would not subject to near as much scrutiny. This is a common tactic many people use to justify setting aside the scriptures. Such tactics are best recognized when one is pressed to defend their claim of the scriptures being unreliable but are unable to do so.

You are able to crawl inside my head and conclude the reason I don't find scripture credible???????????

Quite a trick, what else can you read my mind about?

 

[anonymous person]

You are able to crawl inside my head and conclude the reason I don't find scripture credible???????????

Quite a trick, what else can you read my mind about?

Not I, but God. Nor does He need to "crawl inside your head".

He formed it. He knows the thoughts you think before you think them.

He is God, remember?