Bad Chihuahua! (An Inability To Separate God From Religion)

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Just as the atheist does with God, you blindly and falsely assume that alcohol only causes society harm because it harms a small number of people that become addicted to it and they in turn can harm others. But most humans can and do use alcohol to great positive benefit without hurting anyone. Just as most people do with their faith in their gods.

Your own analogy bears out the irrational and untrue bias that fuels most atheism. And that bias is being created by using one's personal experience as proof of some otherwise false 'universal truth'. "It's bad for some so it's bad for all."

Dislike my perspective if you want; it's still valid.

 

[PureX]

Dislike my perspective if you want; it's still valid.

It’s irrational.

 

[PureX]

There seems to be a misunderstanding here. The rejection of all other God concepts (which is not quite how I would phrase it, but I digress...) didn't come along with becoming an atheist. Rather it came along much earlier than that, it came along with becoming a [insert a religion here].



I simply have no interest in the many ways that people might choose to define or conceptualize God.

And here you are, debating it.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

It’s irrational.

No, that's just the cartoon version of atheists you've constructed.

You can't see through your own prejudices to see things from the point of view of an atheist, then you put all those prejudices on display in your OP.

If anything seems irrational here, it's your hate for atheists. Did you get dumped by an atheist in high school or something? Did an atheist kick your dog?

 

[RestlessSoul]

There seems to be a misunderstanding here. The rejection of all other God concepts (which is not quite how I would phrase it, but I digress...) didn't come along with becoming an atheist. Rather it came along much earlier than that, it came along with becoming a [insert a religion here].



I simply have no interest in the many ways that people might choose to define or conceptualize God.

And yet here you are, on a forum dedicated to a subject you simply have no interest in.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

And yet here you are, on a forum dedicated to a subject you simply have no interest in.

There's way more to religion than theology.

 

[Koldo]

And here you are, debating it.

Debating what specifically though?

 

[RestlessSoul]

There's way more to religion than theology.

And there’s way more to cricket than scoring runs, but an interest in sport is generally taken for granted among players and spectators alike.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

And there’s way more to cricket than scoring runs, but an interest in sport is generally taken for granted among players and spectators alike.

It's more like how you don't need to be interested in the chemical engineering of petroleum to want to talk about climate change.

 

[Koldo]

And yet here you are, on a forum dedicated to a subject you simply have no interest in.

Further clarification is probably needed: I am very much interested in religion as a social phenomenom, but completely uninsterested on exploring every single cringe conceptualiziation of God out there.

I only have an interest in the few dominant (and socially relevant) portrayals concerning God.

 

[Koldo]

There's way more to religion than theology.

Actually, I am also interested in theology... Just not in some random Joe's novel contribution to theology that is totally disconnected from any major work.

 

[LadyJane]

The fear of that Dog Experience may or may not be overcome. But it was a dog and there was a bite. The perceptual interpretation of the human experiencing the event will vary.

The perceptual interpretation of a God Experience is almost always going to be positive. An atheist wouldn't have a negative God Experience. They would just call it an Experience. If an atheist thought they had a God Experience I don't think they'd necessarily be an atheist.

If it was a negative Religious Experience then it was the human interpretation of a belief system and that can often feel like a bite but that perception too will vary.

Those who claim to have experienced God and have no way of properly explaining the life changing event are alone in the uniqueness of that perception. And it's fine. You can tell that story. But it reaches a point where there's nowhere left to go. I believe they believe they had a sensational experience, is all anyone can say.

The metabolism works in mysterious ways.

 

[PureX]

No, that's just the cartoon version of atheists you've constructed.

You can't see through your own prejudices to see things from the point of view of an atheist, then you put all those prejudices on display in your OP.

If anything seems irrational here, it's your hate for atheists. Did you get dumped by an atheist in high school or something? Did an atheist kick your dog?

I don't hate atheists at all. I see them as the mirror image of religious zealots without their even realizing it. Both irrationally laying claim to what they can't know, because their own identity has become entwined with this pretense.

 

[PureX]

There seems to be a misunderstanding here. The rejection of all other God concepts (which is not quite how I would phrase it, but I digress...) didn't come along with becoming an atheist. Rather it came along much earlier than that, it came along with becoming a [insert a religion here].

Hence, the title of this thread ... and people not understanding the difference between theism: the proposed existence of God, and the many various religious depictions and conceptions of this proposed God. Thus, they reject the former along with some particular version of the latter never recognizing that they are not the same thing. Which is quite illogical. And then this particular group of atheists constantly proclaims to theists how overwhelmingly superior they think their illogical response is. So I do them the favor of pointing this out to them. Which they also respond irrationally to.

 

[LuisDantas]

On another thread someone asked atheists why and how they became atheists. And nearly every response sited some unresolvable issue with religion, and/or with how some religion was defining God. The idea being that as the atheist rejected the God as it was defined by that religion, they rejected the idea of God all together.

And for some reason the irrationality of this thought process never seems to have crossed anyone's mind. As to a person, some religion or other was being allowed to define God, without doubt or exception, so that in rejecting that religion's 'God', the entire concept of and gamut of alternative possibilities was being dismissed, en total.

"A chihuahua bit me once as a kid so I reject and despise all dogs to this day."

It seems to me that there is a strong prejudice being served, here. As evidenced by a blanket dismissal prior to any honest exploration or investigation into the many possible ways we humans might choose to define or conceptualize "God".

Really?

It seems to me instead that "god" has shown itself to be a meaningless term on its own, and an entirely unfitting idea for sustaining whole doctrines over.

I honestly have no idea of why you are crying "prejudice" when what you present is a call for igtheism.

 

[Koldo]

Hence, the title of this thread ... and people not understanding the difference between theism: the proposed existence of God, and the many various religious depictions and conceptions of this proposed God. Thus, they reject the former along with some particular version of the latter never recognizing that they are not the same thing. Which is quite illogical. And then this particular group of atheists constantly proclaims to theists how overwhelmingly superior they think their illogical response is. So I do them the favor of pointing this out to them. Which they also respond irrationally to.

Theism is the belief in the existence of any god. And religions are not necessarily talking about different depictions of the same gods.

Back when I was a spiritist, my attitude had always been: "God either exists with this set of attributes (with a bit of leeway), or it doesn't exist at all.". In other words, you are criticizing something that preceded my atheism. Something that was actually characteristic of my theism.

 

[PureX]

Really?

It seems to me instead that "god" has shown itself to be a meaningless term on its own, and an entirely unfitting idea for sustaining whole doctrines over.

And yet what it seems to be to you is at variance with the vast majority of your fellow humans.

I honestly have no idea of why you are crying "prejudice" when what you present is a call for igtheism.

Perhaps that's necause you're trying so hard not to.

 

[LuisDantas]

And yet what it seems to be to you is at variance with the vast majority of your fellow humans.

Spare me. I have no time to this crap. Honestly, neither should you.

Perhaps that's necause you're trying so hard not to.

I am not trying anything. You are utterly unconvincing, after all.

 

[PureX]

Theism is the belief in the existence of any god. And religions are not necessarily talking about different depictions of the same gods.

Theism is the assertion of the proposition. Who believes what is theology and religion.

Back when I was a spiritist, my attitude had always been: "God either exists with this set of attributes (with a bit of leeway), or it doesn't exist at all.". In other words, you are criticizing something that preceded my atheism. Something that was actually characteristic of my theism.

That wasn't theism. That was your own personal theology. Then you threw theism as a proposition out with your personal theological bath water because you didn't like the dirty bath water and you recognize the difference. Just as I stated at the top of the thread. And now, instead of recognizing this error as it's being pointed out to you, you're fighting not to. Which is also both irrational and very common among most of the atheists that come here.

I agree that most atheists simply aren't interested in the theist proposition. But they rarely come to this site.

 

[Koldo]

Theism is the assertion of the proposition. Who believes what is theology and religion.

That wasn't theism. That was your own personal theology. Then you threw theism as a proposition out with your personal theological bath water because you didn't like the dirty bath water and you recognize the difference. Just as I stated at the top of the thread. And now, instead of recognizing this error as it's being pointed out to you, you're fighting not to. Which is also both irrational and very common among most of the atheists that come here.

I agree that most atheists simply aren't interested in the theist proposition. But they rarely come to this site.

Here's what happened to me: I merely accepted that a given depiction of God existed while also treating all other ones as false. So what happened when I no longer believed that depiction? I became an atheist. Why? Because my perspective regarding all other depictions remained the same.

You are entirely free to criticize my all-encompassing dismissal of depictions. I am just clarifying it didn't happen when I became an atheist. Rather, it happened while I was a theist. Me becoming an atheist entailed merely disbelief in one more depiction.