Do you have to disprove other people's belief or non-belief?

[mikkel_the_dane]

Positive world view? What do you mean?

Do you only have lack of belief/disbelief?

 

[Spirit of Light]

Right, and do so correctly. But many of them treat their belief as if they are certain and it is knowledge, so we ask questions that the theist hasn't asked themselves. Debate, discussion? The more outrageous the claim the more a discussion will become a debate.

What if the "proof" you asking for is impossible because the God is not a physical person, thing, entity, but the God arise from within the believer, in the sense that God is a state of consciousness that the believer attaining if they can detach to the physical realm.

 

[F1fan]

Do you only have lack of belief/disbelief?

We all have to believe to some degree. How ready and willing we are to believe in things, and to what degree we believe them is dependent on many factors, like the degree of self-awareness, the degree of critical thinking skill, the degree of social influence, where our biases lie, etc.

I might believe I'm the sexiest man alive and that judgment is highly dubious. But I can still assess claims made by theists and their gods without any problem. And we might accept one guy's claim about a type of god as at least plausible (like those who claim nature is god) while completely rejecting a claim that is how their God has authority over you and me. So we deal with each claim at a time.

 

[RestlessSoul]

Theists are historically at a disadvantage in debate. First they are typically the affirmative/claimants. They represent the claim that some sort of God exists. Second, not only is there is no sufficient evidence of gods, there's no reason to think they are even plausible. Third, in logic and debate claims are by default considered untrue UNTIL there is evidence presented that is compelling to a reasonable and objective standard, much like court.

We’re not in court though, are we?

There’s a thought though; perhaps there are a lot of frustrated lawyers among the atheist fraternity on here. Hence the obsession with evidence and argument that generally lead nowhere.

 

[F1fan]

What if the "proof" you asking for is impossible because the God is not a physical person, thing, entity, but the God arise from within the believer, in the sense that God is a state of consciousness that the believer attaining if they can detach to the physical realm.

Well then if the proof is impossible for me, you, us as a material beings, and the theist has no special powers or ability, how did the believer end up believing at all? It won't be via evidence since you already admit proof isn't viable to we mere mortals.

If God is a state of consciousness then it is explainable, and it can be demonstrated in some way just as consciousness is from the wake person to the person in a coma.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

We all have to believe to some degree. How ready and willing we are to believe in things, and to what degree we believe them is dependent on many factors, like the degree of self-awareness, the degree of critical thinking skill, the degree of social influence, where our biases lie, etc.

I might believe I'm the sexiest man alive and that judgment is highly dubious. But I can still assess claims made by theists and their gods without any problem. And we might accept one guy's claim about a type of god as at least plausible (like those who claim nature is god) while completely rejecting a claim that is how their God has authority over you and me. So we deal with each claim at a time.

No, we don't because we are not always a we. At least to me IMO.

 

[F1fan]

We’re not in court though, are we?

It's not that we are in court. It's that we have a way of thinking and assessing evidence rationally, objectively, truthfully. This doesn't just happen in court, but in life. Court is an example of the social systems we have that require facts, truth, reason, objectivity, rules, etc. Theism/religion wants to be exempt. That's fine in the temple. But if you want to make claims in society at large, then the assumptions in the temple are thrown out. There's a higher standard. And this standard isn't just atheists, it from any competing religious view. Muslims won't accept the assumptions of Christians.

There’s a thought though; perhaps there are a lot of frustrated lawyers among the atheist fraternity on here. Hence the obsession with evidence and argument that generally lead nowhere.

Lawyers know their rules. I'd focus more on frustrated theists. If only they had a God on their side. Alas....

 

[F1fan]

No, we don't because we are not always a we. At least to me IMO.

"We" to "me". That's why we follow the rules as best we can, and make a case to other minds who acknowledge ow the rules and told of reason help with precision of thought and understanding.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Well then if the proof is impossible for me, you, us as a material beings, and the theist has no special powers or ability, how did the believer end up believing at all? It won't be via evidence since you already admit proof isn't viable to we mere mortals.

If God is a state of consciousness then it is explainable, and it can be demonstrated in some way just as consciousness is from the wake person to the person in a coma.

The proof is in how the person live according to what they believe or preach,
In sufism/Islam Allah has 99 "names" or attributes of how a conscious being would appear in this world. So if a sufi lives by the attributes of Allah and they are at the wisdom level of the how those 99 attributes are shown, then you see a person who is a living image of Allah.

 

[RestlessSoul]

It's not that we are in court. It's that we have a way of thinking and assessing evidence rationally, objectively, truthfully. This doesn't just happen in court, but in life. Court is an example of the social systems we have that require facts, truth, reason, objectivity, rules, etc. Theism/religion wants to be exempt. That's fine in the temple. But if you want to make claims in society at large, then the assumptions in the temple are thrown out. There's a higher standard. And this standard isn't just atheists, it from any competing religious view. Muslims won't accept the assumptions of Christians.


Lawyers know their rules. I'd focus more on frustrated theists. If only they had a God on their side. Alas....

This is a religious forum, we are discussing metaphysics here - you are trying to impose a two dimensional paradigm on a multi dimensional subject, then claiming victory when the conversation steps outside your arbitrarily imposed boundaries.

 

[Heyo]

Is this question actually asked in a person’s post, or is it a question you have come up with for yourself?

It is an assumption from my side. I think there are three possible reasons one would post something on RF: to proselytise, but that's not allowed; to get confirmation, but that would be childish; or to seriously debate. And as I always assume only the best of people ...

 

[Twilight Hue]

Believe in God is a personal belief, disbelief, in the physical world is a personal belief. Disbelief in a God is a personal lack of belief in something"unseen"

They are all valid to the one who believe in them.

Sure, in way of a persons belief and belief about other people as well as your own assumptions and assessments in kind.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Sure, in way of a persons belief and belief about other people as well as your own assumptions and assessments in kind.

Only speaking from a sufi way of thinking and believing. If others believe different that is no problem, no need to assume what others may or may not believe.

 

[Link]

Why does it seems like some people must defend their belief no matter what? Are they that unsure about their own belief?

Why does it seems like some people must do everything in their power to discredit or disprove other people's faith or belief? Are they so desperate to prove God can not exist because they themselves does not see any proof of God?

Are both groups wasting their time on proving to others that they are the one who are right?

I would not do it were it not for the truth in God's words "bring your proof if you are truthful". This is used both to show a religion is false or claim about it is false, and also that a claim about God and his religion is true.

 

[Spirit of Light]

I would not do it were it not for the truth in God's words "bring your proof if you are truthful". This is used both to show a religion is false or claim about it is false, and also that a claim about God and his religion is true.

When other people think the same about your beliefs and argue against Allah, how does it make you feel within you? Especially if someone stomping on Allah's grace?

 

[Trailblazer]

Question asked in the most respectful manner.
If you doing the religious/spiritual things out of a sense of duty, but does not like it or mostly not beliving in what you do. Isn't that spreading false belief

I did not say that I do not believe in what I do. I believe my religion is true and I believe in God, but that does not mean I like doing what I do. It also does not mean I like God. Can't you imagine doing something you did not like to do and doing it anyway? Have you ever had a job you did not like but you did it anyway?

I guess most people don't do what they don't like doing, except for a job that pays the rent and puts food on the table, but I am not like most people. I try to do what I think is right even if I don't like doing it. Of course this creates an internal sense of conflict but it is not something I have been able to resolve yet. I don't like God, I don't like Him at all, so having to serve God makes me angry, not all the time but sometimes. I wrote a post I planned to post related to this subject and today might be the day because I see I only had 7 alerts overnight, which is very rare, since I usually have many more.

 

[Link]

When other people think the same about your beliefs and argue against Allah, how does it make you feel within you? Especially if someone stomping on Allah's grace?

I've been hearing people attack me for my belief in God and Islam for years. If humans are going to unite on truth, we need some thicker skin.

 

[Spirit of Light]

I did not say that I do not believe in what I do. I believe my religion is true and I believe in God, but that does not mean I like doing what I do. It also does not mean I like God. Can't you imagine doing something you did not like to do and doing it anyway? Have you ever had a job you did not like but you did it anyway?

I guess most people don't do what they don't like doing, except for a job that pays the rent and puts food on the table, but I am not like most people. I try to do what I think is right even if I don't like doing it. Of course this creates an internal sense of conflict but it is not something I have been able to resolve yet. I don't like God, I don't like Him at all, so having to serve God makes me angry, not all the time but sometimes. I wrote a post I planned to post related to this subject and today might be the day because I see I only had 7 alerts overnight, which is very rare, since I usually have many more.

No, never had a job that was that bad, but stayed in jobs without comfort yes.
When it comes to faith, it is not about what one like or dislike, one serve God because it make one feel complete
But it maybe feels different for you.

 

[Spirit of Light]

I've been hearing people attack me for my belief in God and Islam for years. If humans are going to unite on truth, we need some thicker skin.

Do you treat them with respect even they go against your belief?

 

[Link]

Do you treat them with respect even they go against your belief?

Not as much as I should have. I been kind of rude on forums and am trying to work on that.