God.

[Distruzio]

Not exactly. God is bigger for the humble rather than the arrogant.

how is it humble to claim that the only reason you don't know everything is that god fills the gaps. That would seem to me to be the height of arrogance. "I can't explain it therefore it must only be understandable by an ultimate being so high above us that he/she/it/whatever is entirely incomprehensible to humans." against "I don't know? Someone in that field might or it might remain unexplained. Let's go find out shall we? and if no-one knows maybe we can try to find out."

of those two, which seems more humble to you.

I have met a number of well-educated scientists and philosophers.

well yes, they generally are well educated.

I never said that one shouldn't be filled with the desire to find things out. I explicitly said that until it is known, that there is nothing wrong with attributing the existence of that mystery to God.

[Dyakovo]

how is it humble to claim that the only reason you don't know everything is that god fills the gaps. That would seem to me to be the height of arrogance. "I can't explain it therefore it must only be understandable by an ultimate being so high above us that he/she/it/whatever is entirely incomprehensible to humans." against "I don't know? Someone in that field might or it might remain unexplained. Let's go find out shall we? and if no-one knows maybe we can try to find out."

of those two, which seems more humble to you.

well yes, they generally are well educated.

I never said that one shouldn't be filled with the desire to find things out. I explicitly said that until it is known, that there is nothing wrong with attributing the existence of that mystery to God.

Yes, there is. It's a cop-out. An excuse to not look.

[Distruzio]

I never said that one shouldn't be filled with the desire to find things out. I explicitly said that until it is known, that there is nothing wrong with attributing the existence of that mystery to God.

Yes, there is. It's a cop-out. An excuse to not look.

How has the Church ever not looked? Have we forgotten that it was the Church that established the first Universities and financed the original resurgence of scientific discovery in Europe.

[DaWoad]

how, exactly, did you know that there was anything there to leave?

That, I cannot honestly answer. I've always known. I rejected it for the majority of my life. I was not raised in a church. I wasn't even raised spiritual. I never went to church until after I had read Anton LaVey's Satanic Bible. I only went to ridicule Christians as fools. I can't remember not knowing, and I can't remember not being angry at Him... until my accident.

A ct scan may be in order. Consistent hallucinations/strange feeling that won't go away could have a number of physical causes most of em relatively harmless if treated.

[Dyakovo]

Yes, there is. It's a cop-out. An excuse to not look.

How has the Church ever not looked? Have we forgotten that it was the Church that established the first Universities and financed the original resurgence of scientific discovery in Europe.

Where did I say that people are incapable of not taking the excuse?

[DaWoad]

Yes, there is. It's a cop-out. An excuse to not look.

How has the Church ever not looked? Have we forgotten that it was the Church that established the first Universities and financed the original resurgence of scientific discovery in Europe.

would you like the list? it doesn't start with Galileo I promise you.

[Distruzio]

That, I cannot honestly answer. I've always known. I rejected it for the majority of my life. I was not raised in a church. I wasn't even raised spiritual. I never went to church until after I had read Anton LaVey's Satanic Bible. I only went to ridicule Christians as fools. I can't remember not knowing, and I can't remember not being angry at Him... until my accident.

A ct scan may be in order. Consistent hallucinations/strange feeling that won't go away could have a number of physical causes most of em relatively harmless if treated.

There were plenty following the accident (a 2 ton pallet fell on me). The only thing wrong was several extreme subluxations and a broken back.

[Tarish]

Well I tend to base my beliefs on facts/proof that are laid in front of me.

As do I. Which is why I lack belief in any deity. No proof of their existence has been laid out in front of me.

You know, you claim you are sympathetic to the "atheist position" but all you're doing is showing that you don't know what atheism is. Atheism is simply the lack of belief in a deity or deities, not necessarily actively believing they do not exist (although that is one form of atheism).

Your definition of atheism is basically the same as my definition of agnosticism. So you can stop nit-picking at my beliefs now. Thanks.

[Distruzio]

How has the Church ever not looked? Have we forgotten that it was the Church that established the first Universities and financed the original resurgence of scientific discovery in Europe.

Where did I say that people are incapable of not taking the excuse?

Ah. My apologies.

[Dyakovo]

How has the Church ever not looked? Have we forgotten that it was the Church that established the first Universities and financed the original resurgence of scientific discovery in Europe.

would you like the list? it doesn't start with Galileo I promise you.

The second part of his statement is actually true... Of course, it doesn't actually counter what I said, so...

[SUPERFISHPIE]

My philosophy is based on my personal interpretation of Final Fantasy X.
Thus, I do not believe in a god, especially the christian one. Though I like to call myself agnostic with buddhist and atheist tendencies anyway because I like my doubt.

[Dyakovo]

As do I. Which is why I lack belief in any deity. No proof of their existence has been laid out in front of me.

You know, you claim you are sympathetic to the "atheist position" but all you're doing is showing that you don't know what atheism is. Atheism is simply the lack of belief in a deity or deities, not necessarily actively believing they do not exist (although that is one form of atheism).

Your definition of atheism is basically the same as my definition of agnosticism. So you can stop nit-picking at my beliefs now. Thanks.

1: It's not just "my definition of atheism"
2: What if I don't want to?

[Tarish]

Well I tend to base my beliefs on facts/proof that are laid in front of me.

As do I. Which is why I lack belief in any deity. No proof of their existence has been laid out in front of me.

You know, you claim you are sympathetic to the "atheist position" but all you're doing is showing that you don't know what atheism is. Atheism is simply the lack of belief in a deity or deities, not necessarily actively believing they do not exist (although that is one form of atheism).

That "form" is what I've been meaning by atheism. So enough of the "you don't know what atheism is" bull shit. I do have a lack of belief in god, so I'm well within the definition of atheism that you use. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism also, if you read the article (I realize wikipedia isn't the most reliable of sources, but I'm sure you can look past the credibility), it includes both our definitions of atheism. mine: "atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities." and yours: "atheism is simply the absence of belief that any deities exist."

using my definition, I do not fit the definition of atheist because I do not take the position that there are no deities. My belief is that there may be deities, and there may not be- I do not stand on either side of that argument. So, I do fit your definition of atheism, because of my lack of belief towards deities. the problem is, I have a lack of belief in either side, so I'm in the middle of the two sides. That middle region is agnosticism.

[DaWoad]

A ct scan may be in order. Consistent hallucinations/strange feeling that won't go away could have a number of physical causes most of em relatively harmless if treated.

There were plenty following the accident (a 2 ton pallet fell on me). The only thing wrong was several extreme subluxations and a broken back.

Ouch, what did you partially dislocate?

and, man that sucks, I'm sorry.

[Dyakovo]

As do I. Which is why I lack belief in any deity. No proof of their existence has been laid out in front of me.

You know, you claim you are sympathetic to the "atheist position" but all you're doing is showing that you don't know what atheism is. Atheism is simply the lack of belief in a deity or deities, not necessarily actively believing they do not exist (although that is one form of atheism).

That "form" is what I've been meaning by atheism.

As I said.

The problem is, I have a lack of belief in either side, so I'm in the middle of the two sides. That middle region is agnosticism.

There is no middle region. You either have belief in a deity or deities or you don't.

[Unhealthy2]

I'm saying that atheists tend to think that theists are nutjobs. If thinking of God in such a way is what helps them to understand that we aren't nutjobs, just merely viewing the world in a more inter-relational point a of view, then why not do so? Unless you disagree with my position. If that be the case, then *shrug*. Whatevs.

Belief in a god is a bit more than just viewing the world in a different way. It's actually a claim about reality being factually different.

Actually, he did have the support of the Church until he declared that he was right and all the other scientists that were questioning his findings were wrong. The Church merely required him to wait for the rest of the scientific community to catch up to him. Granted, that may have taken a longer amount of time than Galileo had years left, but the Church is anything but quick to make decisions.

Not knowledgeable enough to comment on this. My point still stands that support or lack thereof of one particular church of one particular religion does not really form a good metric to judge the validity of claims.

Being Christian, I honestly believe that it is the only pertinent religion to me.

But that's Eurocentric. There are thousands of religions with ancient traditions, some of which have an enormous number of modern adherents. How come Christianity is the only one with validity lent to it?

I'm saying you can't deny something merely b/c it doesn't conform to standard empirical data studies.

Depends. If it's only unfalsifiable because we haven't thought of a good way to test it yet, then yeah, there's no need to dismiss it. However, if it's unfalsifiable in principle, then its frequentist probability of being true is 0. It almost surely isn't true.

Remember, I'm an Austrian. So I think in terms of logical a priori reasoning.

Logical a priori reasoning only takes you up to a certain point. In fact, reason alone, without empiricism, would leave you in a perpetual state of Cartesian solipsism, either that or it would force you to draw conclusions that your couldn't really draw on reason alone.

[Bottle]

As do I. Which is why I lack belief in any deity. No proof of their existence has been laid out in front of me.

You know, you claim you are sympathetic to the "atheist position" but all you're doing is showing that you don't know what atheism is. Atheism is simply the lack of belief in a deity or deities, not necessarily actively believing they do not exist (although that is one form of atheism).

Your definition of atheism is basically the same as my definition of agnosticism. So you can stop nit-picking at my beliefs now. Thanks.

It's not "his" definition. It's the actual meaning of the term.

[The Ideal Society]

That "form" is what I've been meaning by atheism.

As I said.

The problem is, I have a lack of belief in either side, so I'm in the middle of the two sides. That middle region is agnosticism.

There is no middle region. You either have belief in a deity or deities or you don't.

Hm, I don't think you have any authority to tell me what I have to believe. You are obviously having a hard time grasping the concept of agnosticism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism
Read, learn, and stfu.

[Bottle]

As I said.

There is no middle region. You either have belief in a deity or deities or you don't.

Hm, I don't think you have any authority to tell me what I have to believe. You are obviously having a hard time grasping the concept of agnosticism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism
Read, learn, and stfu.

Dude, um, read your own source.

[Dyakovo]

As I said.

There is no middle region. You either have belief in a deity or deities or you don't.

Hm, I don't think you have any authority to tell me what I have to believe. You are obviously having a hard time grasping the concept of agnosticism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism
Read, learn, and stfu.

I'm not saying anything about what you have to believe. I am saying that agnosticism is not a middle ground between theism and atheism. It is a statement about knowledge, not belief. There is no middle ground between theism and atheism. Either you have belief in a deity or deities (theism) or you don't (atheism). And by the way, I am agnostic myself; an agnostic atheist.

[Dyakovo]

Hm, I don't think you have any authority to tell me what I have to believe. You are obviously having a hard time grasping the concept of agnosticism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism
Read, learn, and stfu.

Dude, um, read your own source.

Why would he want to do that? Other than, you know, not making himself look like ridiculous...

[Bottle]

Hm, I don't think you have any authority to tell me what I have to believe. You are obviously having a hard time grasping the concept of agnosticism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism
Read, learn, and stfu.

I'm not saying anything about what you have to believe. I am saying that agnosticism is not a middle ground between theism and atheism. It is a statement about knowledge, not belief. There is no middle ground between theism and atheism. Either you have belief in a deity or deities (theism) or you don't (atheism). And by the way, I am agnostic myself; an agnostic atheist.

Good on you for having the patience to deal politely with somebody who was that hostile toward you. I try for that patience and I miss more often than not.

[The Ideal Society]

Hm, I don't think you have any authority to tell me what I have to believe. You are obviously having a hard time grasping the concept of agnosticism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism
Read, learn, and stfu.

Dude, um, read your own source.

What of it? all I've been saying this entire time is there is no proof either way so I'm just unsure of what to believe. Pretty much exactly what that says agnosticism is.

[Dyakovo]

I'm not saying anything about what you have to believe. I am saying that agnosticism is not a middle ground between theism and atheism. It is a statement about knowledge, not belief. There is no middle ground between theism and atheism. Either you have belief in a deity or deities (theism) or you don't (atheism). And by the way, I am agnostic myself; an agnostic atheist.

Good on you for having the patience to deal politely with somebody who was that hostile toward you. I try for that patience and I miss more often than not.

As do I... The painkillers are making me particularly mellow tonight...

[Secret Love]

God. Do you believe in him? Or is he not real? Please share your opinions/beliefs.

(the Christian God is the one I am talking about)

I do believe in God....that is why in one of the forums about relgion I become a little upset with what people have to say. I am very defensive of my faith. If you would like to know more on why I believe in Him, about Him, or anything about my religion, please ask