Is there any religious argument that actually stands when scrutinized with reason?

[Theunis]

You have brought no facts to this forum for me to even confront.

That is merely your opinion! I was speaking of the apparent fact that you appear to have no knowledge of the about.com Judaism Forum nor what they discussed.
Ducking and diving are you?

 

[Oldsoul]

At least you admit to having a closed mind, sure to keep education and knowledge out.

Sad really you think you know so much, there is not room for positive change.

^^^
This is what you posted earlier..

Nope.


I'm specifically addressing your stated comment.




Which in other words means no amount of education or knowledge no matter how credible or factual, means nothing to you. You will remain with your beliefs even if facts presented themselves.

I mean..heat you're saying here is.. there has been enough evidence throughout the history of time that proves God does not exist. .

I'm saying the opposite.

I'm sure if I were to 'comb' your logic I would understand why you think the way you do and visa versa. .

An alternate example;
My friends or acquaintances that are Atheists are just as solid in their beliefs ..

Are you saying Atheists are open minded and Iron Clad believers aren't?

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

Ridiculous. SUddenly the burden of proof doesn't exist for you because you have faith? What if someone has faith that another God exists or that no God exists at all? They also have no burden of proof? How do you determine which idea is reasonable or unreasonable? In this world we only share one reality, which is a reasonable assumption, so we also share the same God if he exists.

And actually the beauty of women is an entirely false analogy. The existence of God is a true or false proposition whereas the beauty of a woman is an analogue variable with no limits or defined criteria. God's existence couldn't be partially true like how a woman could beautiful to some people but not others. In other words God's existnece doesn't rely on the perspectives of different people which you dont seem to understand.

Subjectivity works by choosing about what the agency of a decision is. That procedure results in an opinion.

Atheists simply don't understand anything at all about subjectivity and they suck at it. There is no atheist who has an impressive emotional life, a tender judgement, or anything like that, because all they do is facts.

 

[Theunis]

Subjectivity works by choosing about what the agency of a decision is. That procedure results in an opinion.

Atheists simply don't understand anything at all about subjectivity and they suck at it. There is no atheist who has an impressive emotional life, a tender judgement, or anything like that, because all the is facts.

I had for more than two years discussed things with "Hard-core" atheist and when they ran out of arguments their recourse was to -
1. insults Sometimes veiled nuances.
2. uncouth language.
3.ad hominem
4. They declared that religious writings all around the world are mere fairy tales and myths.. Thus their own subjective feelings was supreme.
5. What you say to them they classify as emotional blind faith and thus subjective while they themselves indulged in using subjectivity as a tool.
6. Their final say in the matter was usually "There is no God. Period".

Thanks be that this forum appears to be clear of such individuals. (Although some people at times sail close to the wind.)

Yet on that forum I met some of the most beautiful minded atheist and agnostics you can imagine.

One said to me her mother taught her the Golden Rule ; She has a beautiful soul and most assuredly qualifies for a loving tender relationship with all.

As Jim Reeves sang "a stranger is just a friend you do not know"

Embrace the Universe and all it contains and Walk in Beauty

 

[McBell]

Subjectivity works by choosing about what the agency of a decision is. That procedure results in an opinion.

Atheists simply don't understand anything at all about subjectivity and they suck at it. There is no atheist who has an impressive emotional life, a tender judgement, or anything like that, because all they do is facts.

You continue to clump all atheists into your preconceived notion of what you think atheists "have to be like".
Would you agree with me if I were to clump ALL theists in with Westboro Baptist Church?

What is even more interesting is how you are just as guilty of that which you do so much whining against atheists for.
Most comical that you are not on the higher ground you preach so much about.

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

I had for more than two years discussed things with "Hard-core" atheist and when they ran out of arguments their recourse was to -
1. insults Sometimes veiled nuances.
2. uncouth language.
3.ad hominem
4. They declared that religious writings all around the world are mere fairy tales and myths.. Thus their own subjective feelings was supreme.
5. What you say to them they classify as emotional blind faith and thus subjective while they themselves indulged in using subjectivity as a tool.
6. Their final say in the matter was usually "There is no God. Period".

Thanks be that this forum appears to be clear of such individuals. (Although some people at times sail close to the wind.)

Yet on that forum I met some of the most beautiful minded atheist and agnostics you can imagine.

You are just following an illusion. Atheism starts out with contrasting the rather formal ritualistic subjectivity of religion, with common sense, rejecting religion. At that point atheism is still accepting of subjectivity, because there is a lot of acceptance of subjectivity in common sense. But then the atheist goes a thinking, and at this point the atheism transforms into the stonecold mister Spock rejection of subjectivity altogether. You have the illusion that atheists have emotions and stuff because they assert what is good and evil with factual, scientific, certitude. That factual certitude may look appealing, as it looks like supreme self confidence of judgement. While us ordinary religious folk just have the fragile emotions to sustain judgement, and ever we are tempted by evil. But when you talk to them at length as I have, their emotional life is completely crap because of this intellectual emphasis on fact to the complete destruction of any and all opinion. They are truly the most revolting anti-human people on earth. There is simply no room for acceptance of the validity of subjectivity in atheism, materialism, naturalism, communism, nazism, and all that garbage. You can quite plainly see that religion is a form of subjectivity which atheists reject, rejecting the worship of God, you should then question if they accept the validity of any subjectivity at all. And the answer is going to be no.

 

[Theunis]

1. Love your neighbour as you love yourself.
2. Be kind to widows and orphans.

How long do you wish the list to be that I can quote,

 

[McBell]

You are just following an illusion. Atheism starts out with contrasting the rather formal ritualistic subjectivity of religion, with common sense, rejecting religion. At that point atheism is still accepting of subjectivity, because there is a lot of acceptance of subjectivity in common sense. But then the atheist goes a thinking, and at this point the atheism transforms into the stonecold mister Spock rejection of subjectivity altogether. You have the illusion that atheists have emotions and stuff because they assert what is good and evil with factual, scientific, certitude. That factual certitude may look appealing, as it looks like supreme self confidence of judgement. While us ordinary religious folk just have the fragile emotions to sustain judgement, and ever we are tempted by evil. But when you talk to them at length as I have, their emotional life is completely crap because of this intellectual emphasis on fact to the complete destruction of any and all opinion. They are truly the most revolting anti-human people on earth. There is simply no room for acceptance of the validity of subjectivity in atheism, materialism, naturalism, communism, nazism, and all that garbage. You can quite plainly see that religion is a form of subjectivity which atheists reject, rejecting the worship of God, you should then question if they accept the validity of any subjectivity at all. And the answer is going to be no.

See, here you go again stuffing all atheists into your wee little box.
And you wonder why no one takes you seriously?

You know that verse that talks about pearls before swine?
YOU are a prime example of why that verse exists.

 

[Theunis]

You are just following an illusion. Atheism starts out with contrasting the rather formal ritualistic subjectivity of religion, with common sense, rejecting religion. At that point atheism is still accepting of subjectivity, because there is a lot of acceptance of subjectivity in common sense. But then the atheist goes a thinking, and at this point the atheism transforms into the stonecold mister Spock rejection of subjectivity altogether. You have the illusion that atheists have emotions and stuff because they assert what is good and evil with factual, scientific, certitude. That factual certitude may look appealing, as it looks like supreme self confidence of judgement. While us ordinary religious folk just have the fragile emotions to sustain judgement, and ever we are tempted by evil. But when you talk to them at length as I have, their emotional life is completely crap because of this intellectual emphasis on fact to the complete destruction of any and all opinion. They are truly the most revolting anti-human people on earth. There is simply no room for acceptance of the validity of subjectivity in atheism, materialism, naturalism, communism, nazism, and all that garbage. You can quite plainly see that religion is a form of subjectivity which atheists reject, rejecting the worship of God, you should then question if they accept the validity of any subjectivity at all. And the answer is going to be no.

As was said by another you are squeezing all atheist into the little pot of your preconceived ideas. Where one day will you with all that hatred bubbling inside you be? A cracked despotic madman bent on murder? Right now your soul is caught up in darkess and in grip of Shatan, Try a little tenderness and love - it may be your salvation!

I have walked the minds of many people. (Yes I have been in their minds and read their thoughts and souls,) I am not a normal human being and know their love and pain. My love and compassion for all is not filled with illusions nor delusions I do not condemn anyone.

Your comments regarding them is most revolting and unbecoming.

I worship none of your Gods or demi-gods for the universal spirit is in me and I was born as I am. Come take my hand and walk into my reality beyond it all where all realities is my reality, where pettiness of all kinds cannot,, does not and never will exist in the harsh yet most beautiful light of the truth.

Added as an edit:
See then how the Islamic religion sees the Golden Rule

http://islam.ru/en/content/story/golden-rule-islam

 

[outhouse]

Are you saying Atheists are open minded and Iron Clad believers aren't?

Generally speaking that would be true.

If there was any credible evidence, I would accept it.

Theist generally, never do. 40% ish refuse most academic knowledge here in the USA to the point of severe fanaticism, in favor of mythology being real.

 

[outhouse]

I'm sure if I were to 'comb' your logic I would understand why you think the way you do and visa versa. .

Because credible evidence and knowledge shows us exactly how man and only man created the abrahamic deities.

Yahweh is two deities compiled together due to a political decision.


When we look at the source for your belief in a deity of choice, we see mythological origins.


To date, there is no evidence anywhere of any kind, that a deity of any type actually exist outside mythology.

Would love to believe in all the mythological promises religions make.

 

[outhouse]

That is merely your opinion!

That would be an educated opinion.

I was speaking of the apparent fact that you appear to have no knowledge of the about.com Judaism Forum

Not a fact. They are factually not a credible university, nor would I ever send a single student there for any study what so ever.

Ducking and diving are you?

Not at all. You cannot place a forum over a university as a means of education and knowledge.

 

[Theunis]

That would be an educated opinion.



Not a fact. They are factually not a credible university, nor would I ever send a single student there for any study what so ever.



Not at all. You cannot place a forum over a university as a means of education and knowledge.

Is this worthy of a reply? I was talking of YOUR lack of knowledge regarding the specific forum. You know nothing of what transpired there nor the sources they quoted..
From your comment, my statement is factual and correct.

A forum is at liberty to quote any Research, University or academic source and that is exactly what they did.

 

[Mindmaster]

To date, there is no evidence anywhere of any kind, that a deity of any type actually exist outside mythology.

I have to correct you here -- outside of ones own head is the proper answer. This is the only factual argument for the existence of a god, btw... In that it can subjectively exist in ones own mind and be as real as happiness or sadness is... Of course, religious people fear the notion that they merely may be participating in a game of Stockholm Syndrome induced placebo-effect. Which leaves me to the counter argument:

If we can have whatever god that makes us happy within our head, why then pick the almighty spoiled brat god? Thee, thou's, and thy's chipping away at everything that makes us rational, egalitarian, and tolerant people. This is the part I really can't conceive of personally -- if this Jehovah guy is real then he's a mass-murdering tyrant. He is the hostile god of the chimpanzee's throwing scat to mark the unworthy who must summarily be destroyed at the behest of an invisible alpha-pack leader, who's mouthpiece is some puppet in a dress.

To me, I think that one should quantify their gods in terms of the character traits they personally embrace... If we must have a god, then be it a self-serving god that makes us into a better person. Let us not be crippled by the biases of antiquity, or the extremism of modern notions of religion. To do anything else, is to invite failure..

 

[outhouse]

I have to correct you here -- outside of ones own head is the proper answer. This is the only factual argument for the existence of a god, btw... In that it can subjectively exist in ones own mind and be as real as happiness or sadness is... Of course, religious people fear the notion that they merely may be participating in a game of Stockholm Syndrome induced placebo-effect. Which leaves me to the counter argument:

I would not debate that the concept exist in peoples conscious minds.

Ancient people did not understand what a conscious mind even was, and blamed bad thoughts on spirits, and good ones on gods.

One who thought good holy thoughts, or did amazing good actions would be considered divine, or even god himself, one who spoke of goodness, a prophet.

My context however is based on study of the origin of these concepts in text, people generally speaking only believe in the deity of their choice based on geographic location they were born.

Born in the middle east allah is your god, which would be different from the Christian god, which is also different if you were born in Israel and worshipped Yahweh alone.

The only thing these god concepts have in common, is that the followers all think their version is the correct one.

 

[Mindmaster]

The only thing these god concepts have in common, is that the followers all think their version is the correct one.

It's a natural extension of transcendental religions... When they say "God's will" they really mean their own will. It is not the God they see, but the self which they feel is a part of that God. It's a real passive-aggressive system at work, and of course anything they would do to bring them away from this phantasm is merely grounds for self-torment to reinforce their beliefs. In reality, these notions are cancerous to ones mind as are anything that ultimately promotes harmful psychological manifestations. Believers are like drug addicts in most cases -- generations of users, but not of them stopping for a minute and doing the math.

You can see it via the statements, "God bless you" for example is ordering God to do something. If God is not with/inside you then you have no say of this... This very notion conveys the founders of the religions original intents -- they knew God was in your head too... However, if God is an ineffable thing then what business do you have saying such things? There is a lot of inconsistency in the psychology of these things. (Don't take that as invitation to pester me with scriptural supports... Those are struggling even more than these issues!)

 

[outhouse]

When they say "God's will" they really mean their own will.

No no no Me and you might say that or other well biblically educated people.

But when most religious say gods will, they mean the mythological description painted in literary text in the books they hold as holy.

Not their own will.

Believers are like drug addicts in most cases -- generations of users, but not of them stopping for a minute and doing the math.

Agreed.

But in modern times we have seen a progression.

Its not one of changing closed or stubborn minds, that does not work, no facts matter.

But we are educating the children who have open minds, and are not suckers for the mythology with the added knowledge they are recognizing.

psychology of these things

Its dynamic and complex, And when dealing with these issues, most people do not change.

Most of my post and replies are not to change the mind of said person in the debate. It is for those with the "where with all" that might be on the fence on any given topic.


And I do enjoy the few people that challenge me, and help me grow intellectually. Ask anyone here, how much my education has grown here in 6 years. Not just biblical.

 

[s13ep]

God can be disproved but not by words; something God-like exists but it is wordless and not, the word, 'God'.

Let's just say that the big conspiracy is that God is the worded version of the wordless good.

 

[outhouse]

God can be disproved but not by words;

Probably why words have never been able to prove the concepts exist outside mythology, where they were factually born.

 

[s13ep]

Probably why words have never been able to prove the concepts exist outside mythology, where they were factually born.

I thought I was on your "Ignore List".

To the bold, no, a word is factually born but not factually bound to humanity.