Christianity - A respectful dialogue

[Ameri Boi]

All I did was challenging the positivist Calilasseia and her (or his?) vacuous slogans (e.g. If an entity X is postulated to exist, and there exists in turn no substantive evidence supporting the existence of entity X, then the default position is to regard entity x as non-existent until said substantive evidence materialises.).

Where did the blue butterfly go after RDF disappeared?

Come! We shall summon him

[charlou]

Cali is here: http://rationalia.com/forum/memberlist. ... file&u=613

[GenesForLife]

First I hope I'm welcomed here. I was banned from RD forum, and was informed that legal action would be taken against me if I would try to register again. All I did was challenging the positivist Calilasseia and her (or his?) vacuous slogans (e.g. If an entity X is postulated to exist, and there exists in turn no substantive evidence supporting the existence of entity X, then the default position is to regard entity x as non-existent until said substantive evidence materialises. ).

I would like to have a respectful dialogue with non-Christians, and challenge their worldview.

Here's a starter:

- Humans have a sensus divinitatis, which allow them to know that the proposition "God exists" is true,without any empirical evidence needed. Those who deny that the proposition "God exists" is true purposely reject the spirit in their wickedness.

Discuss.

1) Positivism is a perfectly valid logical construct, they use it in courts, if you remember, innocent until proven guilty and all that.
2)The default position he advocates, in the absence of evidence, is the right one because no evidence allows an infinite number of possibilities to be true.
3)Respectful dialogue with non-Christians? You do realize that there are loads of non-christians who are theists, who don't subscribe to your version of mythology...
4)All organisms have instincts, so bloody what?
5) "Purposely reject the spirit in their wickedness" , unverified bullshit of a noxious variety, there are so many blind assertions in there, you aren't going to impress anyone with mental gymnastics with that degree of mental con(dis?)tortion.
6)Finally, your proposed construct may have a biological basis, namely , brain damage...

The predisposition of human beings toward spiritual feeling, thinking, and behaviors is measured by a supposedly stable personality trait called self-transcendence. Although a few neuroimaging studies suggest that neural activation of a large fronto-parieto-temporal network may underpin a variety of spiritual experiences, information on the causative link between such a network and spirituality is lacking. Combining pre- and post-neurosurgery personality assessment with advanced brain-lesion mapping techniques, we found that selective damage to left and right inferior posterior parietal regions induced a specific increase of self-transcendence. Therefore, modifications of neural activity in temporoparietal areas may induce unusually fast modulations of a stable personality trait related to transcendental self-referential awareness. These results hint at the active, crucial role of left and right parietal systems in determining self-transcendence and cast new light on the neurobiological bases of altered spiritual and religious attitudes and behaviors in neurological and mental disorders. Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

That abstract is from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2015 ... dinalpos=1

There is also evidence that the perceived need to postulate mythological entities for the purposes of genuflectory tendencies is associated with egocentrism...

People often reason egocentrically about others' beliefs, using their own beliefs as an inductive guide. Correlational, experimental, and neuroimaging evidence suggests that people may be even more egocentric when reasoning about a religious agent's beliefs (e.g., God). In both nationally representative and more local samples, people's own beliefs on important social and ethical issues were consistently correlated more strongly with estimates of God's beliefs than with estimates of other people's beliefs (Studies 1–4). Manipulating people's beliefs similarly influenced estimates of God's beliefs but did not as consistently influence estimates of other people's beliefs (Studies 5 and 6). A final neuroimaging study demonstrated a clear convergence in neural activity when reasoning about one's own beliefs and God's beliefs, but clear divergences when reasoning about another person's beliefs (Study 7). In particular, reasoning about God's beliefs activated areas associated with self-referential thinking more so than did reasoning about another person's beliefs. Believers commonly use inferences about God's beliefs as a moral compass, but that compass appears especially dependent on one's own existing beliefs.

The full research paper is available here at http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2009/ ... l.pdf+html

Welcome to the forum, btw

[JimC]

I have zero respect for christianity or any religion. Deluded is deluded.

I have respect for some individual christians.

They do not include you.

[Rum]

I was a Christian as a teenager. When I started to lose my faith I was very alarmed to begin with. I didn't want to - it made me anxious and worried (and guilty!) that the evidence of my senses and intelligence could simply not support a belief the existence of a Super Daddy. I was not evil or sinful, though I wondered at the time if I was - and even stopped masturbating for a while! . But I just could not believe. I still can't.

Maybe its Satan at work.

[Hermit]

Humans have a sensus divinitatis, which allow them to know that the proposition "God exists" is true,without any empirical evidence needed.

How can you determine the validity of that proposition?

[GenesForLife]

Humans have a sensus divinitatis, which allow them to know that the proposition "God exists" is true,without any empirical evidence needed.

How can you determine the validity of that proposition?

When people can't prove something objectively, they resort to evasionary tactics of ineffability, which is an affront to civilization

[Loki_999]

Here's a starter:

- Humans have a sensus divinitatis, which allow them to know that the proposition "God exists" is true,without any empirical evidence needed. Those who deny that the proposition "God exists" is true purposely reject the spirit in their wickedness.

Discuss.

Hi, and welcome. Always nice to have a believer around to provide a different POV and some entertainment.

Please allow me to dissect your post.

Humans have a sensus divinitatis, which allow them to know that the proposition "God exists" is true,without any empirical evidence needed.

FAIL. Citation needed. From personal experience I have no such sensus divinaitatis so even if I am the only person in the world without this thing your statement fails. Also apparently Psalms 14:1 appears to contradict this view as well. I really would need some empirical evidence.

Allow me to counter by saying that humans have a sensus flyus spaghetticus monsterous which allows them to know that the proposition "The FSM exists" is true, without any empirical evidence needed.

Those who deny that the proposition "God exists" is true purposely reject the spirit in their wickedness.

Well, if you "know" that God (Yahweh) exists and reject him it is not necessarily wickedness. I started a thread and poll a few months ago on RDF asking atheists that if God was proven to exist would you worship him. The results were pretty much negative. After all, the God of the bible is a petty minded sadistic bastard who had a bad habit of throwing his toys out of the pram and fucking around with his most devout followers. Looking at the bible you were probably safer not worshiping Yahweh and then you may only be targetted by one of his bad moods. If you were a follower you were definitely going to get shat on or fucked around with - Job, Moses,Abraham, Lot just to name a few... not to mention his son, erm himself, whatever.... who was intentionally nailed to a cross. Sick bastard in my opinion.

Basically if you need to worship a god then at least pick a decent god. Can i recommend to you Aphrodite (Love), Athena (Wisdom), or Dionysus (Party time!)? I would recommend you worship me but I have a somewhat tarnished reputation myself so probably not what you need if you want to escape the tyranny of Yahweh.

Hail Eris!

[thedistillers]

So as previously mentioned, we know in our heart that God exists. Some people might object: that humans have a sensus flyus spaghetticus monsterous which allows them to know that the proposition "The FSM exists" is true, without any empirical evidence needed.

This objection fails, because no one seriously claims the FSM exists. It was created in 2005 by Bobby Henderson.

Now perhaps the Muslim could make a similar claim about Allah. But why not indeed! Just because there are people who are mistaken doesn't invalidate one bit what I believe! That there are creationists doesn't invalidate the theory of evolution!

Some people might say that I might be the one who is mistaken. But in the absence of a defeater, I see no reason why I should reject my belief in God, the same way that I don't see any reason to reject the belief that the world is real, even if some people believe the world is an illusion.

[JimC]

So as previously mentioned, we know in our heart that God exists. Some people might object: that humans have a sensus flyus spaghetticus monsterous which allows them to know that the proposition "The FSM exists" is true, without any empirical evidence needed.

This objection fails, because no one seriously claims the FSM exists. It was created in 2005 by Bobby Henderson.

Now perhaps the Muslim could make a similar claim about Allah. But why not indeed! Just because there are people who are mistaken doesn't invalidate one bit what I believe! That there are creationists doesn't invalidate the theory of evolution!

Some people might say that I might be the one who is mistaken. But in the absence of a defeater, I see no reason why I should reject my belief in God, the same way that I don't see any reason to reject the belief that the world is real, even if some people believe the world is an illusion.

In the end, if your personal delusion makes you happy, who the fuck am I to disturb your equlibtium...

[thedistillers]

It is a harsh assessment that nonbelievers are wicked, but according to Christian theology, us humans are broken, which is why Christ died on the cross, to atone our sins.

If God wants a relationship with all, and some humans don't believe in Him, the corollary is that there must be something wrong with the nonbeliever.

[normal]

So as previously mentioned, we know in our heart that God exists. Some people might object: that humans have a sensus flyus spaghetticus monsterous which allows them to know that the proposition "The FSM exists" is true, without any empirical evidence needed.

This objection fails, because no one seriously claims the FSM exists. It was created in 2005 by Bobby Henderson.

Welcome. I'll just poke a bit at this.

The FSM was created by humans in 2005. Yahweh was created by humans some thousand years before this. You will have to point to where the difference between these two come in. Sure, some people actually believe in this Yahweh charachter, but that has been true for all gods created by humans. Believing in something does not make it true. It only means you believe in something.

It is a harsh assessment that nonbelievers are wicked, but according to Christian theology, us humans are broken, which is why Christ died on the cross, to atone our sins.

If God wants a relationship with all, and some humans don't believe in Him, the corollary is that there must be something wrong with the nonbeliever.

This is true for other religions as well. So if your view was right you would be risking A LOT by not accepting Muhammed as the true prophet.

Now since there excist no valid evidence for ANY god excisting, none whatsoever, the default position must be atheism.

[Animavore]

It is a harsh assessment that nonbelievers are wicked, but according to Christian theology, us humans are broken, which is why Christ died on the cross, to atone our sins.

If God wants a relationship with all, and some humans don't believe in Him, the corollary is that there must be something wrong with the nonbeliever.

Broken? God isn't really such a great designer if his toys break so easily.
But tell me, why did a guy have to die on a cross because we broke? Couldn't God just fix us with some glue and soldering iron?

EDIT: Spelling.

[Babel]

So as previously mentioned, we know in our heart that God exists. Some people might object: that humans have a sensus flyus spaghetticus monsterous which allows them to know that the proposition "The FSM exists" is true, without any empirical evidence needed.

This objection fails, because no one seriously claims the FSM exists. It was created in 2005 by Bobby Henderson.

Now perhaps the Muslim could make a similar claim about Allah. But why not indeed! Just because there are people who are mistaken doesn't invalidate one bit what I believe! That there are creationists doesn't invalidate the theory of evolution!

Some people might say that I might be the one who is mistaken. But in the absence of a defeater, I see no reason why I should reject my belief in God, the same way that I don't see any reason to reject the belief that the world is real, even if some people believe the world is an illusion.

My bold.
I do not know that. In fact, I won't believe that, until you give me something to work with to determine this as a valid starting point of this discussion, as everything you say, starts with that.
Until then, the only thing in my heart, is blood. Coming in, going out.

[JimC]

It is a harsh assessment that nonbelievers are wicked, but according to Christian theology, us humans are broken, which is why Christ died on the cross, to atone our sins.

If God wants a relationship with all, and some humans don't believe in Him, the corollary is that there must be something wrong with the nonbeliever.

You do realise that we see the very concept of god as absurd, don't you...

Hopefully, you are not clinging to a thought that we will have a road to Damascus moment...

But the interesting bit is "humans are broken"

Many atheists may be dismissive of this insight, but it approximates a truth. We are evolved hominids with a shitload of imperatives written in our genes, many of which work in opposition to rational thought or ethical precepts.

You call this original sin, I call it human nature.

You want a supernatural entity to make it all better.

I want us to work out real, here-and-now solutions, using the brains 6 million years of evolution have given us. Bronze age goat-herder mythologies no longer cut the mustard...