But by this statement you yourself are telling all the people who believe that their beliefs are true, and the beliefs of others are false, that they’re wrong. This is not a trivial group of people whom you are telling that they are wrong. The belief that, say, Christianity is true, and other religions are false, is often nowadays characterized as “fundamentalist”, but historically the idea that Christianity is demonstrably true–by reason and by the revelation of God–has been part of the mainstream of Christian thought. The same holds true of Islam. (Judaism too, AFAIK.)
No, I’m not asserting that I am correct. I’m saying that since we don’t know you have no more right than I do to say that anyone is correct. And if you read the thread, I wasn’t the one asserting from the get-go that belief in God is an illusion. Some people here are asserting that God does not exist except in my imagination. Perhaps, perhaps not, but I believe. That you don’t does NOT give you the right to mock me and my fellow believers as “delusionary”, any more than it gives me the right to condemn you to eternal Hell, which I haven’t and won’t.
That doesn’t really follow though, at least not with my question. My question was not about your belief, but about the manifestations of your belief that you think are occuring. I’m not saying they aren’t occuring-I don’t honestly know-I’m just curious as to why these manifestations should be taken in a different light then the manifestations that afflict people who are in mental wards. In fact, some people who also agree that your God talks to people say that God tells them to drown their babies and such. My question is, is that if yours are to be considered valid, then why aren’t theres? I fully admit I might be missing something here or misreading your statements, but I seek clarity.
Your core belief in God and your belief that God is directly speaking to you are two different things IMO. Why is it arrogant to question your belief in God talking to you, but not arrogant to question a person in a mental wards belief (or do you think they should be set free?)?
You might not be talking to me, but I’ll answer anyway; I’m not telling you that I’m right or that you are wrong-necessarily (I guess I am, if your God is self contradictory).
As far as legs to stand on though, I think you need to define your God a little better before either side can say whether they believe in it or not. Right now, the concept of God is meaningless, at least in my eyes-please correct me if I’m wrong by giving me some primary characteristics.
I am not using it as criteria for accepting or rejecting something’s validity. I am simply trying to contradict those people who ignore the possibility that their ‘experience’ of god might be a false experience, created in their own head.
I am not trying to ‘prove’ God doesn’t exist. I am simply trying to show that absolute stubbourn proof he does exist is impossible.
One of my pet peeves is people who attribute their skills, luck, experiences to God. This drives me to try to rationalise what, in my opinion, is the falseness of these claims. I can’t decide what my peeves are.
To me, the idea that life coming from God is extremely unlikely. But that some interesting interaction of acids,light, heat, and a heck of a lot of time could have created the very basic building blocks of life, and then that a heck of a lot more time resulted in the beginnings of creatures recognisable as ‘life’ is more plausible.
A creation of biochemistry, yes. A myth, no. ‘myth’ implies that it doesn’t exist at all. It does, as a cration of biochemistry.
The latter. People believed the earth was flat. What use was that?
Say? No. Believe? Yes.
Ideas have a habit of spreading. Especially if they are nice ideas. And even more especially if it’s at a time when Science is in it’s infancy. It’s nice to think that you will go to heaven when you die.
To me, faith is a false-hope. Faith is dangerous (not always, but most of the time) Faith sometimes makes people do sickening unspeakable things. So does belief. Can you blame me for wanting to break it down?
I have for some time been uncomfortable with describing myself as an “atheist”. I don’t mean to ridicule or disparage anybody’s posts or thoughts, but hope that the following might illustrate my point:
Atheists. Would you consider the possibility that the preconceived determination inside your own head that there is no god, is so powerful as to make it impossible for you to be convinced otherwise? After all, our brain is trapped with the inputs of its flawed senses by its tendencies toward rationalization and other types of flawed reasoning, how, therefore, can it ever distinguish signs of the existence of a god from those of mere coincidence or misperception?
(To which my own answers are Yes, and It can’t, although that’s not the issue I’m trying to illustrate.)
Well It’s not preconceived. My atheism arrived through rationalisation and challenging the belief in existence of God. I once naively believed in God because It was taken for granted that he existed. It never occured to me that he didn’t until later in life when experience and knowledge made me reconsider.
So I admit that my non-believe may be powerful enough to make it difficult to consider the possibility that he does exist, but in my case if I were to consider it, it would be the second time I’ve done so. I would be back-tracking. Not the case for theists. They would be questioning the original belief.
I describe myself as an atheist for simplicisties sake. To adequately do the job would require a lot more effort. 
I’d have to say that it’s possible. I don’t think this is the case though, because I’d like to be wrong and I’m actively trying to test/find out if I am. My conclusions so far about the matter are a lot more tenative then they might appear.
Are mere coincidences and misperceptions the only manner that God could provide evidence of Godself (itself, himself, herself)? If they are, then I’d accept that the mind could not.
I wouldn’t think that those would be the only evidences of God available though.
That’s a good point, although I wouldn’t say that applies to every theist-not saying you were, but you know how us nitpickers are… 
…
Except, of course, if you’re a synaesthete.
Except, of course, for the many people who have changed their beliefs to theism, or another form thereof, from atheism or whatever they thought in the first place. Although you always seem loath to admit that these people exist, or that intelligent people could ‘convert’ to a religious POV in adulthood, it does happen. It’s not even that rare.
Here’s where I throw my hands up in the air.
I’m not trying to get you guys to believe. I couldn’t give a rat’s ass what you believe. But I do believe, and I do not feel any great desire to continue having you try to poke holes in my beliefs. I’ve done all of that to myself already, and I came to my own conclusions, none of which you have to agree with. I certainly don’t feel the need to justify my beliefs to you.
Think what you want. I have faith. If you do not, good for you. If it makes you sleep better at night, please continue to attack my faith and my “delusions”.
Actually I was about to admit they probably do exist before I got to that (bolded)bit.
But, not meaning to sound tiresome, can you prove it’s not that rare?
I was a theist as a child because when the people I trusted (adults) told me about God I had no reason not to believe them. I took it for granted. I was one of those kids who believed rain was god crying.
I became a full blown atheist in adulthood the time when my intelligence is much greater than it was when I was a kid. In my case it probably took intelligence to become an atheist. In theists, in most cases, it took being a child to be a theist.
Having said that, my first encounters with atheism were as a slightly older kid. The subject of baptism was discussed one day (I think I was at someone’s baptism) I asked my mum “Why do peeople get baptised” (I thought there must be some logical reason for it) when she answered “So they can become Christian” I found this answer completely unsatisfactory, I sort of knew that being ‘christian’ didn’t really mean anything real. It was just a name.
Losing my belief in God was a LOT more gradual. Thousands of little clues over years made me an atheist. To the point where It now seems obvious to me that God is a human creation that stuck.
I am not sure what my point is now, I’ve rambled on a bit. Oh yeah - Aquiring theism in childhood is so easy (kids believe anything) that it makes sense that theism is so common in the world. And why Atheism is less common (because in most cases, Atheism requires post-childhood questioning of beliefs)
I’m rambling again.
It doesn’t make me feel good at night. If anything I am in conflict with my desire not to upset people and my desire to rationalise their belief.
I don’t loath religion on a personal level. I have virtually no problem with your belief as it differs from mine. What I loath is what belief (or belief in deity) make people (extremists I admit) do.
And also, as I have mentioned. It is a pet peeve of mine. Because I don’t believe in God it bugs me when people ignore the skills and efforts of humans (rescue workers, aeroplane designers, the self) and stubbournly attribute good things to God. I believe human ability to do good comes from within.
That’s a very interesting point, however again that sort of brain malfunction has a physical, material cause.
And you don’t need to justify your beliefs to anyone, I agree.
I hope you haven’t perceived that I was just attacking your faith or your ‘experiences’, I’m just trying to see where they fall into play and how you justify them against others who have had similar experiences.
Heck, when I was a theist, I had personal experiences that seemed to convince me at the time that God existed. However there are many rational explanations that I’ve had to confront and admit that would explain those experiences a lot better then God could. I’ll make no bones about it, it was hard for me to admit that I was just talking to myself when praying or that my feeling wasn’t enough to justify my belief (after all, many different religions attribute a feeling to God, they can’t all be right).
When you get right down to it, you could very well be right and I could be wrong. Maybe if I had the experiences you are talking about, that I’d be a firm believer-it’s possible. However from my point of view, I don’t see how they are any different then many other religions or from experiences that can be acquired via naturalistic means.
Then why don’t you direct the question at them? You’ve opened a thread in GD with a vague title and started shouting at all theists for having the audacity to believe something that you find odd.
Would you mind citing a sociological or anthropolgical study that would confirm this or are you making generalization about all of humanity based up on your own experience?
I thought I did. Most theists come across that way. There can’t be many who don’t without being Agnostics.
The latter. Am I incorrect? Do most theists not become theists until adulthood?
With dissociative experiences(NMDA antagonists) I have noticed a definite God-like presence. Eventually I came to realize the presence was myself.
So, He does exist.