Lack of belief in gods.

[Thief]

Understanding myth.

so by raw assumption of myth.....you don't believe

and the line of thought (which I am sure you know)
that line of thought I am sooooo fond of posting is a myth?

 

[Willamena]

so by raw assumption of myth.....you don't believe

and the line of thought (which I am sure you know)
that line of thought I am sooooo fond of posting is a myth?

I don't know about "raw assumption," I only meant the study of mythology that leads to practical understanding of how and why myths come about. To grasp the purpose for God in the narrative of Self (particularly, Why Self?) led me to atheism.

I don't find the God who is forcibly inserted into a narrative of Why The Universe? to be meaningful. It's not about me; myth should be about me.

 

[Thief]

I don't know about "raw assumption," I only meant the study of mythology that leads to practical understanding of how and why myths come about. To grasp the purpose for God in the narrative of Self (particularly, Why Self?) led me to atheism.

I don't find the God who is forcibly inserted into a narrative of Why The Universe? to be meaningful. It's not about me; myth should be about me.

but which is it?
belief is about you?
or belief is not about you?

about God?

My assumptions are not raw
science led me to the primordial singularity and dropped me there

my choice was simple
science would insist...nothing moves without being moved
that would have to be Spirit
as substance cannot move of it's own volition

no myth

 

[Willamena]

but which is it?
belief is about you?
or belief is not about you?

I don't understand.

I believe in me, if that's what you are asking.

about God?

My assumptions are not raw
science led me to the primordial singularity and dropped me there

my choice was simple
science would insist...nothing moves without being moved
that would have to be Spirit
as substance cannot move of it's own volition

no myth

What is a "raw" assumption, and how does it differ from any ordinary assumption?

The poetic image of "nothing moves without being moved" is appealing.

Spirit is word, thought, essence. Those don't move, they are just in the moment: the moment moves.

Spirit is carried along.

Myth is the grand narrative. Prometheus freeing his humanity from the flame is no less us, freeing our humanity.

 

[Thief]

I don't understand.

I believe in me, if that's what you are asking.


What is a "raw" assumption, and how does it differ from any ordinary assumption?

The poetic image of "nothing moves without being moved" is appealing.

Spirit is word, thought, essence. Those don't move, they are just in the moment: the moment moves.

Spirit is carried along.

Myth is the grand narrative. Prometheus freeing his humanity from the flame is no less us, freeing our humanity.

by science....an object at rest will remain at rest until moved
the primordial singularity was set into motion
substance does not do so of it's will (doesn't have any)

so...Spirit first

a raw assumption would be head nodding to whatever you are told
no thought
no consideration to where belief might lead

i might say myth is truth veiled by retelling and agendas when the story was told

 

[ratiocinator]

by science....an object at rest will remain at rest until moved
the primordial singularity was set into motion

How quaintly Newtonian.

 

[ratiocinator]

Spirit first

When are you going to define "spirit" had how did it come about?

 

[Willamena]

Why does it seem important to some to view a lack of belief in gods as a belief itself?

The correct answer is because a "lack" is not, in itself, something: it is only seen in other things, things that are.

Hence, my lack of belief is seen in the belief that there is no god.

 

[Thief]

How quaintly Newtonian.

got a better rebuttal?

ain't seen one yet

 

[Willamena]

by science....an object at rest will remain at rest until moved
the primordial singularity was set into motion
substance does not do so of it's will (doesn't have any)

so...Spirit first

a raw assumption would be head nodding to whatever you are told
no thought
no consideration to where belief might lead

i might say myth is truth veiled by retelling and agendas when the story was told

Myth is non-literal, it has no truth nor untruth. Only connection (as in, the dots.)

An object at rest is only relatively "at rest": the whole universe moves.

 

[Thief]

Myth is non-literal, it has no truth nor untruth. Only connection (as in, the dots.)

An object at rest is only relatively "at rest": the whole universe moves.

at the point of primordial singularity
there is no movement
it doesn't 'begin' until the beginning......begins

not trying to be tongue twisted

the whole universe was in one 'point'
without a secondary point yet formed.....there is nowhere to come from
nowhere to go to
no movement

not until the bang

which I prefer to describe as the pinch and snap of God's fingers
so to speak

and when spoken by God........I AM!

 

[ratiocinator]

got a better rebuttal?

Of what and better than what?

For example, in quantum mechanics you can't actually achieve a state of zero motion. Not that the specifics of the science matter all that much. If you think there's a mystery about how things got going (there is, sort of - but in not the simplistic Newtonian motion way) - then just slapping the (undefined) label 'spirit' on it, and insisting it came first, has all the scientific basis and explanatory power of "I dunno, it must be magic!"

 

[ratiocinator]

at the point of primordial singularity
there is no movement
it doesn't 'begin' until the beginning......begins

not trying to be tongue twisted

the whole universe was in one 'point'
without a secondary point yet formed.....there is nowhere to come from
nowhere to go to
no movement

• It is extremely unlikely there was a singularity - it's a consequence of general relativity without regard to quantum effects that would surely have been significant. We don't have a tested theory that will tell us exactly what happened.
• If there was a literal space-time singularity (or something very similar), then time before it would be meaningless, so there was never "no movement".
• A singularity need not be one point - only the observable universe would have started from one point.

 

[Thumper]

• It is extremely unlikely there was a singularity - it's a consequence of general relativity without regard to quantum effects that would surely have been significant. We don't have a tested theory that will tell us exactly what happened.
• If there was a literal space-time singularity (or something very similar), then time before it would be meaningless, so there was never "no movement".
• A singularity need not be one point - only the observable universe would have started from one point.

"One might ask what is before that but the answer is that there is nowhere before the Big Bang just as there is nowhere south of the South Pole." ~ Stephen Hawking

 

[Willamena]

at the point of primordial singularity
there is no movement
it doesn't 'begin' until the beginning......begins

not trying to be tongue twisted

the whole universe was in one 'point'
without a secondary point yet formed.....there is nowhere to come from
nowhere to go to
no movement

not until the bang

which I prefer to describe as the pinch and snap of God's fingers
so to speak

and when spoken by God........I AM!

The "bang" is a metaphorical image. Thumper's quotation in #615 is appropriate: there is no "point" where there is no "there."

 

[Nakosis]

your turn.....


and your lack of belief is founded on what?

My lack of belief is founded on a lack of knowledge. Unless someone can prove they have knowledge about God, I'm not buying into anyone's claims.

 

[Cephus]

My lack of belief is founded on a lack of knowledge. Unless someone can prove they have knowledge about God, I'm not buying into anyone's claims.

Which is exactly how the majority of atheists operate. Their atheism is based on rejecting the unsupported and unsubstantiated claims made by theists. If theism just vanished from the world, so would atheism because atheism is simply a response to theism. But instead of acknowledging this, theists have to spin atheism as something sinister, because they simply cannot admit that their emperor not only has no clothes, there's no emperor to begin with.

 

[Thief]

at the point of primordial singularity
there is no movement
it doesn't 'begin' until the beginning......begins

not trying to be tongue twisted

the whole universe was in one 'point'
without a secondary point yet formed.....there is nowhere to come from
nowhere to go to
no movement

not until the bang

which I prefer to describe as the pinch and snap of God's fingers
so to speak

and when spoken by God........I AM!

The "bang" is a metaphorical image. Thumper's quotation in #615 is appropriate: there is no "point" where there is no "there."

I made the 'point'
but no....God did it

at the 'point' of the beginning...the primordial singularity

all motion has a starting 'point'

God was there
Spirit first

 

[Thief]

My lack of belief is founded on a lack of knowledge. Unless someone can prove they have knowledge about God, I'm not buying into anyone's claims.

then belief cannot happen for you

you have to make a choice to best of your reasoning

I take what science leads to (the point)
I get it
I then proceed to make a choice

 

[Thief]

apparently the participants here don't get it

there will never be proof of God
that happens after your last breath

science will not answer your lack of belief
it displays only the rational that helps to make the decision

the decision remains yours

you must do so without proof

you have to make the choice with cause and effect in mind

deny cause and effect....and the choice moves to non-science
no experiment is valid without cause and effect
all of science is negated by the denial of cause and effect

you end up making the choice without science
that would be bad

Cause and effect in place....
the universe is the effect
and God is the Cause