Explain Your Religious Views or Lack Thereof

[Conscentia]

No - I am not convinced that it is even possible to believe god exists. (It is impossible to have an idea that does not exist.)
Many claim to believe in something that they call "god". It occurred to me that every definition of god I've ever seen is either a description of a specific figure based on achievements or attributes and therefore useless (Creator of the universe, & omnipotence - like defining steel with the words used to make spoons, and shiny.), or refers to gods vaguely as figures that are revered as "divine", whatever that means, - also useless.
It seems very clear to me that "god" is simply a meaningless label.

Well that's probably because humans fall short of something that goes beyond their comprehension... so some confusion is always going to be around.

That's just an excuse.
It's beyond their comprehension because it is impossible to understand a concept that does not exist.

[Menassa]

Well that's probably because humans fall short of something that goes beyond their comprehension... so some confusion is always going to be around.

That's just an excuse.
It's beyond their comprehension because it is impossible to understand a concept that does not exist.

That as well is an excuse.
It's beyond our comprehension and that's just scary to some people, so they'll believe that something beyond what we humans can grasp doesn't exist.

*shrug*

[The Batorys]

So you don't believe in what they believe exists.
So you believe that according to your beliefs what they believe doesn't exist.
While they believe that what you believe is the real falsehood.

No - I am not convinced that it is even possible to believe god exists. (It is impossible to have an idea that does not exist.)

Many claim to believe in something that they call "god". It occurred to me that every definition of god I've ever seen is either a description of a specific figure based on achievements or attributes and therefore useless (Creator of the universe, & omnipotence - like defining steel with the words used to make spoons, and shiny.), or refers to gods vaguely as figures that are revered as "divine", whatever that means, - also useless.

It seems very clear to me that "god" is simply a meaningless label.

It's an imperfect word that attempts to describe many things that really aren't all that similar. As I've mused on in my previous replies to this particular subject.

Lots of labels are like this, though, when you start trying to define them precisely. Music, or art, for example. Yes, I know it's an imperfect analogy, I'm just using it as an example of another thing that is hard to define very specifically. Most people agree that music exists, as a thing (unlike gods), but if you ask them to define what exactly it is, and isn't, it gets more problematic. Does music have to have a pattern? Or is it any noise that people like listening to. Is John Cage's 4:33 music? Why or why not? You will also find many people that dismiss whole genres that other people list as their favorite music, mostly on the basis that they don't like it, calling it noise. "Deity" isn't the only concept that is complex and difficult from a definitional viewpoint.

[Athylon Prime]

You're right - I was just trying to clarify what I thought was an already clear point. I'll try to refrain from further debate.

I do appreciate it.
Also, everybody, let's please keep this thread down to just explanation and discussion. No flaming, debating, or trolling of any kind.
I enjoy a good,CIVILIZED debate, but this isn't the thread for it. I really don't want the mods to lock it again.

[Conscentia]

That's just an excuse.
It's beyond their comprehension because it is impossible to understand a concept that does not exist.

That as well is an excuse.
It's beyond our comprehension and that's just scary to some people, so they'll believe that something beyond what we humans can grasp doesn't exist.

*shrug*

Nonsense - how can one be said to believe in something that is beyond comprehension? It is impossible to believe in something that one does not understand.

[Athylon Prime]

Sometimes that is the case, although sometimes Proselytization works.

Agreed.

[The Realm of God]

That as well is an excuse.
It's beyond our comprehension and that's just scary to some people, so they'll believe that something beyond what we humans can grasp doesn't exist.

*shrug*

Nonsense - how can one be said to believe in something that is beyond comprehension? It is impossible to believe in something that one does not understand.

Our brain is finite, thus are mental power is finite logically there must be things outside of our comprehension. Who knows we might be incredibly stupid like a protozoa compared to some animals that could exist in this rather large universe.

[Menassa]

That as well is an excuse.
It's beyond our comprehension and that's just scary to some people, so they'll believe that something beyond what we humans can grasp doesn't exist.

*shrug*

Nonsense - how can one be said to believe in something that is beyond comprehension? It is impossible to believe in something that one does not understand.

People enjoy art without fully understanding the painting... although we must debate no longer.

[The Grey Wolf]

Anyone mind refuting my beliefs?

Have my own religion and it doesn't have a name or hierarchy.
Guess my beliefs can be best described as pantheist or monist. My reverence for certain personalities border on worship. I believe in the Vedas, or at least that they contain several nuggets of truth.
I don't think it is possible for us to fully comprehend or know God, at least by words alone it is impossible. Like Siddhartha said, "I have become distrustful of teachings and learning and that I have little faith in words that come to us from teachers."

[Great Franconia and Verana]

I'm an atheist because there is no rational evidence for the existence for a deity.

^This

[The Batorys]

That as well is an excuse.
It's beyond our comprehension and that's just scary to some people, so they'll believe that something beyond what we humans can grasp doesn't exist.

*shrug*

Nonsense - how can one be said to believe in something that is beyond comprehension? It is impossible to believe in something that one does not understand.

Not at all. I believe in lots of things I don't understand very well. Music, as previously mentioned, despite not really knowing why I enjoy it. Same with art. I believe in time, even though it's difficult to understand and I don't understand it that well. I have a favorite color, though I have no idea why I like it more than other colors.

I've been trying to reply to your posts, but it seems you have me set on ignore. If something I said was offensive, I apologize.

[Athylon Prime]

Anyone mind refuting my beliefs?

Have my own religion and it doesn't have a name or hierarchy.
Guess my beliefs can be best described as pantheist or monist. My reverence for certain personalities border on worship. I believe in the Vedas, or at least that they contain several nuggets of truth.
I don't think it is possible for us to fully comprehend or know God, at least by words alone it is impossible. Like Siddhartha said, "I have become distrustful of teachings and learning and that I have little faith in words that come to us from teachers."

*Generic refutation with a well hidden insult thrown in*

[Conscentia]

No - I am not convinced that it is even possible to believe god exists. (It is impossible to have an idea that does not exist.)

Many claim to believe in something that they call "god". It occurred to me that every definition of god I've ever seen is either a description of a specific figure based on achievements or attributes and therefore useless (Creator of the universe, & omnipotence - like defining steel with the words used to make spoons, and shiny.), or refers to gods vaguely as figures that are revered as "divine", whatever that means, - also useless.

It seems very clear to me that "god" is simply a meaningless label.

It's an imperfect word that attempts to describe many things that really aren't all that similar. As I've mused on in my previous replies to this particular subject.

Lots of labels are like this, though, when you start trying to define them precisely. Music, or art, for example. Yes, I know it's an imperfect analogy, I'm just using it as an example of another thing that is hard to define very specifically. Most people agree that music exists, as a thing (unlike gods), but if you ask them to define what exactly it is, and isn't, it gets more problematic. Does music have to have a pattern? Or is it any noise that people like listening to. Is John Cage's 4:33 music? Why or why not? You will also find many people that dismiss whole genres that other people list as their favorite music, mostly on the basis that they don't like it, calling it noise. "Deity" isn't the only concept that is complex and difficult from a definitional viewpoint.

Music - Audio-based art.
Art - The expression or application of human creative skill and imagination producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power. (Note: Beauty and emotional power are subjective. Thus what is art for one person is not so for another.)
Are these not sufficient?

My point is the term "deity" is so vague and that the concept of a "deity" cannot be said to exist. Alongside it's synonyms, "deity" is the most useless word in the English language.

[Uelvan]

So you believe that they don't believe in what they believe?

Who are you to tell someone what they do or don't believe?

No.
I am not convinced that anyone believes in "god" because I'm not convinced there's such a thing as "god" - not even as a concept.

Prove me wrong. Answer the questions I presented in my post.

Also, I'm not telling them anything. They told me - I have simply recorded what I have perceived.

Lolwut. People have their own concepts of what makes up god. From there, we have different religions. Simple?

[Blasveck]

Nonsense - how can one be said to believe in something that is beyond comprehension? It is impossible to believe in something that one does not understand.

Not at all. I believe in lots of things I don't understand very well. Music, as previously mentioned, despite not really knowing why I enjoy it. Same with art. I believe in time, even though it's difficult to understand and I don't understand it that well. I have a favorite color, though I have no idea why I like it more than other colors.

I've been trying to reply to your posts, but it seems you have me set on ignore. If something I said was offensive, I apologize.

But music is not beyond your comprehension, if you work at it, or practice, or even listen to it.

No matter how hard you try, you will never comprehend God.

[New Ravenrock]

Atheist here. Religion and it's followers are irrational and I think it's stupid to believe in some magical fairy. That and there is no evidence. And Science has clearly proven that we don't need religion, as many religion were founded to explain the world's functions around them. That time has passed and we no longer need a light in now a much greater and more progressive world.

[Neo Rome Republic]

Anyone mind refuting my beliefs?

Have my own religion and it doesn't have a name or hierarchy.
Guess my beliefs can be best described as pantheist or monist. My reverence for certain personalities border on worship. I believe in the Vedas, or at least that they contain several nuggets of truth.
I don't think it is possible for us to fully comprehend or know God, at least by words alone it is impossible. Like Siddhartha said, "I have become distrustful of teachings and learning and that I have little faith in words that come to us from teachers."

principle of parsimony.

[The Steel Magnolia]

Why would you seek to alter someone against their will, if that which you are altering harms no one?

Against their will? What part of argument is against someone's will? I seek to change their will. And I don't see what the lack of harm has to do with this. Again, I'm neither a Christian nor humanist - arguments of live and let live are not relevant to me.

Why do you seek to change their willÉ

[Tlaceceyaya]

No, it wouldn't.
There are loads of people who deny evidence.
If he exists, then he's basically saying "Fuck You!" to the people who prefer evidence over superstition, and making their choice for them by not providing them with an opportunity.

Yes it would,

If you see a bowl full of hot coals and a bowl full of diamonds the choice to take one would be made before you sat down.

So you're saying that my choice has already been made, and that your appeal to free will as the reason for there being no evidence for god was incorrect?

[The Batorys]

Not at all. I believe in lots of things I don't understand very well. Music, as previously mentioned, despite not really knowing why I enjoy it. Same with art. I believe in time, even though it's difficult to understand and I don't understand it that well. I have a favorite color, though I have no idea why I like it more than other colors.

I've been trying to reply to your posts, but it seems you have me set on ignore. If something I said was offensive, I apologize.

But music is not beyond your comprehension, if you work at it, or practice, or even listen to it.

No matter how hard you try, you will never comprehend God.

That assumes that I believe gods are incomprehensible. Also, I don't worship God with a capital G. This is the problem I have with a lot of the atheist viewpoints. They assume, in many cases, a decidedly Abrahamic view of the nature of deities.

My reasons for enjoying music, and the specific music I enjoy, are things I will never fully understand, however.

[The Steel Magnolia]

The first part I understand... and it's not if you could take a bowl of diamonds or a bowl of hot coals the choice is made before you sit down in the chair.

The last part, I don't understand... at all.

I'm not sure how much more plain I can make it. God is a fictional character from the mythology of the ancient Middle East. Due to a history of people pretending this character is real, to the point of it being socially-ingrained, an inherent special-pleading fallacy has attached to this particular character, meaning it is treated as being somehow more worthy of consideration than similar characters, like Thor, Zeus, Isis, and so on. I'm just taking a step past the historic special-pleading, and looking at it objectively.

Thor, Zeus, Isis, etc make several positivistic claims that can be easily falsified.

[Menassa]

Yes it would,

If you see a bowl full of hot coals and a bowl full of diamonds the choice to take one would be made before you sat down.

So you're saying that my choice has already been made, and that your appeal to free will as the reason for there being no evidence for god was incorrect?

No, go back and re read and then TG me if you would like to continue.

[The Steel Magnolia]

Well that's probably because humans fall short of something that goes beyond their comprehension... so some confusion is always going to be around.

That's just an excuse.
It's beyond their comprehension because it is impossible to understand a concept that does not exist.

If someone believes in a concept, it exists.

[Mkuki]

Atheist here. Religion and it's followers are irrational and I think it's stupid to believe in some magical fairy. That and there is no evidence. And Science has clearly proven that we don't need religion, as many religion were founded to explain the world's functions around them. That time has passed and we no longer need a light in now a much greater and more progressive world.

Except Science hasn't been able to explain everything. Your premise for the formation, and subsequent dissolution, of religion is, at worst, completely false and, at best, inaccurate.

[The Steel Magnolia]

Atheist here. Religion and it's followers are irrational and I think it's stupid to believe in some magical fairy. That and there is no evidence. And Science has clearly proven that we don't need religion, as many religion were founded to explain the world's functions around them. That time has passed and we no longer need a light in now a much greater and more progressive world.

Some of us may indeed still need a light. Don't extinguish that light.