That's bullshit jonny.

I think very few atheists here would say that, Adam.

I don't know of any "trend." I do know people have made those kinds of statements for a long time. It's certainly nothing new.

There are some who certainly think that way, but I doubt think they are the majority.

Personally, I subscribe to the "Your right to swing your fist ends at my nose" philosophy.

I think that anybody should be free to believe, or not believe, what they want as long as they don't try and foist it on me. That's why mishies of MORmON or JW persuasions drive me nuts.

Well, there are dumb Atheists too. But remember, smart people can be just as wrong as dumb people. They’re even better at defending their positions, as you can see with smart Mormons.

babyloncansuckit Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, there are dumb Atheists too. But remember,
> smart people can be just as wrong as dumb people.
> They’re even better at defending their
> positions, as you can see with smart Mormons.

So everybody is wrong I have concluded. Just some people talk better.

Badassadam1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So everybody is wrong I have concluded. Just some
> people talk better.


I've noticed people can be really smart about their main area of expertise, but make the mistake of thinking that they're also right about every other area even if they haven't studied it in depth. So people are wrong about different things.

babyloncansuckit Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, there are dumb Atheists too. But remember,
> smart people can be just as wrong as dumb people.
> They’re even better at defending their
> positions, as you can see with smart Mormons.


I was in MENSA years ago, also some atheist groups. Smart people in many ways but also unbelievably dumb about some things. Also witnessed a lot of ego battles about petty crap which is not smart at all.

I think you are protesting too much man. We all disagree about lots of things. This one is no different. To get upset about the existence of something only some people assert exists plagues us as creatures. Like black swans or tiny creatures we can't see with our eyes. Or the world being flat for that matter.

Many people come here with much in the way of vestiges of former beliefs. There is no trend to call people idiots. Individual people call people that.

Badassadam1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That's bullshit jonny.

Einstein rejected the Atheist label, ad do really intelligent scientists like Carl Sagan, Francis Collins, Neil deGrasse Tyson and Michio Kaku.
Even "Darwins Pitbull" Richard Daekims admits to believing in Eimsteins religion.

koriwhore Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Einstein rejected the Atheist label, ad do really
> intelligent scientists like Carl Sagan, Francis
> Collins, Neil deGrasse Tyson and Michio Kaku.
> Even "Darwins Pitbull" Richard Daekims admits to
> believing in Eimsteins religion.

'The idea that God is an oversized white male with a flowing beard who sits in the sky and tallies the fall of every sparrow is ludicrous. But if by God one means the set of physical laws that govern the universe, then clearly there is such a God. This God is emotionally unsatisfying ... it does not make much sense to pray to the law of gravity.' Professor Carl Sagan

(borrowed from esais' thread!)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/28/2018 06:16PM by ificouldhietokolob.

adam, I didn't read johhny's statements as that.
I certainly wouldn't say that.
Some of my favorite people (our Boner pal, for example) are theists. I don't think any of them are idiots.

So if I can make a suggestion...ease up. Even IF that was what johnny meant, so what? Don't care what he thinks of you. Don't care what I think of you. Care what YOU think of you.

ificouldhietokolob Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> adam, I didn't read johhny's statements as that.
> I certainly wouldn't say that.
> Some of my favorite people (our Boner pal, for
> example) are theists. I don't think any of them
> are idiots.
>
> So if I can make a suggestion...ease up. Even IF
> that was what johnny meant, so what? Don't care
> what he thinks of you. Don't care what I think of
> you. Care what YOU think of you.

I know exactly what he meant.

It's one area where we all have a right to a point of view as long as we're not hurting anyone. There's no need to explain.

There is no God unless he proves himself real, physically. And I am not talking about some silly bible verse. Otherwise God is just mythology, and a tiresome one at that.

There has to be an intelligence out there or even close by that the eye can not see that understands humanity and the human emotions. There has to be something that knows me and is smarter than everyone else out there. I don't feel like a soulless machine that just evolved. There is a person inside this body not just a computer machine. When the person leaves the body will die. I feel I have always existed as crazy as that sounds.

But with that said I believe all religions are incorrect.

Adam, there are as many different opinions out there as there are human beings.

Do what feels right to you.

Lot's Wife Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Adam, there are as many different opinions out
> there as there are human beings.
>
> Do what feels right to you.

I don't know what is exactly right and it drives me crazy. Sure science can explain a lot but there is no humanity to science. It does not feel love for example and can not love a human.

No god you could conger up could replace the love of another human. No god you could conger up could be a useful companion. No god you could conger up could keep you company. No god you could conger up could have an interesting conversation with you. For all those things, you need other humans.

Devoted Exmo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No god you could conger up could replace the love
> of another human. No god you could conger up
> could be a useful companion. No god you could
> conger up could keep you company. No god you
> could conger up could have an interesting
> conversation with you. For all those things, you
> need other humans.

I am not impressed with humanities' love at all. I don't even feel it. They say vestigial words and then don't stick around nor back it up. Things go bad for a second and they hightail it out of there, humans don't know real love in my experience. They think they do, they don't. When put to the test they fold.

Adam,

Science is powerful, but relative to some of the biggest questions it is still in its infancy.

In fact, uncertainty may be hardwired into the structure of the universe. I humbly suggest that for us individually, and for the foreseeable future of humanity, absolute certainty is out of the question.

We all live with that.

Why does there have to be a god? What requires that?

dogblogger Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why does there have to be a god? What requires
> that?

The soul maybe I have no idea.

You stated there had to be, I thought you had more reasoning behind that claim.

"A soul, maybe" is not a strong start to supporting the claim.

dogblogger Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You stated there had to be, I thought you had more
> reasoning behind that claim.
>
> "A soul, maybe" is not a strong start to
> supporting the claim.

What are your strong claims? Lets start there. Is dogblogger a soulless machine?

I don't know. I've not seen any evidence of a soul but that's not conclusive yet.

I suspect that no one has a soul and look forward to evidence one way or the other. I lean that direction because the premises and arguments for a soul have ramifications that don't pan out so far..

There doesn't seem to be anything for a soul to do that the body doesn't do on its own.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/28/2018 10:19PM by dogblogger.

dogblogger Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't know. I've not seen any evidence of a soul
> but that's not conclusive yet.
>
> I suspect that no one has a soul and look forward
> to evidence one way or the other. I lean that
> direction because the premises and arguments for a
> soul have ramifications that don't pan out so
> far..

You don't see a soul when you look in the mirror? Nothing?

Just a physical body interacting with light.

Your statement suggests that a soul also interacts with light and so should be a testable hypothesis.

Just a body and nothing more that's depressing.

Badassadam1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Just a body and nothing more that's depressing.

I don't see why that would be depressing. I rather enjoy being a living body.

But even if it is -- if it's factual, then it's factual. Depressing or not.

And from all the evidence we have, it's factual.

adam, you can believe what you want to. If it comforts you to believe there's some "intelligence" and "soul" and such, have at it. It's your life.

Some of us are simply letting you know that confronting "depressing" facts head-on works for us. Not making up comforting myths works for us. Dealing with reality however it is works for us. You can try things that way and see if it works for you. Or you can try something else and see if that works for you. It's your choice -- something mormons didn't give you, but you have no matter what mormons say. You decide what works for you. Whatever it is, treat other people kindly, honestly, and fairly -- and you'll be happy with yourself, which is really all that matters.

While you may find it depressing, you shouldn't let emotional responses drive your thinking if you want to be accurate on this class of thinking.

Use your emotions for emotional topics, that's their strength.

Now if the existence of a soul or God is all about emotion for you then this conversation has gone as far as it can go and you have your emotion based answers. And that's fine.

I'm still looking for intelligence on this planet.

Dave the Atheist Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm still looking for intelligence on this planet.

You may not be smart enough to find it.

The way I see it is that everyone of us just thinks differently.

One person looks at the mountains, the trees, the stars and they see a creator's hand.

Others, like me, think, "This is all amazing. Let's see if we can figure out where it all came from," and therefore I have a love of science.

Neither of us are wrong, as the only real truth is that we just don't know. We don't have all of the answers. We're just different, that's all.

Badassadam1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That's bullshit jonny.


Adam:

As gently as I can write, one of the important parts of recovery is learning that people who are good, intelligent, and knowledgeable can honestly and sincerely disagree with each other on a seemingly endless list of subjects.

Once upon at time, many people (especially those who were a part of Western Civilization) thought they (at least potentially) could understand "everything"...that there was nothing which would not be (at least eventually) available to the brains of human beings, and nothing that could not be understood in its entirety by human beings.

However, in the past couple of hundred years, and with increasing speed, we human beings have learned that not only can we NOT understand and comprehend "everything," but each new and genuine step forward in comprehension and understanding leads us to ever MORE uncertainties and MORE "unknowns" for us to work on in the future.

I've spent the last months going through books and papers (like scientific abstracts) which were published beginning in the 1880s or so, and many of them are chockfull of "scientific facts" that we now know are no such thing (including the advice and research data from seemingly endless numbers of self-help, and self-instruction, books which were published, beginning in the 1920s).

The educated, "proven," and often "scientific" wisdom of one generation is the laugh of the generations which follow.

What is to be learned from this reality is that, no matter what we actually DO learn, full knowledge and wisdom will still be ahead of us (like a carrot hanging from the headpiece of a plowing horse). The horse never reaches the carrot...and in many ways, neither do we.

What we absolutely, scientifically "know" today will be laughed at in 3018, 4018, and 5018 (assuming that our species is fortunate enough to get to those years).

There are many people here who, after usually considerable reading and reflection, are atheists. There are many people in the world whose actual RELIGION is atheistic (Buddhism, for example).

There are also many theists of different kinds, throughout the world and on this board.

It is not the "answer" to the question ("Is there a God?," for example) which counts, because whatever answer any individual decides is the "right" one for them is likely to be upended by increased understanding, and more data, in the century or centuries to come.

In Mormonism, a "wrong" answer means that YOU are "wrong."

In the world outside of Mormonism, however, a seeming "wrong" answer is simply an announcement that a new phase of learning has begun...an opportunity to learn through honestly searching debate, research, and reflection.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/28/2018 07:03PM by Tevai.

That was gentle, Tevai. :)

Interesting, thought-provoking.

You read a lot!

Me too but the more I do, the more I realize I don't know. And can never know it all or even pretend to.

I recognize the overwhelming thirst for answers and knowledge. But at some point hopefully reason prevails and things settle down a bit. What can seem like a problem or even an abnormality can be turned towards the positive. Such as reading, reading, reading, taking a class or a course, going back and starting again with what we actually know or believe or have discarded and other steps to answer our own questions and keep learning, which turns out to be an ongoing pursuit and not one that's over by the end of high school, as I used to think, ha!

I am so interested in all the information out there about early humans. You're right, it does keep changing (sometimes daily) and I've had to make a conscious effort to grasp why that would be and to accept that what we think or know today can change in a flash. We have to keep up! It can be frustrating if you're trying to figure things out and the ball keeps bouncing. But to realize that is the nature of the chase for knowledge is a big gift to our own brains. We can calm down, slow down, learn the latest understanding of the topics we're interested in and accept that it can and will likely change as more discoveries are made, more information uncovered. The more information available the wider our comprehension which can change our previous thoughts (which is what happens to scientists and other pursuers of info).

It can be hard to accept that we will never actually know precisely for sure, likely, how the human migration, for instance, went and the same for much of the rest of human history. But exciting to contemplate that the search continues and every piece of new info will (eventually) add to our store of knowledge. I do feel frustrated sometimes that just when I think I get the prevailing view of the basics they get changed due to new discoveries. It helps to accept that that's the way it goes. And it's a positive, not a bad thing as it means we, as searchers, are open to add light and knowledge rather than sticking with previous info that could have been limited or incorrect.

All I know for sure is that our ancestors were strong, resilient, bright and hardy folks who faced innumerable massive challenges just to survive and they did a fabulous job of keeping the species alive. Here's hoping we don't screw it up too much more badly.

And that's just one eg of the search for information. It is multitudinous, overwhelming and endless. I used to think, when I was a kid, that our body of knowledge was finite and that it was my job to learn it all. Little did I know it doesn't go like that (for most of us). That's why people take a specific course of study during their pursuit for higher education, eg history, and even then many specialize in one particular aspect of a very large field. Such as learning all about one age (Victorian, say) rather than all of human history. Just. So. Much. Info.

It is not a quick endeavour. So far I'm still only on "C" in the dictionary of life and knowledge. Got a ways to go. Maybe will never get to zee...(as they say in America). I can barely say "zed" any more even up here in Canada due to our culture being increasingly subsumed by the USA. (I blame Google!) Then comes the time in life when you start to forget stuff. I used to know Greek mythology (from jr school). Not so much any more. I will have to go back and re-read as it keeps coming up in life and I am curious to know (or remember) more.

BAA: Where are you at with the books you got out of the library? I'd try doing some reading and not just get stuck in your own head. There are lots of answers. Right there - on your computer, in a book or magazine. Read, read, read to quench your thirst a little bit. It isn't an overnight process though. So many questions. So many books. Take the time to find stuff out while you can. Some info will be hard fact. Other topics or sources will be more in the way of opinion. It helps to keep that straight. It can affect how you interpret what you hear or read.

I have only read a little been mainly focusing on the cosmos DVD because I have to return it sooner.

It is one of the most boring dvds I have ever watched though and my room mate agrees so I am not the only one. You think they could make science exciting but they just can't. No emotion to any of it. It's almost as boring as general conference was.

Go and see "Won't you be my neighbor?" A Mr. Rogers documentary on his life showing now at select theaters.

One of his primary philosophies was to teach children that what is most essential is invisible to the eye. And another one following 9/11 (shortly before his death,) that of "Tikkun Olam." Is Jewish for "restoring creation." Which is a fundamental duty of humankind on earth. Another was to accept people, especially children, just as they are.

Believe what you may. In the end isn't what really matters is that you lived the best you could for the life you've been given?

But there's no other way than accepting plain & simple reality.

quinlansolo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> But there's no other way than accepting plain &
> simple reality.

Whatever it is it brings sadness.

Most people feel the pain and sadness of the loss of the idea of God, to get much better over time.

Devoted Exmo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Most people feel the pain and sadness of the loss
> of the idea of God, to get much better over time.

I don't know, science hasn't really been on my side in life. Not like it's a friend that knows who you are or anything. Lord knows I tried the medical field to it's fullest capabilities.

I'm not seeing any trend like that. Where do you get that bizarre idea ?

Dave the Atheist Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm not seeing any trend like that. Where do you
> get that bizarre idea ?

Course you haven't. The majority on this site are atheists. It's like most former Mormons go straight to atheism automatically which is fine if you want to believe you are just a random person that counts for nothing in this universe.

A random person counts for a lot if s/he makes a positive contribution to this world.

Theism or atheism: doesn't really matter, does it?

Lot's Wife Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A random person counts for a lot if s/he makes a
> positive contribution to this world.
>
> Theism or atheism: doesn't really matter, does it?

Positive is a point of view. I thought I was making a positive contribution by paying tithing but I wasn't.

Actually, the majority on this site are theists.
Looks like you are resorting to lies again.

Dave the Atheist Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Actually, the majority on this site are theists.
> Looks like you are resorting to lies again.

Name ten theists on this site.

>>The majority on this site are atheists.

I don't have any reason to believe that is true. The atheists here tend to be more vocal, but there are plenty of believers as well. You can count me among them.

If you need there to be a God, there can be a God for you. Just don't expect too much from him, her, or whomever.

I've told you before that my concept of God is of a supreme being who created the universe and everything in it. It works best for me to believe that other than sending Jesus, God's interference essentially ended with the creation. I cannot otherwise deal with the suffering of innocent people and the unfairness of so many things. My concept is of a God who listens and imparts wisdom and strength of spirit but doesn't otherwise interfere.

It's easiest for me to deal with the $h!t that life sometimes throws at all of us if I believe there's a God. Others think it's silly. I don't mind. They're not hurting me and I'm not hurting them.

I have a wife with a very serious chronic illness. She's been close to death twice since we married. Things have gone well for her since the birth of our second and last child. No couple is guaranteed to grow old together. Our odds of doing that are probably slimmer than average. Because of my wife's situation, it gives me peace and hope to think we'll be together again in some manner after we die. I don't imagine it anything like a celestial room in a temple, and I don't picture funky handshakes and passwords as a way of getting there. I have no way of knowing if anything is really going to happen the way I picture it, but I'm happiest in thinking that it will.

I still live my life as though this is all we get. I'm not letting my guard down in terms of protecting my children from harm or ensuring that my wife gets the very best medical care available. I just choose to believe in God and in an afterlife because it makes the hardest times more bearable.

Invent your own schema. You don't have to start a church as Joseph Smith did, and con everyone out of their money and wives. Do this just for yourself.

If God will one day judge all of us (I'm skeptical of that, but I hedge my bets), it would seem that judgment criteria would be based heavily on doing the best we can with what we've been given and on treating others fairly. I can't see any creator smart enough to devise a world or universe who would also fall for people who insincerely fawn over him or her as though they're Eddie Haskell from the old "Leave It to Beaver" show. It' nice to show God a bit of gratitude when you're feeling grateful, but I doubt that God listens very long or very closely to those who praise him or her. My God would prefer that we spend the time building up someone else. God knows God is great. God doesn't need to hear how wonderful he or she is from me all the time.

But that's my religion, not yours. You get to come up with whatever works for you. There have been times in history when a person might have been severely punished for expressing his own set of religious beliefs far different from the established and orthodox views. Be happy that we're not living in such a time.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/29/2018 02:51AM by scmd1.

I think god is not to be understood with a human mind. We can not detect or discover him or her or it on any level. I think that is by design. I think he or she or it lets things happen on purpose by design for whatever reason. For the most part I don't think god interferes with humanity at all. He lets things play out no matter how brutal things may be, he does not step in. Maybe god thought I would be a weakling if I did not suffer. Who knows? I'm still mad about my life but I am only at the mid point of life really, I can not see how this plays out like a god could or something. I don't know life seems better for the people that believe in god on some level. I'm tired of seeing it and I want to have a good life like they have.

This is great, Adam. You're formulating your own understanding.
Keep in mind that IF God doesn't interfere, God presumably DOESN'T interfere. Maybe it's not personal in any way. Maybe you didn't suffer and aren't continuing to suffer so that you won't be weak as much as you're suffering because that's just how it worked out - another person used his free will to harm you or even to operate a motor vehicle in an unsafe manner, which happened to injure you because you happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Think of all the little kindergartners and first-graders at Sandy Hook Elementary School. Does anyone with even half of a functioning brain REALLY think that the horrible event happened to teach either the babies (five- to seven-year-olds are essentially babies) or their parents not to be weak? Or was it that an unbelievably misguided mother thought for some ridiculous reason that it was a good idea to take her mentally ill young adult son to a shooting range on a regular basis, and then to store the excessive number of weapons she kept in her home in a cabinet not sturdy enough to keep the weapons out of his hands? Were the children shot so that they or their parents could learn to be stronger, or were they in a horribly wrong place at an equally horribly wrong time? That was, IMO, a prime example of the exercise of free will gone unthinkably wrong. No God had a hand in any of it except to the extent that, for those who believe in the existence of a God, anyway, God created the individuals involved and granted them free will.

And why does God "prevent" some tragedies and not others? Maybe God doesn't prevent ANY of them. Some bad acts happen because someone carried them to fruition; others don't because someone thinks better of it or lacks the wherewithal to carry them out, or something randomly occurs to get in the way of them happening.

It's fine if you can in any way benefit from the bad actions of others, but maybe that's not WHY it happened at all. Some things happen as a result of someone exercising free will. Other things are quite random. Either way, even if you believe in God, it's not necessarily God inflicting anything on you.

I can see how messing with one's freedom or free will could be a bad thing. Even I understand it and I am no god. Been controlled most of my life in some way, it is evil. People telling me what to do constantly, bullying me around in real life and online. My new counselor said I don't need to put up with that sh#t anymore. I think I only put up with it because I am used to it. I used to think that guys like my father had the answers, they don't, not at all. They just know how to control people through guilt and fear and other things.

Scmd, my beliefs and approach appear to be very similar to your own. I live my life as if this is all I'll get. But I prefer to believe that there is more.

I don't feel that God needs to be worshipped. Appreciated, maybe. I do that whenever I admire his/her creation.

I feel that I have done enough good and useful things in my life that I have no fear of being judged. I try to get the big things right, but I don't sweat the small stuff.

I don't believe in the existence of gawhd. However, I think that everyone has a right to believe or not believe whatever they want as long as they let me do the same. The problem with my view is that I know my own TBM family won't honor this idea. They believe it is not only their right, but their obligation to brow beat, not just me (calling me an idiot), but anyone else who isn't mormon.

Why can't we just all get along.

Some atheists have that opinion, and some believers have the same opinion about atheists. I would ignore other people's opinions and believe or not as you wish.

Adam, I like Paul Toscano's description of Jesus. I think you will like it to. Toscano has been excommunicated from the mormon church.

**********

When Paul Toscano was asked if he still had a testimony of Jesus Christ, he said:

"I love Jesus even though he may be a fictional character. I see him as a combination of Henry V and Dionysus. A King in disguise among His people--eating of their limitations and drinking of their disappointments, yet able to descend into the abyss and rise again, pulling out again of meaninglessness, both soul and cosmos. I can say that if Jesus was not the Christ, He should've been. If He is not God, He should be. Even as a fiction, He is the best of all possible deities. His disciples claim that He loves us in our sins before we love Him, and more than He loves Himself. He prizes us above His sovereignty. He lays aside the richness of His divinity to assume the poverty of our humanity. He offers us joint heirship in all He lays claim to. He transforms the provincial religion of one god of war and one chosen tribe into a cosmic religion of one God of love and many suffering souls. He does not require certainty or purity as conditions of His deliverance--merely that we recognize our lack and long to be filled. From His cross, He spoke for all who were assailed by doubts when He cried, "My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me?” Jesus may be a fiction, but if so, He is a fiction against which the banalities of history and sociology pale in comparison. The fiction that transforms reality."

No god, no cry.