I have been on both sides of the coin. I was a christian for a long time. Now I’ve been an atheist for a long time. For me, the only way to make sense of the world is to use logic, reason, and science. When I was a christian, I often “felt the presence” of God. As an atheist, I often get similar feelings when I feel particularly connected to a person or group of people, or when I am in the great outdoors communing with nature, or when I am alone and making weighty personal decisions. I don’t attribute these feelings to any higher power or spiritual plane of any kind. I think they are internal emotions, and they can evoke very powerful feelings.
I would have thought it abundantly clear from what I wrote that I don’t “blame” religion for anything. The only reason I brought up religiously motivated violence and persecution was to deflect trite responses from people with blatant anti-religious agendas (I believe Libertarian calls them “hand-stabbing atheists”). Either I’m not half the writer I think I am or you stopped reading after the second sentence.
This thread was not started to show that I’m “all spiritual and everything”, it was started in response to the ridicule of a kid who thanked God that he survived a sniper attack. I got off track writing it, and ended up talking more about my own faith than the tasteless behavior of certain posters in the linked thread. When one talks about one’s faith, it can be considered “witnessing”, and that’s the only reason I put it here instead of in the Pit. I’m not interested in debating anything, I’m responding to something that pissed me off.
In light of that, I guess I made a mistake posting it here. I’d prefer that it be moved somewhere more appropriate, but if that’s not possible, I’d just as soon let it die.
Anyhoo… relax, cuauhtemoc. If you want to talk about your personal feeling toward God, knock yourself out. But there’s no point introducing a “fact” (i.e. wars and persecution are caused by religion) and then getting upset when a basic fallacy of that fact is pointed out.
Personally, I think if those wars hadn’t been rationalized by religion, they would have been rationalized by something else.
You were very courageous posting your knowledge of God here, and I believe that it was for a purpose as all things are. Don’t let the belittlers distract you with their talk. They always like to show religion in a bad light, and I know religion has nothing to do with what you feel and speak. God doesn’t have a religion.
They forget that science has visited unspeakable horrors on helpless animals and humans also when the opportunity presented itself. Science builds the weapons of mass destruction, poison gas, lethal diseases, atomic bombs, which have killed more people than christians ever dreamed of in the dark ages. 150 million in WWII. They have built the potential to murder the whole world many times over. So forget their blame spreading and name calling. You have done fine, and I am glad you had the courage to post it.
If you want to come to my site you will find others that know as you do, thanks again for posting. ndeweb.com
Love
Leroy
You can’t do anything without God, He is the medium in which we all exist. Sounds like when you were getting close, you quit. God is a lot more than feelings. Hope you try again sometime.
With the eyes? No.
With other confirmable and repeatable scientific processes? Yes.
Now tell me how you see your version of “God”, as opposed to any other possible version, using the scientific method?
Come now. Feet are measurable in innumerable ways. 13W here. Dieties are not measurable in any way. (Well, ‘faith’, I suppose, but would you rather have a doctor that used scientific methods to operate on your head goblins, or used faith and a scalpel?)
Czarcasm, I am incapable of proving any evolutionary theory (or, of course, “scientific creationism,” a misnomer if there ever was one) through the mechanisms of classical physics. Of course, using the mechanisms acceptable in biology and paleontology, it becomes self-evident. Likewise, the techniques useful in psychology are not appropriate for interpretation of animal or hyperon behavior.
I suspect that any “scientific proof of God” or His absence would require a paradigm that followed the scientific method but which employed techniques not appropriate to any of the present physical, biological, or social sciences. The question of what would constitute appropriate techniques for use in empirical theology is one I’ve long wondered about.
Dr. V.S. Ramachandran and others have measured spiritual activity in the brain. See Phantoms in the Brain, the chapter titled, “God and the Limbic System”.
FWIW, and speaking as an atheist, believe what you believe. I could argue with you, because I don’t share your belief, but so what? You aren’t trying to force anybody to accept it, and that’s all I ask of people.
Merry Christmas.
What I’d like to know is why people are so wrapped up in the literal truth about religion and spirituality. I find it extremely funny that people need religion to be scientifically true.
I feel something similar. It seems to reveal itself most clearly through coincidences. I’d love to think that it’s a magic friend helping me along the way. But considering my perceptive limitations, I must accept that I may be misinterpreting the “feelings”. It may be wishful thinking and it may be something along the lines of a God Module.
A blind man grabs an elephant’s trunk and thinks it is a snake. To categorize your experience as a certain thing definitively and then say "I don’t want to talk about it. It MUST be what I think it is. " is, to me, the worst and most harmful part of faith. Many feel differently. I think that life should always be about testing what you know. Testing preconcieved notions about the nature of all aspects of perception. Perhaps this isn’t that easy to maintain in the hustle and bustle of everyday life, but to me it makes life worth living. My goal is to strive to make my knowledge more complete in ALL areas. I want to be a better person, I want to know more than I do, I want to shatter lies and see the truth. There aren’t too many subjects where I even come close to suspecting that I MUST have it right. It’s a humility that the faithful tend to forsake.
Given the size of existence and the amount of data available to be collected, to make conclusive statements about vague suspicions is to lack a beautiful vision in my book. The vision to understand one’s place. And our place is the Student. We are born knowing nothing and must figure it out for ourselves. There are hints along the way, but if reality is a puzzle, we haven’t even put the border together yet. No reason to plug your ears and pretend that you know when all you really do is suspect.
Be patient. Maybe one day we’ll build a god detector . . .
I do so enjoy Libertarian’s arguments… (no sarcasm). But my question is in the title:
Do you know God? I think the word “believe” is along the same lines as “hope my thoughts are correct”. I believe that God exists, but I also believe that Anything is Possible. It is possible that there is no God, it is possible that re-incarnation is true, it is possible that I live a dream and when I “go to sleep” at night I really “wake up” and when I “wake up” in the morning, I am really “going to sleep”. Are any of these probable? I don’t think so. But know is a strong word, I don’t think you know God, but it’s possible I am wrong… just as possible that everyone but Mangetout is wrong
0rbytal, I think the problem lies in English failing to make a distinction between savoir and connaitre. As I once pointed out, I have no idea whether cjhoworth has any distinguishing marks on her torso, what her height, weight, prominent features, hair, skin and eye color might be. But I know her – I know the person who inhabits the body whose characteristics I don’t happen to know. What cuauhtemoc speaks of, and I also claim, is that we know God in much the way that I know CJ – as a being of some sort in whom we can place our trust.