Great atheist quote

[TXlib]

For if there is a sin against life, it consists perhaps not so much in despairing of life as in hoping for another life and in eluding the implacable grandeur of this life.
-- Albert Camus

[SOteric]

1. Great Theist Quote:

Lord, make me an instrument of your peace,
Where there is hatred, let me sow love;
Where there is injury, pardon;
Where there is discord, union;
Where there is doubt, faith;
Where there is despair, hope;
Where there is darkness, light;
Where there is sadness, joy,
for your mercy and truth's sake.
O Divine Master, grant that I may not so much seek to be consoled as to console,
to be understood as to understand,
to be loved as to love,
for it is in giving that we receive,
it is in pardoning that we are pardoned,
it is in dying that we are born to eternal life.

-St. Francis of Assissi

[TXlib]

3. That is indeed a great theist quote.

I think it trumps the poetic heck out of the Camus quote...

[Beaker]

7. it falls apart at the end.

"it is in dying that we are born to eternal life."

sounds like a glowing endorsement of suicide, if you ask me.

unfortunately, death is just that...

[SOteric]

10. Except that

the Catholic church does not condone suicide, so you're really sort of heavily interpretting, there.

unfortunately, death is just that...

In your opinion.

[TXlib]

11. So, what can you tell me about St Francis?

All I know about him are a few random quotes.

[SOteric]

12. Read here:

http://members.aol.com/JAMIETAMPA/Francis/biography3.htm

[TXlib]

14. Thanks.

He sounds like an interesting fellow.

[Beaker]

13. in my "opinion"?

show me any proof to the contrary.

[SOteric]

15. The argument

of whether there is an existence of sorts after death is a classic Argumentum ad Ignorantium. No living person can prove there is a life after death. And no living person can prove that there is not. Any statements put forth on either side of the argument can logically only be considered opinion.

To debate this matter would be a futile waste of one's time.

[Beaker]

20. the whole "life after death" thing is what led me from theist to a-theist.

I went to parochial school my whole life(lutheran), but as i got toward's the end of high school, it just kept making less and less sense the more i thought about it. of course everyone wants to believe that life is eternal, in the sense of the "immortal soul"...being wiped out of existence is a bleak & scary thought.

But-
IF there is a god, and he's the loving father-figure of the Bible, why would he condemn any of his "children" to eternal damnation and torment in Hell, along the "lake of fire", for even small violations of his ambiguous "rules"???
plus- He won't give you any solid unequivocal proof of his existence- instead, you're supposed to entrust the fate of your one and only, immortal soul to the second-hand words of men who lived centuries ago, even before reliable recording methods were created, and whose own words say that men CANNOT be trusted....
sounds pretty petty & sadistic, maybe even boderline psychotic& criminally insane- and I'm supposed to "worship" the guy? and "love" him? that'd be kinda like a battered wife staying in the marriage-
no thanks.

Instead, I try to live for the most part by the same philosophy that's central to pretty much ALL religion, and even pre-dates the bible, where it's version is known as "the golden rule"-

"do unto others as you would have it that they would do unto others"

i.e.- treat other people as you would want/expect them to treat you.(although I don't know how it's meant to apply to masochists)

and IF there is a god-
when he/she/it decides to treat me with a modicum of respect, and provide some type of clear evidence of existence- he'll have my undivided attention and devotion.

until then-

not.

[SOteric]

33. "Hell"

is a Christian invention. The Old Testament and the texts of Judaism do not describe or expound upon the notion of a lake of fire or eternal damnation.

I don't believe God does condemn to this torment, it's a choice we make for ourselves; to be eternally in his presence or to be without him. For me, that is a major part of what life ultimately and actually means. We have a chance to experience a blend of both experiences and exercise our free will to chose that with which we best identify.

Your argument boils down to your saying that you don't agree with what you in our limited human understanding, perceive as the way that God conducts his business. He should keep you better informed. He should behave thusly and do these things. Until such time as you are able to dictate policy and behaviour to God, you refuse to believe in him.

Good luck with that.

:hi:

[Beaker]

36. i'm not trying to "dictate policy"-

you need to find a better method for boiling down arguments, because the one you're using ain't working-

but gee, it was sure nice of you to presume to tell me what my side of the argument is :hi:

and based on your seeming embrace of catholoschism earlier on, I assumed you were a christian (although to the untrained eye, catholics can sometimes seem more virginian than christian)

i'm just looking for a little common courtesy in a deity.

if another man is going to tell me that an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent deity wants, expects, or requires something of lil' ol' me-
I'm going to have to ask for a little more proof than just the word of that imperfect, equally fallible, sinful and deceitful being before expending any of my limited(life is short) and valuable time & effort in that direction.

to settle or ask for less would be to show myself to be some kind of naive, weak-minded, easily manipulated fool- and momma didn't raise none o'them.

[SOteric]

38. I'm sorry,

but it very much still looks that way to me.

God does not meet your expectation. God does not measure up to your criteria. God is not sufficiently courteous as prescribed by modern-day cultures and etiquette mavins. God does not play by your idea of the rules. Ergo you want nothing to do with God.

[Az]

39. Got nothing against god

Just never met him.

[SOteric]

41. Or, -

You have and you just didn't realise it. :hi:

[TXlib]

42. What if God was one of us?

Sorry, the guy in the cube next to me has been humming that all afternoon.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

43. just a slob like one of us...

to compound your 'ear-worm'...damn I hate it when that happens...now I am stuck with it too!

theProdigal

[TXlib]

44. hit the bong like one of us...

oops, that's "What if God Smoked Cannabis?"

[SOteric]

48. That ~would~

go a long way toward explaining some of my coworkers. :7

[TXlib]

49. I sense an interesting story coming on...

Please share...

[SOteric]

45. There's only one cure...

Just.....sit right back and you'll hear a tale,
a tale of a fateful trip,
that started from this tropic port,
aboard this tiny ship...

(No, no. Don't thank me. You're relief is thanks enough.)

[TXlib]

47. AHHHHHHHHH!!!!

:spank:

[Az]

52. Or perhaps

who you mistook for god was just yourself. That argument goes both ways. And I can provide evidence that such phenomena does happen.

I seek the truth. If the truth leads me to gods front door I will gladdly follow it there.

[SOteric]

57. Perhaps it was.

This is always possible.

I do not believe it at this time, based on all those things I've known and felt over the course of my lifetime.

And on the bright side: If I'm wrong, I won't have to hear anyone say "I told you so." :7

[Beaker]

46. nooooo.......

it has nothing to do with wanting nothing to do with god- if there were one, i'd be more than happy to hang out for awhile(although eternity is a long damn time to spend with anyone).

problem is, there is no god to hang out with- just a lot of other humans who think they've figured out what god is, or decided that we can't really understand what "god" is in our mental infancy(but he's there, gosh-darnit).

I'm content to deal with the here & now, and what is real & actual- time spent contemplating if god is, what god is and what that god may want or expect is just another way that some people choose to spend their limited time in life.

the way i look at it, if there were a god, and that god wanted us to know it existed, it'd let us know, but it hasn't, so it doesn't.

but if it did, and it wanted something from us, again- it'd let us know, but it hasn't, so it doesn't.

pretty simple, really.

[Az]

37. Before you stands two doors

One door leads to an eternity of bliss and wonderment. The other door leads to an enternity of suffering and misery. Which door do you choose. Oh by the way. The doors are not labeled.

To be able to make an effective choice one needs information. There could be some guy standing near the doors telling you which door is the right door. How do you trust this individual. He could be lying. He could be mistakent.

The best and only course would be for the information about what lays beyod each door to be made plainly obvious. Evidence showing what each one covers should be made available. Note that this evidence does not deny the individuals choice. It merely makes their choice possible in an educated sense.

This is the same dilema posed by modern Christianity. It offers us two choices and no supporting evidence for either case other than a multitude of opinions. The argument is often made that if god made himself plainly obvious he would deny faith and this would deny freewill. Knowledge does not deny freewill. It informs it and enables it to be exorcised intelligently.

[SOteric]

40. Only if rationality and logic

are the only measures of experience. Yet in reality emotion, sensation, passion and intuition play a role in our lives.

You can study the notes and know a piece of music to a degree of absolute intellectual precision. It takes something more, to execute that piece in a manner that separates it for artistic excellence.

You can practice the strokes, the perspective and subtle hue and texture and accurately render a likeness on canvas. It takes something more to execute that piece in a with real depth and feeling.

Those 'levels of the exceptional' and other cannot be relayed in a brief, written, lesson format. You have to live them, have faith in their availability to you and experience them anew in every rendition.

[Az]

51. Not the only

We are emotional creatures. The very basis upon which we build our understanding of the universe around us are our emotional reactions to events. The universe is recorded in our mind as emotional reactions. Logic and rational thought are discoveries that we have learned have value to us in discovering the truth of things. Sometimes our emotional reaction to things can be misleading. Using tools such as logic and critical thinking give us the means to unweave the rainbow.

Our emotions can convey all manner of truths to us. But the issue presented to us by Christianity places a very real descision before us. The heaviest of matters is on the table. Eternity in heaven or hell. A descision of what you believe to be true is on the table. The bible suggests that faith is the best route but is not beyond providing evidence for the skeptics. Thomas questioned Jesus whether it was really him and was not satisfied until he had the physical evidence of the wounds in his very hands. Knowledge does not deny freewill. It merely informs it.

[SOteric]

55. Yes, 'not the only'

with regard to your statement as well:

The best and only course would be for the information about what lays beyod each door to be made plainly obvious. Evidence showing what each one covers should be made available...

Perhaps in your judgement this is the best and only course for decision. I think it somewhat akin to asking for an ingredient list and chemical analysis in a luxury restaurant.

Somethings simply need to be experienced. In many ways you and I agree; in an ideal situation I believe we'd have at least some elements of both the intellectual data and the intuitive, emotional experience.

Yet, as I've elucidated in my previous post in this thread ("In regard to your supposition," or something similar) the opportunities, the interest, the mutual cooperation necessary for mankind to have explored validation of god is limited both by science and by religion. Perhaps we've always had the validation that so many seek, but we didn't know it while we were looking at it. Maybe god is a P-dimensional membrane.

[Az]

58. Maybe

But wouldn't god (being a nice god) want us to come to the right descision. I mean the stories about him have had instances where he was willing to provide the hard evidence requested(Thomas, burning bushes, fire colums, etc). Why hold back now? Provide us with an example that we cannot refute. We still can make a free choice between whether we wish to follow his way or the other. But we are left in the dark.

There are measurable differences between how some people see the world around them. This extends to skeptics and believers. Some readily see patterns in the world around them even when they are not there. Others withhold acceptance that a pattern is really there. If there is such a real difference between individuals this means the matter is not balanced. Did god make the skeptics such that they could not find their way to him? Did he make the journey harder for them or even impossible?

[TXlib]

16. As one atheist to another

What proof have we that *we* are right?

Although I feel fairly certain that this existance is the only one there is, I will readily admit I can't prove it.

[Az]

19. Proof is for math. evidence is for science

Well proof is also for booze but that is not going to solve this issue.

Not going to prove anything using science or logic. You certainly can disprove claims with it. Disprove enough claims and you begin to get an idea of what the actual truth may be.

[TXlib]

24. Fine. As one atheist to another...

What evidence have we that *we* are right?

---

ha | irs

[Az]

28. Didn't know atheists were making the positive claim

Atheism in general is a reactionary position. That is the theists make a claim that there is a god. We take their evidence and arguments into consideration and if they fail to meet the standards of logic and evidentiary process we reject their claim. Thus asking whether we are right or not is not necissarily the right question. The right question is more along the lines are the claimants right.

[TXlib]

30. Agreed.

But I get a lot of flak from people when they first learn that I am an atheist, since they are expecting me to call them stupid for their beliefs.

That reaction is a result of anti-theists making strong, provocative claims.

I'm getting more used to walking a fine line in the interests of keeping the peace.

[SOteric]

35. I'm not sure your supposition

regard sufficient disproof and truth is accurate.

The two main pillars of 20th-century physics, quantum mechanics and Einstein's general theory of relativity, are mutually incompatible. General relativity fails to comply with the quantum rules that govern the behaviour of elementary particles, while black holes are challenging the very foundations of quantum mechanics. Something big has to give.

But rather than assume that the one theory disproves sufficiently the other, there have been a series of attempts to quantify the "Theory of Everything" to include both.

So yes, we are, as a species, constantly refining our thoughts, our knowledge base and discarding that which does not fit. But here's the rub: often in sciences theories which are discarded, worn-out, tired and forgotten are re-examined when all other roads have been walked. Usually, because someone somewhere had enough faith, interest, funding, or a wild-ass hunch, - call it whatever you like to pull it out and re-examine it from another facet.

While many gods over the passage of time have been 'disproved' I think that rather than suggesting an ultimate truth it's perhaps equally or even more valid to point out that adherents lost interest in those gods. With enough interest, with enough reasonable and seeking minds, I don't conceive it impossible that even a good mathematician, scientist or physicist might come to a point of admitting the possibility of an external force in the universe which mankind in her infacy has named God.

The difficulties are that religion has a distrust and suppressive effect on science. And science and often an even stronger distrust and suppressive effect on religion. My point is: maybe there's a unifying supersymmetry. How do we come to explore that idea if we cannot come to regard each point of view as valid?

[DS1]

62. Bravo!!

*whistles*

[youngred]

21. Its not an endorsement of suicide

esp considering the Church's strong opposition to suicide.

It talks about the 'glory of heaven' no more.

[Az]

31. Suicide and the church

It is interesting. One of the main hooks of the religion is the notion that there is something that comes after death. If you live by the rules set by the religion this time after life is superior to what you experienced during life. Thus the religion in essence is largely based on a death cult mentality. That is that what happens after you die is superior to what comes before it.

This creates a problem for a religion that is trying to grow. With this emphasis on the afterlife what is there to keep the people focused on the here and now and specifically propogating the religion. There has to be a rule set to keep people from taking their own lives.

However consider this. Assume you are a true believer. Assume further that your salvation is certain as you have lead a good life. Why would you not want an unsaved person to kill you?

[youngred]

34. Because the gift of God (as traditionall accepted)

is life. Therefore ending life, or stopping life is a 'sin'. Without going into an extensive debate of the Consistant Life Ethic, suffice it to say that ending one's own life, or ending that of another is a wrong. The early Christian church (and for what I know of others as well) did indeed face that problem, not in the form of suicide, but of people withdrawing from the world. It was quite common for early Christians to sell all their worldly goods, and not have children. You are right about the aparant conundrum

Plus, I only have faith that there is a God and an afterlife... doesn't mean there is and I'd rather not found out firsthand until my time is up thanks ;-)

[cprise]

64. It still provides a disincentive

...away from saving life, maximizing it, and enhancing the quality of life.

And that's just the position towards humans. Where all other life is concerned, life it to be used (and disposed of ) as we see fit.

Threats like climate change and mass extinction are barely a consideration in such a religious world view. In fact, they may be something to look forward to as a fulfilment of prophecy.

[youngred]

66. How exactly?

I'm not following anything you're saying, in fact my religious worldview is quite the opposite from that which you describe

[cprise]

71. That is the dominant Christian M.O.

...especially as it is felt in politics.

If people value afterlife more than life, are preoccupied with human "unworthiness" and sin, and are stuck on authoritarianism then how might that manifest on a large scale?

Might we trail many other (very secular) nations in our quality of life, lead the world in environmental destruction, lead the world in prisons and incarceration, fail to re-invest in our children?

I appreciate that a religious Left (or something) exists. But after Billy Graham's bullying they have dropped humanism as a principle and have been too busy staring at their crystals and New Testament deconstructions to really care about reaching some kind of spiritual consensus on the human condition. The Right has theirs: people are inherently bad, they must be pauperized and controlled even if that means lying and killing. The Left in this country doesn't have it in them to tar, feather and neutralize these fundamentalists---- INSTEAD we hear them complain about "secular fundamentalists" who get uppity about enforcing constitutional law and seperation of church and state.

You should all be studying alms, its history, and why a preference for this socio-economic form has re-emerged suddenly in American politics. We are manufacturing a vast prison population and beginning to use them as captive alms recipients in faith-based prisons!

[youngred]

72. No, not at all

Another principle is that let he who is without sin cast the first stone. So I see you must be walking on water these days.

Give me a break. That's such a biased, stereotypical and inaccurate view of religion and Christianity.

Might we trail many other (very secular) nations in our quality of life, lead the world in environmental destruction, lead the world in prisons and incarceration, fail to re-invest in our children?
We're also behind some very religious nations in those regards, and ahead of some very secular nations in those regards. Blaming that on Christianity is ridiculous.

Ceptive Alms recipients in faith based prisons, excuse me, but What the fuck are you talking about?

You make some valid points about the lack of a unified religious left, but spirnkle your post with vague inaccuracies.

[Beaker]

50. "it is in dying that we are born to eternal life."...

they gotta be a little more careful how the phrase things...an impressionable mind could easily interpret that as an encouragement to be dead...it might even lead them to believe they have an "immortal soul" that transcends death- not something you want people believing in a country where guns and pointy sticks are so readily available.

[youngred]

59. OK

but anyone who has done enough reading to get that quote has probably done enough reading to know what the quote means. The context is the key

[Beaker]

63. ...

:eyes:

[youngred]

67. What a well thought out and intelligent response

Don't take your ignorance on the matter out on others.

[PVnRT]

26. A glowing endorsement of suicide?

Ummmmm whatever :eyes:

[cprise]

2. Life is grand and quite precious

All the more so if this is the only time we have.

:toast:

[Az]

4. Sagan

The world is so exquisite, with so much love and moral depth, that there is no reason to deceive ourselves with pretty stories for which there's little good evidence. Far better, it seems to me, in our vulnerability, is to look Death in the eye and to be grateful every day for the brief but magnificent opportunity that life provides.
-- Carl Sagan

[TXlib]

6. That's a great one, too!

[cprise]

65. I have a deep appreciation for him

...and for atheism, skepticism and science in general after reading his book "Demon Haunted World".

[BlueEyedSon]

5. "God is Santa Clause for adults."

[Beaker]

8. Hey....that's mine.

nt.

[youngred]

22. *sigh*

I as a theist find that to be extremely insulting. The existance of god can neither be proven nor disproven. I believe and have faith that there is a God, other's do not. I got my belief from looking at the world around me and from reading various religious text's and thesis by atheists and agnostics. I came to one conclusion, someone else came to another. I however, don't denegrate the beliefs of those who came to a different conclusion than myself. I respect that difference.

[Az]

23. Incorrect

The existance of god can be disproven if anyone were to actually put forward a properly structured argument for god. The difficulty is that all the arguments for god have been defeated but the belief continues. We are left with a god whose description and actions are so constrained that no action on its part is detectable. No presense is described. No aspect measurable. The god that cannot be disproved is the end product of a logical assault. Its nature defined by what we cannot disprove rather than what we actually know about it.

[youngred]

25. You can't prove a negative

It is impossible to prove that God does not exist beyond a shadow of a doubt, because Humans are so blind to so much that goes on around us.

God is different to everyone. To some she is a creator and watcher, to some she directly influences human events, to some she speaks to people, to some she doesn't exist. Its precisely the ambiguous nature of God that makes her available to so many people from so many different cultures, and walks of life.

You say "all the arguments for god have been defeated". I disagree. There are places where humans have no understanding and it is entirely possible that a God may exist. She may not match the view that many hold of her, but she is (in my opinion there).

[Az]

29. Agree, however

My point still stands. The notion we have of god today is largely the result of a series of attempts to argue the existance of god. These arguments have been beat down on a regular basis until all we have left is a nonclaim for god that does not put forward anything that is challengable.

At one time god or gods were much more a real presense in the world around us according to their claimants. As our knowledge of the world increased these gods were discredited.

Thus we now have what is called the God of the Gaps. The god that can only be described by that which we have not yet uncovered through science. And these gaps are shrinking all the time as science whittles away at them.

Please note that my claim is not that we have disproven all claims for god. It is specifically that all claims that have been made for god which carry any methodology of refutation have been refuted. There are numerous arguments for god that depend on the Gaps to retain their grasp on society.

[youngred]

32. OK

Fair enough. I agree that as the world has gone on many of the Gods of the past have dissapeared. I guess my major problem is the absolutism of the extremes. Claiming beyond a shadow of a doubt that God is or isn't real just seems an anathema to me. When dealing with an issue as big as the reality or falsity of a God I think there just cannot be proof either way.

My Claim for God, I feel a presence. An undefined sense of soemthing that is greater than myself that I see in the world. I can't prove it. I don't even want to prove. I feel (know is too strong a word) from my experience that there is something there, but perhaps that is just the remnants of my imagination running away with me. I don't know, but I could never tell someone else that their belief in an intangible entity is or isn't correct. Just me though.

I always appreciate your insight on matter of religion Az. You are always respectful, insightful and honest.

[pocoloco]

9. From the Gospel of Thomas

(113) His disciples said to Him, "When will the Kingdom come?"
Jesus replied, "It will not come by expectation, it is not a matter of saying 'Here it is' or 'There it is' but rather the Kingdom of the Father is spread out upon the earth, but men do not see it."

[Rabbit of Caerbannog]

17. If the Bible has taught us nothing else, and it hasn't,

its that girls should stick to girl's sports, such as hot oil wrestling, foxy boxy and such and such...

-Homer Simpson

[SOteric]

18. Those chapters

on nekkid Jell-O wrestling are particularly touching. :hi:

[CO Liberal]

27. A Great Bumper Sticker Quote

"LORD, PROTECT ME FROM YOUR FOLLOWERS.
AMEN."

:-)

[jimbo fett]

53. Great atheist quote #2:

Upon arriving at the Pearly Gates: "You gotta be shittin' me!"

[TXlib]

54. BWA HA HA HA HA!

Yeah, I guess I'd have some 'splainin' to do if that happened...

[Az]

56. Heaven

There are those that look forward to eternity that cannot figure out what to do on a rainy day.

So tell me. What do you plan on doing in heaven and why are you not doing it right now?

[geniph]

60. I'll have an opinion one way or another

when I have some evidence acceptable to me one way or another. Until such time, in the words of the Church of the Militant Agnostic, "I don't know and you don't either!"

;-)

[Az]

61. Yes but

Atheism and Theism is not a question of what you know. In the end all we truly know is that we are. The Atheism/Theism question asks what you believe. Thats an entirely different question. What you believe does not have to be defended, argued, or proven. Its just what your mind currently believes to be the case. And try as you might I don't think you can believe that there is AND is not a god. So you do fall into one of the categories. But like the rest of us you do not know if what you believe is true or not.

Gnostic/Theist: Believes in god and has direct knowledge of god.

Agnostic/Theist: Believes in god, but has no direct knowledge of god or has doubts about what they believe is their direct knowledge of god.

Gnostic/Atheist: Has no belief in god and has direct knowledge that this universe has no gods.

Agnostic/Atheist: Has no belief in god but does not have direct knowledge that this universe has no gods.

[geniph]

68. I quite literally have no opinion either way

I neither explicitly believe nor explicitly disbelieve. Agnostic/atheist is the closest description. I am non-theistic in the extreme; I guess I'm just not particularly interested in the spiritual.

[Az]

70. Keep in mind

Whether one pronounces in the positive that there is no god or you simply have no particular belief in a god you are still without a belief in god. The word theist means a person with a belief in god and the prefix 'a' means without. Thus an atheist at its most basic def means a person who is without a belief in god. Thus if for whatever reason you do not currently believe there is a god then you are by definition atheist.

Note this does not mean you have to start reading Ayn Rand or insist Madeline Murray Ohare was a wonderful but misunderstood woman.

[Lizz612]

69. I like that.

I have never seen it put that way, as two different ideas. I guess I'm an Agnostic Theist.
I don't know who god is, but God is there. And I don't know who God's representative here is, but if I help humanity, I think I'll be on God's good side when I die.