Total Posts:46|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Why Do Theists Assume ...

PureX
Posts: 1,515
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2016 6:44:22 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
Why do so many theists assume that they are supposed to believe in the existence of "God", absolutely? Because that seems absurdly unrealistic to me, right from the start.

We have no logical reason to believe in anything, absolutely: without any doubt or skepticism to any degree. Even something as enduring as gravity is a phenomena that I can only assume will remain extant, but cannot be absolutely certain of it, since there is much that I do not understand about it, and whatever might effect it occurrence.

So the idea that our faith in the existence and nature of "God" has to preclude doubt just doesn't seem honest, or realistic, to me. And in fact, I don't see how faith can be called faith at all, if one has no doubts. It would be called 'certainty' rather than 'faith'. Why would we even need faith if we had no doubt? As we would have certainty, instead. And wouldn't we prefer certainty over faith?

The point of my asking this question is that I believe any religious ideology that seeks the elimination of doubt, as an act of "faith", is at best confused, and is more likely being deliberately dishonest.
Fatihah
Posts: 7,714
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2016 7:06:49 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/6/2016 6:44:22 PM, PureX wrote:
Why do so many theists assume that they are supposed to believe in the existence of "God", absolutely? Because that seems absurdly unrealistic to me, right from the start.

We have no logical reason to believe in anything, absolutely: without any doubt or skepticism to any degree. Even something as enduring as gravity is a phenomena that I can only assume will remain extant, but cannot be absolutely certain of it, since there is much that I do not understand about it, and whatever might effect it occurrence.

So the idea that our faith in the existence and nature of "God" has to preclude doubt just doesn't seem honest, or realistic, to me. And in fact, I don't see how faith can be called faith at all, if one has no doubts. It would be called 'certainty' rather than 'faith'. Why would we even need faith if we had no doubt? As we would have certainty, instead. And wouldn't we prefer certainty over faith?

The point of my asking this question is that I believe any religious ideology that seeks the elimination of doubt, as an act of "faith", is at best confused, and is more likely being deliberately dishonest.

Response: Islam does not discourage or eliminate doubt, nor do I know of any religion or religious person that does. At the same time, just because you have doubt of something does not mean that others have the same doubt.
Stronn
Posts: 314
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2016 7:11:15 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/6/2016 6:44:22 PM, PureX wrote:
Why do so many theists assume that they are supposed to believe in the existence of "God", absolutely? Because that seems absurdly unrealistic to me, right from the start.

We have no logical reason to believe in anything, absolutely: without any doubt or skepticism to any degree. Even something as enduring as gravity is a phenomena that I can only assume will remain extant, but cannot be absolutely certain of it, since there is much that I do not understand about it, and whatever might effect it occurrence.

So the idea that our faith in the existence and nature of "God" has to preclude doubt just doesn't seem honest, or realistic, to me. And in fact, I don't see how faith can be called faith at all, if one has no doubts. It would be called 'certainty' rather than 'faith'. Why would we even need faith if we had no doubt? As we would have certainty, instead. And wouldn't we prefer certainty over faith?

The point of my asking this question is that I believe any religious ideology that seeks the elimination of doubt, as an act of "faith", is at best confused, and is more likely being deliberately dishonest.

Every theist has doubts at some point. One way they often try to quell their doubts is to vehemently profess their faith to others. Such "witnessing" has long been used by religion as a way to reinforce faith and bolster emotional investment in their religion. In fact, for many, bolstering one's own faith is a more important reason to proselytize than recruiting others.
janesix
Posts: 3,437
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2016 7:26:52 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/6/2016 6:44:22 PM, PureX wrote:
Why do so many theists assume that they are supposed to believe in the existence of "God", absolutely? Because that seems absurdly unrealistic to me, right from the start.

We have no logical reason to believe in anything, absolutely: without any doubt or skepticism to any degree. Even something as enduring as gravity is a phenomena that I can only assume will remain extant, but cannot be absolutely certain of it, since there is much that I do not understand about it, and whatever might effect it occurrence.

So the idea that our faith in the existence and nature of "God" has to preclude doubt just doesn't seem honest, or realistic, to me. And in fact, I don't see how faith can be called faith at all, if one has no doubts. It would be called 'certainty' rather than 'faith'. Why would we even need faith if we had no doubt? As we would have certainty, instead. And wouldn't we prefer certainty over faith?

The point of my asking this question is that I believe any religious ideology that seeks the elimination of doubt, as an act of "faith", is at best confused, and is more likely being deliberately dishonest.
I cant recall any theists who proclaimed to have zero doubt. Except maybe bog.
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,307
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2016 2:42:38 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/6/2016 6:44:22 PM, PureX wrote:
Why do so many theists assume that they are supposed to believe in the existence of "God", absolutely? Because that seems absurdly unrealistic to me, right from the start.


Because maybe you don't understand how spiritual principles operate and why Jesus and Paul taught them.

We have no logical reason to believe in anything, absolutely: without any doubt or skepticism to any degree. Even something as enduring as gravity is a phenomena that I can only assume will remain extant, but cannot be absolutely certain of it, since there is much that I do not understand about it, and whatever might effect it occurrence.


Yes sure, if you don't know what spirituality is, which is the practical application of spiritual laws, through trial and error. So in essence you learn what is "absolute" or what is law, what is authority.

So the idea that our faith in the existence and nature of "God" has to preclude doubt just doesn't seem honest, or realistic, to me. And in fact, I don't see how faith can be called faith at all, if one has no doubts. It would be called 'certainty' rather than 'faith'. Why would we even need faith if we had no doubt? As we would have certainty, instead. And wouldn't we prefer certainty over faith?

It doesn't have to "preclude" doubt, but faith is not driven by doubt, that is why doubt produces no fruit in spirituality. Faith is not blind belief in God, rather confidence in His principles, to produce fruit (evidence). Faith is a spiritual principle, this has been lost in translation.


The point of my asking this question is that I believe any religious ideology that seeks the elimination of doubt, as an act of "faith", is at best confused, and is more likely being deliberately dishonest.

That depends, on whether or not those beliefs are based upon truth, do you not wish to have a foundation? come on....Jesus is a solid foundation!
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,083
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2016 3:34:08 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/6/2016 6:44:22 PM, PureX wrote:
Why do so many theists assume that they are supposed to believe in the existence of "God", absolutely? Because that seems absurdly unrealistic to me, right from the start.

We have no logical reason to believe in anything, absolutely: without any doubt or skepticism to any degree. Even something as enduring as gravity is a phenomena that I can only assume will remain extant, but cannot be absolutely certain of it, since there is much that I do not understand about it, and whatever might effect it occurrence.

So the idea that our faith in the existence and nature of "God" has to preclude doubt just doesn't seem honest, or realistic, to me. And in fact, I don't see how faith can be called faith at all, if one has no doubts. It would be called 'certainty' rather than 'faith'. Why would we even need faith if we had no doubt? As we would have certainty, instead. And wouldn't we prefer certainty over faith?

The point of my asking this question is that I believe any religious ideology that seeks the elimination of doubt, as an act of "faith", is at best confused, and is more likely being deliberately dishonest.

Ahhh, thank you! This is a very honest appraisal of belief. You and I may be on opposite sides of the fence, but I completely respect this view.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Willows
Posts: 2,027
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2016 4:18:09 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/7/2016 2:42:38 AM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 8/6/2016 6:44:22 PM, PureX wrote:
Why do so many theists assume that they are supposed to believe in the existence of "God", absolutely? Because that seems absurdly unrealistic to me, right from the start.


Because maybe you don't understand how spiritual principles operate and why Jesus and Paul taught them.

We have no logical reason to believe in anything, absolutely: without any doubt or skepticism to any degree. Even something as enduring as gravity is a phenomena that I can only assume will remain extant, but cannot be absolutely certain of it, since there is much that I do not understand about it, and whatever might effect it occurrence.


Yes sure, if you don't know what spirituality is, which is the practical application of spiritual laws, through trial and error. So in essence you learn what is "absolute" or what is law, what is authority.

So the idea that our faith in the existence and nature of "God" has to preclude doubt just doesn't seem honest, or realistic, to me. And in fact, I don't see how faith can be called faith at all, if one has no doubts. It would be called 'certainty' rather than 'faith'. Why would we even need faith if we had no doubt? As we would have certainty, instead. And wouldn't we prefer certainty over faith?

It doesn't have to "preclude" doubt, but faith is not driven by doubt, that is why doubt produces no fruit in spirituality. Faith is not blind belief in God, rather confidence in His principles, to produce fruit (evidence). Faith is a spiritual principle, this has been lost in translation.

Faith is driven not by doubt but by fear. Fear of losing your faith and fear of losing your afterlife.
Religious Faith is a spiritual principal the premise of which, there is no such thing.
Faith in God is blind faith.


The point of my asking this question is that I believe any religious ideology that seeks the elimination of doubt, as an act of "faith", is at best confused, and is more likely being deliberately dishonest.

That depends, on whether or not those beliefs are based upon truth, do you not wish to have a foundation? come on....Jesus is a solid foundation!
Since there is no viable evidence to support the assertion that Jesus ever existed your foundation is extremely flimsy to say the least.
Your belief is not based on truth but myths.
To many people religious belief is enforced upon them or they lack the education to know better, otherwise deliberately dishonest, you are not being true to yourself.
PureX
Posts: 1,515
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2016 3:22:34 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/6/2016 7:06:49 PM, Fatihah wrote:
At 8/6/2016 6:44:22 PM, PureX wrote:
Why do so many theists assume that they are supposed to believe in the existence of "God", absolutely? Because that seems absurdly unrealistic to me, right from the start.

We have no logical reason to believe in anything, absolutely: without any doubt or skepticism to any degree. Even something as enduring as gravity is a phenomena that I can only assume will remain extant, but cannot be absolutely certain of it, since there is much that I do not understand about it, and whatever might effect it occurrence.

So the idea that our faith in the existence and nature of "God" has to preclude doubt just doesn't seem honest, or realistic, to me. And in fact, I don't see how faith can be called faith at all, if one has no doubts. It would be called 'certainty' rather than 'faith'. Why would we even need faith if we had no doubt? As we would have certainty, instead. And wouldn't we prefer certainty over faith?

The point of my asking this question is that I believe any religious ideology that seeks the elimination of doubt, as an act of "faith", is at best confused, and is more likely being deliberately dishonest.

Response: Islam does not discourage or eliminate doubt, nor do I know of any religion or religious person that does. At the same time, just because you have doubt of something does not mean that others have the same doubt.

I appreciate your response. But Islam, like Christianity, has a great many factions, each with their own ideological proclivities. My reference to religions demanding total adherence as an expression of "faith" also refers to their demanding total obedience to the religious 'rules'. And factions of Islam certainly exhibits plenty of that. As do many factions of Christianity.
PureX
Posts: 1,515
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2016 3:25:27 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/6/2016 7:11:15 PM, Stronn wrote:
At 8/6/2016 6:44:22 PM, PureX wrote:
Why do so many theists assume that they are supposed to believe in the existence of "God", absolutely? Because that seems absurdly unrealistic to me, right from the start.

We have no logical reason to believe in anything, absolutely: without any doubt or skepticism to any degree. Even something as enduring as gravity is a phenomena that I can only assume will remain extant, but cannot be absolutely certain of it, since there is much that I do not understand about it, and whatever might effect it occurrence.

So the idea that our faith in the existence and nature of "God" has to preclude doubt just doesn't seem honest, or realistic, to me. And in fact, I don't see how faith can be called faith at all, if one has no doubts. It would be called 'certainty' rather than 'faith'. Why would we even need faith if we had no doubt? As we would have certainty, instead. And wouldn't we prefer certainty over faith?

The point of my asking this question is that I believe any religious ideology that seeks the elimination of doubt, as an act of "faith", is at best confused, and is more likely being deliberately dishonest.

Every theist has doubts at some point. One way they often try to quell their doubts is to vehemently profess their faith to others. Such "witnessing" has long been used by religion as a way to reinforce faith and bolster emotional investment in their religion. In fact, for many, bolstering one's own faith is a more important reason to proselytize than recruiting others.

I agree. But what you are really describing here is cult behavior: an attempt at mind control.
PureX
Posts: 1,515
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2016 3:31:54 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/6/2016 7:26:52 PM, janesix wrote:
At 8/6/2016 6:44:22 PM, PureX wrote:
Why do so many theists assume that they are supposed to believe in the existence of "God", absolutely? Because that seems absurdly unrealistic to me, right from the start.

We have no logical reason to believe in anything, absolutely: without any doubt or skepticism to any degree. Even something as enduring as gravity is a phenomena that I can only assume will remain extant, but cannot be absolutely certain of it, since there is much that I do not understand about it, and whatever might effect it occurrence.

So the idea that our faith in the existence and nature of "God" has to preclude doubt just doesn't seem honest, or realistic, to me. And in fact, I don't see how faith can be called faith at all, if one has no doubts. It would be called 'certainty' rather than 'faith'. Why would we even need faith if we had no doubt? As we would have certainty, instead. And wouldn't we prefer certainty over faith?

The point of my asking this question is that I believe any religious ideology that seeks the elimination of doubt, as an act of "faith", is at best confused, and is more likely being deliberately dishonest.
I cant recall any theists who proclaimed to have zero doubt. Except maybe bog.

And yet, that seems to be the goal and the proclamation of a good many. Thus, my suspicions regarding their real intent.
PureX
Posts: 1,515
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2016 3:45:00 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/7/2016 2:42:38 AM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 8/6/2016 6:44:22 PM, PureX wrote:
Why do so many theists assume that they are supposed to believe in the existence of "God", absolutely? Because that seems absurdly unrealistic to me, right from the start.

Because maybe you don't understand how spiritual principles operate and why Jesus and Paul taught them.

We have no logical reason to believe in anything, absolutely: without any doubt or skepticism to any degree. Even something as enduring as gravity is a phenomena that I can only assume will remain extant, but cannot be absolutely certain of it, since there is much that I do not understand about it, and whatever might effect it occurrence.

Yes sure, if you don't know what spirituality is, which is the practical application of spiritual laws, through trial and error. So in essence you learn what is "absolute" or what is law, what is authority.

All we can learn from 'trial and error' is the probability of a given outcome. We certainly don't learn any "absolute truth" that way.

So the idea that our faith in the existence and nature of "God" has to preclude doubt just doesn't seem honest, or realistic, to me. And in fact, I don't see how faith can be called faith at all, if one has no doubts. It would be called 'certainty' rather than 'faith'. Why would we even need faith if we had no doubt? As we would have certainty, instead. And wouldn't we prefer certainty over faith?

It doesn't have to "preclude" doubt, but faith is not driven by doubt, that is why doubt produces no fruit in spirituality. Faith is not blind belief in God, rather confidence in His principles, to produce fruit (evidence). Faith is a spiritual principle, this has been lost in translation.

That you are describing is a tautological bias. The more you 'believe' the X" is the truth, the more you will perceive "X" to be true. Belief becomes the "evidence of truth" while the "evidence of truth" then justifies the belief.

Faith is not a "spiritual principal". Faith is an intellectual choice. It's the choice to act in accord with what we hope to be true, but do not know to be true. Thus doubt and faith are 'cause and solution'. Without doubt, we have no need of faith. Because we'd have certainty, instead.

The point of my asking this question is that I believe any religious ideology that seeks the elimination of doubt, as an act of "faith", is at best confused, and is more likely being deliberately dishonest.

That depends, on whether or not those beliefs are based upon truth, do you not wish to have a foundation? come on....Jesus is a solid foundation!

The truth is exactly what we don't have. It's why we need to employ faith. So pretending that we know the truth is NOT really faith at all, as many religious adherents proclaim, it's just blind pretense, masquerading as faith.
PureX
Posts: 1,515
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2016 3:47:16 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/7/2016 3:34:08 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 8/6/2016 6:44:22 PM, PureX wrote:
Why do so many theists assume that they are supposed to believe in the existence of "God", absolutely? Because that seems absurdly unrealistic to me, right from the start.

We have no logical reason to believe in anything, absolutely: without any doubt or skepticism to any degree. Even something as enduring as gravity is a phenomena that I can only assume will remain extant, but cannot be absolutely certain of it, since there is much that I do not understand about it, and whatever might effect it occurrence.

So the idea that our faith in the existence and nature of "God" has to preclude doubt just doesn't seem honest, or realistic, to me. And in fact, I don't see how faith can be called faith at all, if one has no doubts. It would be called 'certainty' rather than 'faith'. Why would we even need faith if we had no doubt? As we would have certainty, instead. And wouldn't we prefer certainty over faith?

The point of my asking this question is that I believe any religious ideology that seeks the elimination of doubt, as an act of "faith", is at best confused, and is more likely being deliberately dishonest.

Ahhh, thank you! This is a very honest appraisal of belief. You and I may be on opposite sides of the fence, but I completely respect this view.

That's because I suspect your argument is with the abuse of religion, not with religion, itself. You just haven't clearly recognized the differences, yet. :)
Fatihah
Posts: 7,714
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2016 5:12:05 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/7/2016 3:22:34 PM, PureX wrote:

I appreciate your response. But Islam, like Christianity, has a great many factions, each with their own ideological proclivities. My reference to religions demanding total adherence as an expression of "faith" also refers to their demanding total obedience to the religious 'rules'. And factions of Islam certainly exhibits plenty of that. As do many factions of Christianity.

Response: If the rules are reasonable and just and can apply, as is the case for Islam, then there should be no difficulty in obeying them.
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,083
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2016 5:58:43 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/7/2016 3:47:16 PM, PureX wrote:
At 8/7/2016 3:34:08 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 8/6/2016 6:44:22 PM, PureX wrote:
Why do so many theists assume that they are supposed to believe in the existence of "God", absolutely? Because that seems absurdly unrealistic to me, right from the start.

We have no logical reason to believe in anything, absolutely: without any doubt or skepticism to any degree. Even something as enduring as gravity is a phenomena that I can only assume will remain extant, but cannot be absolutely certain of it, since there is much that I do not understand about it, and whatever might effect it occurrence.

So the idea that our faith in the existence and nature of "God" has to preclude doubt just doesn't seem honest, or realistic, to me. And in fact, I don't see how faith can be called faith at all, if one has no doubts. It would be called 'certainty' rather than 'faith'. Why would we even need faith if we had no doubt? As we would have certainty, instead. And wouldn't we prefer certainty over faith?

The point of my asking this question is that I believe any religious ideology that seeks the elimination of doubt, as an act of "faith", is at best confused, and is more likely being deliberately dishonest.

Ahhh, thank you! This is a very honest appraisal of belief. You and I may be on opposite sides of the fence, but I completely respect this view.

That's because I suspect your argument is with the abuse of religion, not with religion, itself. You just haven't clearly recognized the differences, yet. :)

Oh, I do recognize the difference. I don't have any problem with belief in god (although I don't share this belief) and the religions that may be associated it, but I most certainly do have issue with this belief being pushed on others in secular education, politics/government, and as an argument against science. I believe that most of these abuses (if not all) conflate "faith" with certainty. Kudos to you for calling that out.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
KIND
Posts: 14
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2016 6:05:25 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
We have no logical reason to believe in anything, absolutely: without any doubt or skepticism to any degree.

You seem to believe in this idea absolutely
Stronn
Posts: 314
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/8/2016 12:25:34 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/7/2016 3:25:27 PM, PureX wrote:
At 8/6/2016 7:11:15 PM, Stronn wrote:
At 8/6/2016 6:44:22 PM, PureX wrote:
Why do so many theists assume that they are supposed to believe in the existence of "God", absolutely? Because that seems absurdly unrealistic to me, right from the start.

We have no logical reason to believe in anything, absolutely: without any doubt or skepticism to any degree. Even something as enduring as gravity is a phenomena that I can only assume will remain extant, but cannot be absolutely certain of it, since there is much that I do not understand about it, and whatever might effect it occurrence.

So the idea that our faith in the existence and nature of "God" has to preclude doubt just doesn't seem honest, or realistic, to me. And in fact, I don't see how faith can be called faith at all, if one has no doubts. It would be called 'certainty' rather than 'faith'. Why would we even need faith if we had no doubt? As we would have certainty, instead. And wouldn't we prefer certainty over faith?

The point of my asking this question is that I believe any religious ideology that seeks the elimination of doubt, as an act of "faith", is at best confused, and is more likely being deliberately dishonest.

Every theist has doubts at some point. One way they often try to quell their doubts is to vehemently profess their faith to others. Such "witnessing" has long been used by religion as a way to reinforce faith and bolster emotional investment in their religion. In fact, for many, bolstering one's own faith is a more important reason to proselytize than recruiting others.

I agree. But what you are really describing here is cult behavior: an attempt at mind control.

True enough. Except that it is often done consciously to oneself. The act of prayer itself is one such behavior, especially if one prays for stronger faith and fewer doubts. Such self-mind-control techniques are endemic in religion. They can be somewhat subtle, but they are usually easy to spot if you look for them, from a Catholic saying hail Mary's to Buddhist meditation to a Muslim who cannot mention Muhammad without following it with "peace be upon him."

Many atheists tend to underestimate the power of such habituaion, and consider themselves immune from it. They will often say that nothing short of rock-solid evidence could convince them of the truth of a religious claim. But I suspect that even the most die-hard atheists, if they made a concerted, conscious effort over an extended period of time to convince themselves of a religious belief, if they willfully bent all their thoughts to trying to believe, and got in the habit of doing so, then they might very well end up believing.

Being an atheist, i would, of course, consider any such effort an act of willful self-delusion, and see no reason to make such an attempt.
Emmarie
Posts: 1,907
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/8/2016 12:28:29 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/6/2016 6:44:22 PM, PureX wrote:
Why do so many theists assume that they are supposed to believe in the existence of "God", absolutely? Because that seems absurdly unrealistic to me, right from the start.

We have no logical reason to believe in anything, absolutely: without any doubt or skepticism to any degree. Even something as enduring as gravity is a phenomena that I can only assume will remain extant, but cannot be absolutely certain of it, since there is much that I do not understand about it, and whatever might effect it occurrence.

So the idea that our faith in the existence and nature of "God" has to preclude doubt just doesn't seem honest, or realistic, to me. And in fact, I don't see how faith can be called faith at all, if one has no doubts. It would be called 'certainty' rather than 'faith'. Why would we even need faith if we had no doubt? As we would have certainty, instead. And wouldn't we prefer certainty over faith?

The point of my asking this question is that I believe any religious ideology that seeks the elimination of doubt, as an act of "faith", is at best confused, and is more likely being deliberately dishonest.
Great points - I agree, faith is only faith if some doubt exists.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/8/2016 12:40:47 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/6/2016 6:44:22 PM, PureX wrote:
Why do so many theists assume that they are supposed to believe in the existence of "God", absolutely?
As you'll recall, Pure, in a recent thread we've been talking about monotheistic dualism, which represents the theological heritage of some 54% of the world.

Monotheistic dualists believe they're born conscripted into a genocidal war between good and evil. It's a war you can't disbelieve in or opt out of, because those actions ally you with the Enemy.

How can anyone accept that doctrine without also absolutely believing in God as Commander in Chief?

Mandatory faith accompanies belief in monotheistic dualism. Which perhaps explains why doubters and skeptics have frequently been persecuted by monotheistic dualists, while they are often tolerated by Hindus and other polytheists.
Harikrish
Posts: 11,005
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/8/2016 1:24:45 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/7/2016 2:42:38 AM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 8/6/2016 6:44:22 PM, PureX wrote:
Why do so many theists assume that they are supposed to believe in the existence of "God", absolutely? Because that seems absurdly unrealistic to me, right from the start.


Because maybe you don't understand how spiritual principles operate and why Jesus and Paul taught them.

We have no logical reason to believe in anything, absolutely: without any doubt or skepticism to any degree. Even something as enduring as gravity is a phenomena that I can only assume will remain extant, but cannot be absolutely certain of it, since there is much that I do not understand about it, and whatever might effect it occurrence.


Yes sure, if you don't know what spirituality is, which is the practical application of spiritual laws, through trial and error. So in essence you learn what is "absolute" or what is law, what is authority.

So the idea that our faith in the existence and nature of "God" has to preclude doubt just doesn't seem honest, or realistic, to me. And in fact, I don't see how faith can be called faith at all, if one has no doubts. It would be called 'certainty' rather than 'faith'. Why would we even need faith if we had no doubt? As we would have certainty, instead. And wouldn't we prefer certainty over faith?

It doesn't have to "preclude" doubt, but faith is not driven by doubt, that is why doubt produces no fruit in spirituality. Faith is not blind belief in God, rather confidence in His principles, to produce fruit (evidence). Faith is a spiritual principle, this has been lost in translation.


The point of my asking this question is that I believe any religious ideology that seeks the elimination of doubt, as an act of "faith", is at best confused, and is more likely being deliberately dishonest.

That depends, on whether or not those beliefs are based upon truth, do you not wish to have a foundation? come on....Jesus is a solid foundation!

Jesus said his foundation would be built on Peter the Rock who turned out to be a liar like Jesus. .

Matthew 16:18 And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. - Bible Hub
biblehub.com " matthew
Outplayz
Posts: 1,264
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/8/2016 5:38:42 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/6/2016 6:44:22 PM, PureX wrote:
Why do so many theists assume that they are supposed to believe in the existence of "God", absolutely? Because that seems absurdly unrealistic to me, right from the start.

We have no logical reason to believe in anything, absolutely: without any doubt or skepticism to any degree. Even something as enduring as gravity is a phenomena that I can only assume will remain extant, but cannot be absolutely certain of it, since there is much that I do not understand about it, and whatever might effect it occurrence.

So the idea that our faith in the existence and nature of "God" has to preclude doubt just doesn't seem honest, or realistic, to me. And in fact, I don't see how faith can be called faith at all, if one has no doubts. It would be called 'certainty' rather than 'faith'. Why would we even need faith if we had no doubt? As we would have certainty, instead. And wouldn't we prefer certainty over faith?

The point of my asking this question is that I believe any religious ideology that seeks the elimination of doubt, as an act of "faith", is at best confused, and is more likely being deliberately dishonest.

Although not religious, this was a good post... i got to think about my belief a bit (a belief made of doubt). I speculate spiritually to be true, i can't deny doubt is always there but i have less doubt in the former. It's interesting that doubt makes my belief however. Almost anything having to do with my doubts are negatives. I even find a belief that we just stop existing to be a negative although viably can be true. In the end, doubt is a fight against your own negatives. If one doesn't doubt their beliefs, then they aren't really learning or growing. Maybe why we have so many spiritually stuck. They have given up on challenging the harder parts of their belief.
PureX
Posts: 1,515
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/8/2016 7:12:54 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/8/2016 5:38:42 AM, Outplayz wrote:
At 8/6/2016 6:44:22 PM, PureX wrote:
Why do so many theists assume that they are supposed to believe in the existence of "God", absolutely? Because that seems absurdly unrealistic to me, right from the start.

We have no logical reason to believe in anything, absolutely: without any doubt or skepticism to any degree. Even something as enduring as gravity is a phenomena that I can only assume will remain extant, but cannot be absolutely certain of it, since there is much that I do not understand about it, and whatever might effect it occurrence.

So the idea that our faith in the existence and nature of "God" has to preclude doubt just doesn't seem honest, or realistic, to me. And in fact, I don't see how faith can be called faith at all, if one has no doubts. It would be called 'certainty' rather than 'faith'. Why would we even need faith if we had no doubt? As we would have certainty, instead. And wouldn't we prefer certainty over faith?

The point of my asking this question is that I believe any religious ideology that seeks the elimination of doubt, as an act of "faith", is at best confused, and is more likely being deliberately dishonest.

Although not religious, this was a good post... i got to think about my belief a bit (a belief made of doubt). I speculate spiritually to be true, i can't deny doubt is always there but i have less doubt in the former. It's interesting that doubt makes my belief however. Almost anything having to do with my doubts are negatives. I even find a belief that we just stop existing to be a negative although viably can be true. In the end, doubt is a fight against your own negatives. If one doesn't doubt their beliefs, then they aren't really learning or growing. Maybe why we have so many spiritually stuck. They have given up on challenging the harder parts of their belief.

I think we need our doubt to help keep us honest and sane. Certainty can be addictive, for we humans, because we survive and thrive by knowing how to control and manipulate our environment. Knowledge is our survival. And therefor our ignorance is feared as weakness. The more certain we are of our knowledge, the stronger and more in control we feel we are. While the more doubtful and uncertain we are of our knowledge the more vulnerable and frightened we feel we are. And we don't want to feel that way. So we tend to avoid acknowledging our own doubts and uncertainty, because it makes us aware of our vulnerability. And we don't want to be aware it. Nor do we want others to be aware of it, in us.

So feigned certitude can easily become a kind of intellectual drug. A drug that can be peddled to people for power and profit, in the form of ideology; religious, political, etc.,. And there are a number of religious groups and factions that are doing exactly that.
PureX
Posts: 1,515
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/8/2016 7:23:40 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/8/2016 12:25:34 AM, Stronn wrote:
At 8/7/2016 3:25:27 PM, PureX wrote:
At 8/6/2016 7:11:15 PM, Stronn wrote:
At 8/6/2016 6:44:22 PM, PureX wrote:
Why do so many theists assume that they are supposed to believe in the existence of "God", absolutely? Because that seems absurdly unrealistic to me, right from the start.

We have no logical reason to believe in anything, absolutely: without any doubt or skepticism to any degree. Even something as enduring as gravity is a phenomena that I can only assume will remain extant, but cannot be absolutely certain of it, since there is much that I do not understand about it, and whatever might effect it occurrence.

So the idea that our faith in the existence and nature of "God" has to preclude doubt just doesn't seem honest, or realistic, to me. And in fact, I don't see how faith can be called faith at all, if one has no doubts. It would be called 'certainty' rather than 'faith'. Why would we even need faith if we had no doubt? As we would have certainty, instead. And wouldn't we prefer certainty over faith?

The point of my asking this question is that I believe any religious ideology that seeks the elimination of doubt, as an act of "faith", is at best confused, and is more likely being deliberately dishonest.

Every theist has doubts at some point. One way they often try to quell their doubts is to vehemently profess their faith to others. Such "witnessing" has long been used by religion as a way to reinforce faith and bolster emotional investment in their religion. In fact, for many, bolstering one's own faith is a more important reason to proselytize than recruiting others.

I agree. But what you are really describing here is cult behavior: an attempt at mind control.

True enough. Except that it is often done consciously to oneself. The act of prayer itself is one such behavior, especially if one prays for stronger faith and fewer doubts. Such self-mind-control techniques are endemic in religion. They can be somewhat subtle, but they are usually easy to spot if you look for them, from a Catholic saying hail Mary's to Buddhist meditation to a Muslim who cannot mention Muhammad without following it with "peace be upon him."

The interesting thing, here, is that this process can be used to our advantage, or to our harm. Which is why we need to be skeptical of any purported results in advance. And instead, keep a close watch on the results we are actually getting.

Many atheists tend to underestimate the power of such habituaion, and consider themselves immune from it. They will often say that nothing short of rock-solid evidence could convince them of the truth of a religious claim. But I suspect that even the most die-hard atheists, if they made a concerted, conscious effort over an extended period of time to convince themselves of a religious belief, if they willfully bent all their thoughts to trying to believe, and got in the habit of doing so, then they might very well end up believing.

I agree, because what they call "evidence" is being strongly biased by the assumptions they currently hold. If those assumptions are shaken be serious doubt, what they will determine to be "evidence" will begin to change.

Being an atheist, i would, of course, consider any such effort an act of willful self-delusion, and see no reason to make such an attempt.

And yet even that conclusion is the result of a bias that's been 'pre-approved as the truth'. We humans are nothing if not a hodgepodge presumptions that have been fed to us over a lifetime, and that we never really managed to sufficiently doubt. :)
PureX
Posts: 1,515
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/8/2016 7:26:28 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/7/2016 5:12:05 PM, Fatihah wrote:
At 8/7/2016 3:22:34 PM, PureX wrote:

I appreciate your response. But Islam, like Christianity, has a great many factions, each with their own ideological proclivities. My reference to religions demanding total adherence as an expression of "faith" also refers to their demanding total obedience to the religious 'rules'. And factions of Islam certainly exhibits plenty of that. As do many factions of Christianity.

Response: If the rules are reasonable and just and can apply, as is the case for Islam, then there should be no difficulty in obeying them.

"Reasonable and just" according to whom?
PureX
Posts: 1,515
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/8/2016 7:33:42 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/8/2016 12:40:47 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 8/6/2016 6:44:22 PM, PureX wrote:
Why do so many theists assume that they are supposed to believe in the existence of "God", absolutely?
As you'll recall, Pure, in a recent thread we've been talking about monotheistic dualism, which represents the theological heritage of some 54% of the world.

Monotheistic dualists believe they're born conscripted into a genocidal war between good and evil. It's a war you can't disbelieve in or opt out of, because those actions ally you with the Enemy.

How can anyone accept that doctrine without also absolutely believing in God as Commander in Chief?

Most "monotheistic dualists" don't think about their own religion in such depth. Nor do they apply it to their lives with much deliberation or vigor. The ideology you are presenting is the extremist's view of it. Most of these theists are not religious extremists and do not feel that they are at war with all existential manifestations of satan, beyond the 'satan of selfish inclination', within themselves.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/8/2016 7:56:37 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/8/2016 7:33:42 PM, PureX wrote:
At 8/8/2016 12:40:47 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 8/6/2016 6:44:22 PM, PureX wrote:
Why do so many theists assume that they are supposed to believe in the existence of "God", absolutely?
As you'll recall, Pure, in a recent thread we've been talking about monotheistic dualism, which represents the theological heritage of some 54% of the world.
Monotheistic dualists believe they're born conscripted into a genocidal war between good and evil. It's a war you can't disbelieve in or opt out of, because those actions ally you with the Enemy.
How can anyone accept that doctrine without also absolutely believing in God as Commander in Chief?
Most "monotheistic dualists" don't think about their own religion in such depth.
I concur. Much of the time they react from normative social habits they don't understand, and couldn't possibly defend, and thus operate from a complacent, contemptuous sanctimony whose tyranny, injustice and cruelty they cannot recognise because it's too comfortably familiar.

And this insight is key to why the conversation is important.

Another way of thinking about it is this: Westboro Baptist Church is an international joke for no other reason than that it takes literally Mediaeval religious doctrine in a society where it has become fashionable to pretend that Christians are too nice to have ever thought that way.

And the reason most mainstream Christians can't stand looking at Westboro Baptist Church is that it would force them to reflect on a living, nonviolent historical re-enactment of their tradition's own shameful moral and intellectual history.

Most of these theists are not religious extremists and do not feel that they are at war with all existential manifestations of satan, beyond the 'satan of selfish inclination', within themselves.
Which is precisely why one must challenge the consequences of any decisions and attitudes which act as though they are in such a war.

Now, I have been responding in good faith to your shifting counter-arguments, which have moved from:

1) Most religion isn't dualistic (yes it is, both by adherents and cultural influence);
2) It's not the dualism, but the absolutism (yet dualism is founded on absolutism and constructed to support absolutism on demand);
3) Science cannot successfully challenge it (yes it can, by the experience of many atheists and secularists, and by the shift in the religious themselves in the last several centuries);
4) Most adherents don't take it seriously (precisely my point: adherents don't consciously believe it, yet frequently act as though they do. That behaviour already has a name: hypocrisy)

Your own shifting, repeatedly failed arguments represent your confusion on this topic, Pure: you have an emotional attachment to an undefendable, unsupportable status quo for no other reason than your own (quite correct) intuitions that if the foundations of the world's majority religious heritage is so readily debunked, the foundations of all religiosity comes into doubt.

I don't mind that you have that position; I can completely understand it. However what bothers me is that you are either unaware of your own internal conflicts, or have yet to acknowledge them. And though you're not a dualist yourself, in reacting to it without acknowledging your own inner conflicts, you're adopting the same unthinking absolutist sanctimony you've denounced.

My point being: I understand and accept why you hold the position you do, however I wish you were more candid about why you hold it.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/8/2016 8:18:36 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
Pure in follow-up, because discussion in two recent threads have intersected, I got confused about which thread we were in. Some of my recent comments were appropriate for the other thread, but I feel they are not topic for this one.

Please accept my apologies for the inadvertant cross-over, and do not feel obliged to reply to any off-topic comments.
Fatihah
Posts: 7,714
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/8/2016 9:49:12 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/8/2016 7:26:28 PM, PureX wrote:

"Reasonable and just" according to whom?

Response: To anyone who is reasonable and just.
Outplayz
Posts: 1,264
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/9/2016 3:18:02 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/8/2016 7:12:54 PM, PureX wrote:
At 8/8/2016 5:38:42 AM, Outplayz wrote:
At 8/6/2016 6:44:22 PM, PureX wrote:
Why do so many theists assume that they are supposed to believe in the existence of "God", absolutely? Because that seems absurdly unrealistic to me, right from the start.

We have no logical reason to believe in anything, absolutely: without any doubt or skepticism to any degree. Even something as enduring as gravity is a phenomena that I can only assume will remain extant, but cannot be absolutely certain of it, since there is much that I do not understand about it, and whatever might effect it occurrence.

So the idea that our faith in the existence and nature of "God" has to preclude doubt just doesn't seem honest, or realistic, to me. And in fact, I don't see how faith can be called faith at all, if one has no doubts. It would be called 'certainty' rather than 'faith'. Why would we even need faith if we had no doubt? As we would have certainty, instead. And wouldn't we prefer certainty over faith?

The point of my asking this question is that I believe any religious ideology that seeks the elimination of doubt, as an act of "faith", is at best confused, and is more likely being deliberately dishonest.

Although not religious, this was a good post... i got to think about my belief a bit (a belief made of doubt). I speculate spiritually to be true, i can't deny doubt is always there but i have less doubt in the former. It's interesting that doubt makes my belief however. Almost anything having to do with my doubts are negatives. I even find a belief that we just stop existing to be a negative although viably can be true. In the end, doubt is a fight against your own negatives. If one doesn't doubt their beliefs, then they aren't really learning or growing. Maybe why we have so many spiritually stuck. They have given up on challenging the harder parts of their belief.

I think we need our doubt to help keep us honest and sane. Certainty can be addictive, for we humans, because we survive and thrive by knowing how to control and manipulate our environment. Knowledge is our survival. And therefor our ignorance is feared as weakness. The more certain we are of our knowledge, the stronger and more in control we feel we are. While the more doubtful and uncertain we are of our knowledge the more vulnerable and frightened we feel we are. And we don't want to feel that way. So we tend to avoid acknowledging our own doubts and uncertainty, because it makes us aware of our vulnerability. And we don't want to be aware it. Nor do we want others to be aware of it, in us.

You said what i wanted to say, but better lol. I just can't tell how it is to me. I have a belief, that feels unchallenged, and basically grows as i grow. I believe it to be true at this point, however, with a lot of questions that come up either by me or someone else. These questions make me question it, yes, but i never feel the negative effects of doubt. I understand full well that without a brain... you are discontinued. That is one logical answer from the observations of what we have now; that seems most true as well if you look at it logically. Yet, when you rule in what we are and the world around us... so many other possibilities open up to us. I wonder why though bc it is quite clear without a brain i am done. It is funny how it is so hard for us to take Occam's Razor on this topic. At least the way i look at it is, it's only one possibility, yet since i happen to be a fan of creativity... i have no choice but to doubt it more than my own belief - it is the least creative choice on the table.

So feigned certitude can easily become a kind of intellectual drug. A drug that can be peddled to people for power and profit, in the form of ideology; religious, political, etc.,. And there are a number of religious groups and factions that are doing exactly that.

This is another topic. I am looking for ways to get my stories and beliefs monetized. Why not? If i can be a good story teller or personality, i should use that to my advantage. Plus, i know i would be the most honest about the topic and have the most creative following. In my opinion, there needs to be a voice to shift us away from religion and back to free thought, back to being free in my opinion. Yes, my belief is solely constructed from my imagination, my creativity. But... so was my music, art, and so forth that people seemed to like. I don't see why spirituality can't be art too; actually i would be honored if i could make it that way. It would mean division and genre, which is how i see it at this point anyways. I have plans in this regard, i am just hesitant in its uncertainty; mostly lazy too. I see no harm in it though, we all need money for freedom... plus, i know this and most likely look for ways in implementing that into my "churches." Come on... i have to call it a religion as a paralegal, i know all the tax cuts ;p
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,307
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/9/2016 12:15:38 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/8/2016 1:24:45 AM, Harikrish wrote:
At 8/7/2016 2:42:38 AM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 8/6/2016 6:44:22 PM, PureX wrote:
Why do so many theists assume that they are supposed to believe in the existence of "God", absolutely? Because that seems absurdly unrealistic to me, right from the start.


Because maybe you don't understand how spiritual principles operate and why Jesus and Paul taught them.

We have no logical reason to believe in anything, absolutely: without any doubt or skepticism to any degree. Even something as enduring as gravity is a phenomena that I can only assume will remain extant, but cannot be absolutely certain of it, since there is much that I do not understand about it, and whatever might effect it occurrence.


Yes sure, if you don't know what spirituality is, which is the practical application of spiritual laws, through trial and error. So in essence you learn what is "absolute" or what is law, what is authority.

So the idea that our faith in the existence and nature of "God" has to preclude doubt just doesn't seem honest, or realistic, to me. And in fact, I don't see how faith can be called faith at all, if one has no doubts. It would be called 'certainty' rather than 'faith'. Why would we even need faith if we had no doubt? As we would have certainty, instead. And wouldn't we prefer certainty over faith?

It doesn't have to "preclude" doubt, but faith is not driven by doubt, that is why doubt produces no fruit in spirituality. Faith is not blind belief in God, rather confidence in His principles, to produce fruit (evidence). Faith is a spiritual principle, this has been lost in translation.


The point of my asking this question is that I believe any religious ideology that seeks the elimination of doubt, as an act of "faith", is at best confused, and is more likely being deliberately dishonest.

That depends, on whether or not those beliefs are based upon truth, do you not wish to have a foundation? come on....Jesus is a solid foundation!

Jesus said his foundation would be built on Peter the Rock who turned out to be a liar like Jesus. .

Matthew 16:18 And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. - Bible Hub
biblehub.com " matthew

Wrong, the foundation was based on the principle Peter confessed, not a man. Once again you prove you are illiterate to scripture. His statement was based upon Peter's confession and as usual Jesus draws out an illustration and some poetic/analogous phrasing to go along with it.
He was establishing the truth Peter confessed, it was the confession that "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God" the church was built, not man.

Matthew16
15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this "rock" (the confession) I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

19 And I will give unto thee (church) the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou (this is applicable to whoever applies these principles) shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou (those who abide in that confession) shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Peter was irrelevant to the point and principles Jesus was making, Peter just happened to be the object of the confession, God could have revealed that truth to anyone of them, it was the confession that " Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God." That is what the church was built upon.
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,307
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/9/2016 12:21:27 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 8/7/2016 4:18:09 AM, Willows wrote:
At 8/7/2016 2:42:38 AM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 8/6/2016 6:44:22 PM, PureX wrote:


It doesn't have to "preclude" doubt, but faith is not driven by doubt, that is why doubt produces no fruit in spirituality. Faith is not blind belief in God, rather confidence in His principles, to produce fruit (evidence). Faith is a spiritual principle, this has been lost in translation.

Faith is driven not by doubt but by fear. Fear of losing your faith and fear of losing your afterlife.
Religious Faith is a spiritual principal the premise of which, there is no such thing.
Faith in God is blind faith.

Sorry atheist, but you don't get to tell me how my beliefs work, it goes the other way around. If you want to know what I believe and how, stop assuming crap and get into a discussion with me without assertions please.
No, faith is not driven by fear, read that above again.



The point of my asking this question is that I believe any religious ideology that seeks the elimination of doubt, as an act of "faith", is at best confused, and is more likely being deliberately dishonest.

That depends, on whether or not those beliefs are based upon truth, do you not wish to have a foundation? come on....Jesus is a solid foundation!
Since there is no viable evidence to support the assertion that Jesus ever existed your foundation is extremely flimsy to say the least.
Your belief is not based on truth but myths.
To many people religious belief is enforced upon them or they lack the education to know better, otherwise deliberately dishonest, you are not being true to yourself.

Thanks for all your opinions buddy.
If you want to discuss something or understand my beliefs then have at it, otherwise it's you being dishonest. I am and always will be true to myself that is why I abide in what I know.