B.C. atheists deny taking umbrage with public menorah

[JOF585]

For example:

Which scenario is more likely to be of comfort to a family who's loved one(s) have died or been killed?

The belief in faith that the loved ones are in God's hands in a better place or the atheistic scientific method of describing in full horrific detail how the loved one died.

Apply the scientific method to the family of the 3 who died a few days ago in a mobile home fire in Sicamous and at least try to understand how faith can be of greater comfort than some sort of automated mechanical belief in nothing.

Atheists...

Lord luv 'em...

How is it comfort ? God chose your family to die in a fire ? Why your family and not another one ?

[5VP]

Well then...

It's obvious you haven't experienced a loss or are still in shock and bitter about a loss or have guilt about your past (or present?) actions.

For me, and, I daresay, a greater majority of real humans, I believe that a faith in a greater power is better that than the mechanical, heartless atheistic "scientific method" version full of statistics of fire accidents (insert method of death here) and scientific details about the combustion of the human body or the decomposition rates of a corpse. etc...

I'd rather know and hear from other humans that there is a plan and a final resting place for the soul rather than the atheistic, "You're loved ones are nothing but worm feed and it's a waste of time to dwell on remembering them. The end..."

Are we all just animals to atheists??

As I mentioned above science doesn't take into account, or for that matter, has yet to explain, the reason we are all imbued with emotions.

Even animals have emotions without knowing about science...

This all has little to do with the Mennorrah though, but it does illustrate how vehement atheists may be about trying to hide their denialist guilt.

[fluffy]

God or not, bad things happen. Grief is a physical process that will have to be dealt with whether you hold a belief in a higher power or not, and while such a belief may offer some condolence it is by no means the only source of condolence. If somebody wants to quote combustion details and decomposition rates then I suspect they are not so much an atheist as they are an insensitive jerk, and being an insensitive jerk is not the exclusive domain of atheists.

[5VP]

Exactly...

If one takes God out of the picture than that would be the only choice atheism can offer, insensitive jerkiness; no better than being an animal...

[TyrianQuill]

 
 

science http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science is fundamentally “an approach” to learn,
nowhere that I know of is science purported to be a “soother” or a mechanism/approach or way to provide or acquire comfort.

As biologist PZ Myers said:

 
"Richard Fyneman had this excellent short description of what science actually is, it's a one-liner, you should memorise it: 'Science is what we do to keep from lying to ourselves'. It's a way of thinking in which we're constantly aware that we could be wrong in our preconceptions and so continually define new tests of our ideas. It's a way of breaking out of the faulty modes and models that evolution has granted us.
 
On the other hand of course religions are the lies we tell ourselves to justify our biases. Rationalisations, which is all that religion can generate, do not represent new knowledge. At best religion generates comforting noises to mask the fact that someone is starving to death, or is dying of cholera, or had a Crusader stick a sword in his chest. That is all it has accomplished in the millennia of its history. It has not improved our ability to grow food, or treat disease, nor has it given us any new insights into our origins and existence."
 

source: http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/rn/podcast/ ... 100327.mp3
(it may take a moment or two to download, but it is a GREAT listen! )
 


And, in regards to the original topic of the thread, equal opportunity http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_opportunity is the subject matter, not faith not religion not belief.

[Glacier]

Wow. Do you even know what the "Scientific Method" involves? You're just throwing out challenges in an attempt to find out what sticks. I provided you with a verbal Tautology; nothing more, nothing less. I certainly did not make a claim about some physical aspect of the real world (the existence of Bigfoot or Unicorns, for example) that required the Scientific Method.

No, I'm trying figure out if you actually believe what you said, and whether or not it's an opinion, a statement of faith or a scientific fact.

The scientific method can be applied to any claim, but not all claims can be falsified by it. There are anecdotal stories of Bigfoot's existence, but using the scientific method, there is no evidence of it's existence (that I know of). If you think you saw Bigfoot (as my brother swears he did) then you'd likely believe, but since you've never seen any such evidence, you don't believe in Bigfoot. Science on the other hand is agnostic on the issue since lack of evidence does not mean non-existence.

The same principle applies to belief in a deity. Many people (including several on Castanet) claim to have experienced God. Others lay claim to nature of the universe as evidence for a deity. Certainly some of the claims about God are falsifiable (transubstantiation for example), but the science is inconclusive about God's existence.

You make the claim that religion is doing what you are told regardless of what is right. This is a really stupid generalization (in my view), and one that needs to be challenged (in my view). Perhaps it is true in the sense that everyone is susceptible to doing what they are told from authority figures (be they religious, political, or otherwise), but your quote seems to imply that this a uniquely religious phenomenon. Are you also lumping atheistic religions into this box? Is someone who belongs to religion X more likely to do what they are told than someone who belongs to political party Y? These are the questions I have.

[fluffy]

Exactly...

If one takes God out of the picture than that would be the only choice atheism can offer, insensitive jerkiness; no better than being an animal...

I'm not sure if you missed my point completely or are just trying to project your own spin onto my thoughts. You're speaking as if you think that belief in God and insensitive jerkiness are mutually exclusive, I can assure you from my own personal experience that this is not the case. You also speak as if you think that a belief in God is the only way to find condolence in times of grief, I can also assure you that this is not the case.

[5VP]

So what would you suggest?

Everyone on the planet just have their collective consciousnesses erased and pretend the concept of God never existed?

The claim by atheists that they have found morality on their own sans some form of god(s) or greater power is completely fallacious.

They, jerks or not, were shown right and wrong by their parents, jerks or not, and all the generations of their lineage, jerks or not, as we all were and at some point in this process god was involved.

The faith in god(s) and the associated rituals during a time of grief has evolved as such because it works and has stood the test of time regardless of what we in the 21st century would now selfishly prefer as a new paradigm ..

[fluffy]

5V, everything you say is based on the assumption that there must be a God and that is something none of us can know for sure. You have intensely strong beliefs I'm sure, but there is just no way to know for sure. To the atheist who's belief that there is no God I would say the same thing, there is simply no way they can know for sure that there is no God. I think the whole thing is best left in a live-and-let-live frame of mind. Your beliefs aren't affected by the fact that atheists don't share them any more than their beliefs are affected by yours.

So what would you suggest?

Everyone on the planet just have their collective consciousnesses erased and pretend the concept of God never existed?

Not at all. I would suggest that everyone on the planet choose their own path, and those who choose to have a God in their lives can do so, and those who don't can do that, and everyone can do it without criticism or judgement from the rest.

[5VP]

Interesting comments but there is no assumption by me here...

First of all: There are only 3 characters in my forum name. Too difficult to type them all? That says a lot about a person too.

The entire planet's culture(s) is based on god(s) of some type. It's patently childish and quite ridiculous at this point in our human evolution to assume an otherwise denialist posture.

Example: Less than 100 years after the fact there are already those on the planet who try to deny the existence of the nazi's extermination of Jews during WW2. In another 100 years there will those who can, like you now, state that, since no one currently alive was there, this is, "something that none of us can know for sure."

Like it or not, GOD is the entire and only reason this dialogue exists. God is in and is a part of your life and every other atheist here no matter how hard you try to spin this. Once you can wrap your head around that and forget about the religiosity aspects that seems to be driving your fear about God you will see the light of what I and the other 99.999% of the planet have been talking about for millenia.

Fence sitting is not a comfortable position in the long term...

[steven lloyd]

Fence sitting is not a comfortable position in the long term...

There is a distinct difference between fence sitting, and in being comfortable with other people having a spiritual belief system (or not) distinct from your own. I am quite comfortable with my spiritual belief system, of what I know (and have experienced) and what I cannot know, and I don't lose any sleep knowing that some people believe differently (or not at all).

[5VP]

Exactly...

[fluffy]

Interesting comments but there is no assumption by me here...

First of all: There are only 3 characters in my forum name. Too difficult to type them all? That says a lot about a person too.

Sorry, It was a typo, honest. It also says a lot about a person when they assume the worst.

The entire planet's culture(s) is based on god(s) of some type. It's patently childish and quite ridiculous at this point in our human evolution to assume an otherwise denialist posture.

The entire planet's culture once accepted blindly that the world was flat, too.

Example: Less than 100 years after the fact there are already those on the planet who try to deny the existence of the nazi's extermination of Jews during WW2. In another 100 years there will those who can, like you now, state that, since no one currently alive was there, this is, "something that none of us can know for sure."

The recording of recent history is a little more reliable these days, the holocaust is readily provable to the point where we can know for sure unless we choose to assume a denialist posture. Holocaust deniers do not do so not because of an honest belief that the Holocaust never happened, but with deliberate concealment in mind.

Like it or not, GOD is the entire and only reason this dialogue exists. God is in and is a part of your life and every other atheist here no matter how hard you try to spin this. Once you can wrap your head around that and forget about the religiosity aspects that seems to be driving your fear about God you will see the light of what I and the other 99.999% of the planet have been talking about for millenia.

My beliefs do hold something I choose to refer to as "God", but it holds little resemblance to the traditional concept of a supreme intelligence. It's a more metaphorical idea, something like a bucket that holds all the good stuff of life: truth, beauty, love, compassion, honesty, all the qualities that contribute to a life of serenity and wonder. I can comfortably use words like "God speaks to me" and "I am happy to have God in my life", but I do so metaphorically to refer to the idea that my life is driven by something other than fear in its countless forms. That's a different bucket. The idea that there is an actual benevolent dictator of sorts out there somewhere pushing buttons just doesn't feel right. And since what feels right is what drives these kind of decisions for me, that's what I'm going with.

Fence sitting is not a comfortable position in the long term...

Is there a God? For me the only honest answer can be "I don't know" so that means that the fence is the only place I can sit and keep a clean conscience. To come down on either side would mean making a decision based on inadequate information which to me would involve greater discomfort than staying on the fence. What some may call "faith" to me means deciding prematurely. The beliefs of 99.999% of the planet are not enough to make me go against what I feel to be true. But...my beliefs are open to revision should anything happen to give me cause to reconsider them.

[5VP]

Many experiences brought me to my conclusions and none of them were inspired by the church.

Try reading Carlos Castaneda for example if you haven't already. For me, "The Art of Dreaming" was particularly and shockingly revealing to me regarding the possible existence of entities existing outside the normal realms of perception...

PS. Many previous ancient god knowing cultures already knew the earth wasn't flat.

IMHO, religion is one of God's worst enemies...

[Glacier]

James 1: 26-27

26 Those who consider themselves religious and yet do not keep a tight rein on their tongues deceive themselves, and their religion is worthless.

27 Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.