What makes you right?

[XenoFish]

Don't misunderstand me, I don't believe someone's religious beliefs are wrong (unless it's harmful to yourself and others). And I myself have been down the road of devotion. I'm some ways I found a more proactive metaphysical approach to be better. I sought the divine will/creative force through magick. There have been several events that made me question myself. Even though I ride the fence of apatheism and agnostic beliefs, I know that there is something, perhaps our own will that makes changes. It's hard to describe. I honestly miss my metaphysical practices. I felt the happiest when I was a magician. Now that I'm in the perpetual limbo of beliefs, I wonder how some people can devote some much times to something without question.

[+Sherapy]

This is where I disagree with you. I do know that there is a God. I think perhaps you meant to write that nobody can empirically prove God, a comment to which I would wholeheartedly agree. That, however, is a different question. Thus the situation remains where agnostics (regardless of what time frame they set as to the impossibility of proving God or not) have put themselves in a position where they believe they have chosen the correct approach to God.

I'm not sure I know what you are referencing. Science and God do not clash, but those who believe God exists and those who believe it is an unkowable question do.

Nevertheless, it remains the case in regard to the question at hand. And as I said, if I am guilty of idolatry, then I've chosen the wrong path and I've just gotta cross my fingers that if God exists then he doesn't worry about such things.

Pa., that you 'know' there is a god, I would ask how do you know this? My step dad is a devote Catholic, yet he recently told me that no one knows, least of all him, if there is a god or not, as an Athiest I told him I agree with that, I would feel incredibly arrogant to position or claim that I just know there is no God. I truly honestly, don't know one way or the other yet, none the less, Atheism still works the best for me, my reasons work for me, they suffice. My Dad thinks his path is the best model for him as far as honoring commitments. My best friend thinks that the Christian path is the best model for her to learn about and practice unconditional love. My path is a fruitful way for me to learn about and nurture tolerance, etc. etc. The God, no God, we can't settle at this time, we do not have a way to test one way or the other, personal experience would not add much, to me it's simply the equivalent of saying my galaxy S6 is better than your iPhone; therefore, I prefer this over that; when really it depends on what you want in a phone based on your personal needs. I have even read on here that a poster claims to be healthier and has super powers as a result of a belief in God, that reminds me of the wrinkle creams endorsed by Dr. Oz, (well we all know it's BS, tee hee/ personal testimony via the placebo affect).

For me, the point 8ty is bringing in that no one knows there is or isn't a god is a good one to explore.

Edited July 11, 2015 by Sherapy

[StarMountainKid]

With respect, I've read a lot of words so far, we can elaborate on why we think we're right all day, but perhaps there is only a simple psychological reason we think we are right. If instead the question were "What Makes You Wrong?", I think people would start defending themselves, and I think we would post more honest to the point answers here.

[XenoFish]

no one knows there is or isn't a god is a good one to explore.

I think that's the thing. No one knows and I wonder how people can be devout to a belief where their is no evidence of it being true.

[Astral Hillbilly]

From the sound of things, you may have been given over to a reprobate mind. If so, there's no discussion possible with you. Only an attack on anyone who dares think different from yourself.

The only interest I imagine you'll see in this thread is others trying to figure out what made you so dark and turned against God. I read where a lot of people let you down, but not one thing that God did to you. Your hatred is obvious, so good luck on your fishing trip.

[XenoFish]

Am I dark? perhaps.But I have reason to be. Do I hate god? No. I just don't understand why a loving heavenly father would let someone come under suffering. Do you know what it feels like to be hated by everyone around you for no reason whatsoever? I do. I never knew why. Then I you are taken to church and are told all this great things about god and how he answer prayers. So you pray for the pain to stop, you do this every night and it get's worse and worse until you snap. When ends up when I put a classmate in the hospital. Then you wonder why god didn't help you. Why the pain never ceased. Then your mentally assaulted by the "your not god enough for god" chant over and over while sitting in church. As a kid these things mess you up. You never feel good enough for anyone. Even when it's made apparent that god made you messed up and doesn't love you. And that he had his own son killed. I cried so many times at night wanting god to love me to help me. It created a deep void in me. I believed, I hoped, I desired. I did everything I could to be devout. And you life was hell. Then I find magick, I found that it was self-empowering, that I didn't have to be weak, that I didn't have to turn the other cheek and let other abuse me. I fought back. I became stronger.

And now I wonder how some of you can do this? How can you be devout in such a things? I want the reasons and motivations why you do this? What drives your faith and so far only a few have answered me and I thank them. So if your not going to provide insight into my questions then please don't even bother to respond. I want to know why? That is all I'm asking.

Edited July 11, 2015 by XenoFish

[GoldenWolf]

From the sound of things, you may have been given over to a reprobate mind. If so, there's no discussion possible with you. Only an attack on anyone who dares think different from yourself.

The only interest I imagine you'll see in this thread is others trying to figure out what made you so dark and turned against God. I read where a lot of people let you down, but not one thing that God did to you. Your hatred is obvious, so good luck on your fishing trip.

Instead of giving them to these guys:

He gives them to these guys:

Romans 1:28

And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient

[XenoFish]

In other words they didn't conform to the ideals of others. Correct?

[Likely Guy]

Nobody, agnostic or otherwise, denies that it is possible for a person to estimate whether it is or is not seriously possible that there is no God. If something like that, a personal estimate of plausibility held with whatever confidence, isn't what you mean by "I do know that there is a God," then no, I believe that you do not know that, and that nobody else does, either.

That's a fair defintion but, as an apatheist or an 'indifferent agnostic', I'd like to add...

Do I care, or would I live my life differently if God was proved real or a fake? Nope, not one bit.

[XenoFish]

Do I care, or would I live my life differently if God was proved real or a fake? Nope, not one bit.

Same here. I just want to understand the reason some people have for their beliefs. I seek to understand them.

[Likely Guy]

Same here. I just want to understand the reason some people have for their beliefs. I seek to understand them.

It's totally fine to wonder why people believe/disbelieve the way they do and not care whether God exists or not.

Edit: Surely, somewhere along the line, someone will say, "If you wonder, you must care." The answer is no, it's simple curiousity. If I research ancient 'Egyptian theology' let's say, does that mean that I believe in the existance of ancient Egyptian Gods, or express any disbelief toward them? No.

Edited July 12, 2015 by Likely Guy

[Mr Walker]

Faith will never be proof.

But the fruits or consequences of faith are evidential proof of its effectiveness. These are quantifiable. Eg faith reduces pain levels. Faith reduces depression in aged people in nursing homes. etc. Faith contributes to up to 10 years greater longevity and physical /mental health in human beings. All proven by many scientific and medical studies across many societies in recent times.

[Likely Guy]

But the fruits or consequences of faith are evidential proof of its effectiveness. These are quantifiable. Eg faith reduces pain levels. Faith reduces depression in aged people in nursing homes. etc. Faith contributes to up to 10 years greater longevity and physical /mental health in human beings. All proven by many scientific and medical studies across many societies in recent times.

Your total lack to link to anything that is either a scientific or a medical study is duly noted.

"Faith contributes to up to 10 years greater longevity." - brought to you by the International Institute of Obvious Studies. People that are religious tend to drink and smoke less. I fail to see God's direct involvement in their longevity.

Edited July 12, 2015 by Likely Guy

[XenoFish]

Here you go likelyguy. It's an interesting read. One that makes me support religion as a form of self-development and self-therapy, not as a literal truth.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychology_of_religion

[+Paranoid Android]

PA

Let's try not to move the goalposts so much. You, PA, introduced the verb to know into our discussion with your proposed definition of agnostic,

Nobody, agnostic or otherwise, denies that it is possible for a person to estimate whether it is or is not seriously possible that there is no God. If something like that, a personal estimate of plausibility held with whatever confidence, isn't what you mean by "I do know that there is a God," then no, I believe that you do not know that, and that nobody else does, either.

In retrospect we might say that Huxley meant something like that people could not empirically prove that there was or wasn't a god. Many people today do agree with that, although it was hotly controversial at the time. In any case, it wasn't what I meant by to know in the context of replying to your proposed definition of my religious beliefs.

Everybody bases their world view on the knowledge that they have gained over the years, that includes agnostics when they decide that God cannot be known. They know that God cannot be known and therefore choose neither. If they didn't know this they'd either believe or not believing in God because their knowledge would be different.

As I recall, what we discussed was a Biblical "creator and sustainer type" God, what you said you actually believed to be the case about God, not whether there exists any sort of thing that it is simply outsdie the scope of scientific inquiry.

I'm not sure I folow, I do believe in a "creator and sustainer type" God, but have never claimed any empirical backing for it, simply accepting that science and God do not clash, they are in different spheres of knowledge (the whole NOMA principle and the like).

Glad you mentioned that. It also came up recently in another thread as well ("Genesis 5:18-24 (KJV)" here on S vs. S). Abraham lived to 175, yes? Aren't these factoids pretty much fatal to your idea that the legendary or figurative portions of Genesis are only found in the first dozen chapters or so? (It's still a current thread; you can answer there if you prefer.)

I don't recall ever mentioning that the age of the people in the genealogies of Genesis 5 and 10 was a factor in determining the poetic nature of chapters 1-11. I've mentioned several reasons why I believe those chapters to be theological discourses on God rather than historical accounts of what happened, none of those reasons were "they are simply too old to have been realistic ages". You're talking to a guy who believes people rose from the dead by God's power, so someone living for 175 years isn't impossible for me.

[+Paranoid Android]

Pa., that you 'know' there is a god, I would ask how do you know this? My step dad is a devote Catholic, yet he recently told me that no one knows, least of all him, if there is a god or not, as an Athiest I told him I agree with that, I would feel incredibly arrogant to position or claim that I just know there is no God. I truly honestly, don't know one way or the other yet, none the less, Atheism still works the best for me, my reasons work for me, they suffice. My Dad thinks his path is the best model for him as far as honoring commitments. My best friend thinks that the Christian path is the best model for her to learn about and practice unconditional love. My path is a fruitful way for me to learn about and nurture tolerance, etc. etc. The God, no God, we can't settle at this time, we do not have a way to test one way or the other, personal experience would not add much, to me it's simply the equivalent of saying my galaxy S6 is better than your iPhone; therefore, I prefer this over that; when really it depends on what you want in a phone based on your personal needs. I have even read on here that a poster claims to be healthier and has super powers as a result of a belief in God, that reminds me of the wrinkle creams endorsed by Dr. Oz, (well we all know it's BS, tee hee/ personal testimony via the placebo affect).

For me, the point 8ty is bringing in that no one knows there is or isn't a god is a good one to explore.

The two snippets I put in bold pretty much sum it up. When I read your opening statement I was ready to type "I know this because of personal experience proving the existence of God to me". Then you up and say that personal experience isn't valid to you. But it is valid to me, and that is how I know God exists! Because it is personal it is neither transferable nor empirical, but that still leaves me with experiences that have proven God. I therefore "know" God exists, and to say otherwise would be a lie (to myself, if not to you).

[+Sherapy]

The two snippets I put in bold pretty much sum it up. When I read your opening statement I was ready to type "I know this because of personal experience proving the existence of God to me". Then you up and say that personal experience isn't valid to you. But it is valid to me, and that is how I know God exists! Because it is personal it is neither transferable nor empirical, but that still leaves me with experiences that have proven God. I therefore "know" God exists, and to say otherwise would be a lie (to myself, if not to you).

Fair enough, so god is concluded based on your interpretation of your personal experiences, is this accurate? I have had personal experiences as an atheist, I spoke of one on UM it happened when I found out my mom was not gonna live much longer (a few years ago) and my Dad needed me to fly to Florida immediately, and I didn't want to go, I truly didn't think I had the strength to face this moment and I was trying to come up with way to tell my dad I couldn't come, suddenly I saw my mom to my left and my deceased grandmother to my right, each sat next to me and told me I needed to go and that my mom was ready to die, and she would hold on till I got to my dad.

I booked a flight for the next day. My mom passed 10 minutes before I landed. I am an Athiest, many of my friends and family did interpret this as God sending me angels, I heard all kinds of interesting interpretations. But, I did not for one second consider this as God or angels for me;0 I interpreted it as a hallucination under extreme stress, not unlike the few other times in my life the types of experiences have happened like this in my life always under extreme stress, so this is not new to me. For me, and I have posted this before too, it is immaterial how it was interpreted, if I was Christian I would of been sure it was God, if I was Muslim, I would of said it was Allah, and as an Athiest I interpreted it in that context, just like each of my friends and family interpreted my experience according to their beliefs. I was not offended either that the interpretations were unique to the path of the person either. That is why I said personal experience doesn't mean a whole lot even from me. As humans we make sense of things according to our personal beliefs and as anyone I will firmly posit that according to my beliefs my experience was stress induced, "I just know it." It still doesn't prove or disprove god though as a culture and technology wise we don't have a way to do so at this time, it's not to say we won't, but right now we don't know one way of the other like 8ty says, yet this doesn't matter as Sharon posts beleifs are personal to each of us and work for us according to our needs and I think she is right.

Edited July 12, 2015 by Sherapy

[Mr Walker]

Your total lack to link to anything that is either a scientific or a medical study is duly noted.

"Faith contributes to up to 10 years greater longevity." - brought to you by the International Institute of Obvious Studies. People that are religious tend to drink and smoke less. I fail to see God's direct involvement in their longevity.

I've posted such links for years. If you don't believe me then try and prove me wrong. As soon as you do any serious searching oyu will find the results and the studies themselves. I am not here to educate you or change your mind; just to state factual truths which you can check for yourself.WHY do SOME religious people smoke and drink less than non religious people ? Because their faith or belief directs them to. For example they might think their body is the temple of the lord and needs to be kept healthy. Thus there is, in this instance, a direct causal link between faith/belief and health. Take the studies of senior citizens in nursing homes.Those with a belief in a loving god lived longer and were less depressed than those without such a belief. Its logical They believed they had someone caring for them and watching over them where as those without faith were often lonely isolated an worried about their health and depressed. THe "believers" were thus less lonely, worried, or depressed, and lived longer and happier lives as a consequence. Direct causal link. Also in cohorts of otherwise equal living habits, smokers drinkers or not, people who attend church once a week statistically live 5-7 years longer than those who do not attend church. And its not the social effect of community because attending a bowling club once a week doesn't have the same effect..

I will give you ONE source filled with meta analysis of peer reviewed findings in recent years. Read it carefully.

http:www.hindawi.com/journals/ism/2012/278730/ Damn the link didn't work Google " religion, spirituality and health: The research and clinical implications"

Edited July 12, 2015 by Mr Walker

[eight bits]

Likely Guy

That's a fair defintion but, as an apatheist or an 'indifferent agnostic', I'd like to add...

Do I care, or would I live my life differently if God was proved real or a fake? Nope, not one bit.

That's fine, but "apatheist" or "indifferent" provides different information than what is asked for in the ontological question of God. In the phase "indifferent agnostic," the first adjective provides additional information than was asked for. That's fine, too, but it's a different issue.

Personally, I do care, because of curiosity, because of my interest in comparative religion, and because of my interest in depth psychology, where the "image of God" concept plays a key role.

For the reasons I discussed with PA. I don't think including the term "impossibility" as part of the definition of agnostic is useful. Lack of knowledge in any strenuous sense suffices. Nobody "knows" in any sense which is stronger than a very confident personal opinion. Conversely, no observant person denies that people sometimes form and hold personal opinions with great confidence despite evidentiary poverty.

PA

Everybody bases their world view on the knowledge that they have gained over the years, that includes agnostics when they decide that God cannot be known.

I renew my objection to your use of decsion-charged rhetoric, when you have presented no evidence that beliefs are chosen, decided, or are anything other than an involuntary response to the information available to the inference agent.

I appreciate that some interpretations of Protestantism require that some specific religious beliefs be "chosen." There is yet another way that some religions conflict with science.

They know that God cannot be known and therefore choose neither.

No, they believe that. As I already explained with a worked example, it cannot be excluded that God can be known (if a god existed and was willing to make himself or herself known) from typical agnostic premises (which do not exclude that gods might exist)..

...(the whole NOMA principle and the like)...

... would make an interesting discussion, was proposed by an agnostic (Gould), and I think it is in the best traditions of our confesssion. However, Gould did not actually propose that the ontological question of God could be reserved exclusively to any designated field of scholarhip. His proposal does not deny the unity across disciplines of factual knowledge, and the terms of inquiry into the QoG cannot be the subject of any human regulation anyway in a free academic environment.

I don't recall ever mentioning that the age of the people in the genealogies of Genesis 5 and 10 was a factor in determining the poetic nature of chapters 1-11.

You are aware that other people find these ages diagnostic of figurative expression, even if you don't. (You don't?)

Regardless, the issue was not your reasons for drawing a conclusion, but the conclusion itself and whether the conclusion withstands scrutiny by others besides yourself, its maker. It is not unusual that somebody would offer a hypothesis, only to find that others disagree because they notice something which the first person didn't attend to so much.

[Stubbly_Dooright]

2. I think nonbelievers need God in their lives because there is no better way to live than worshiping God. Knowing that the Maker of the Universe loves you is far more grand than any human relationship or human experience can compete. This belief even comes with the disclaimer that cultural difference is beautiful to Him.

I like this last line of this particular part in your post. The first one, (although, this is in the 'I think' and to me, that is kind of a hands off for me ) how would you think that there is no better to live other that what you 'you think' ((Again, this is your belief, I'm not knocking it)) but how would you compare with how non-believers believe to be the best way to live to what you think is worshipping God being better? Now, I'm not saying it's not. I feel who knows, it could be. But non believers don't believe, so how would they think it's better, if there is no evidence to them ( you know, not in the way you and I have evidences for us to believe in our beliefs)? Do you know I mean?

Excellent post, Dooright!

Thank you KariW!

[XenoFish]

Couldn't have been said that when I did practice magick I was a hypocrite? I mean being an agnostic occultist, and calling forth spirits and other such entities. Even though I held a curious view of god. I found such rituals a the middle piller and both the greater and lesser banishing rituals of the pentagram to be highly effective on a personal level. I began to regard them as a placebo of sorts. The banishing rituals began to give me a psychological release, I felt calmer and more relaxed after. The middle pillar increased my energy level, which I liken unto a placebo effect. Yet I believed in what I did. It kept me calm, it helped me focused, and most important I was happy. I did worry about god existing. I just found that the philosophy of Christianity to be simple and effective, though I still had a curiosity about god's existence, what I hated was the structure of the religion. The basics were to me (might need correction), have faith, pray, act kindly/honestly, treat other as you wish to be treated, and that was it. Very, very simple and back in my occultist day I did this. You could say I was spiritual rather than religious. Even during those times I didn't require the validation of a higher power, I didn't need proof nor did I even care if god existed. It was a odd mix of beliefs that worked. I just did the work because it made me feel good.

I sure this might not be making sense to anyone.

[eight bits]

Xeno

I mean being an agnostic occultist, and calling forth spirits and other such entities.

Like any English word, agnostic can be used figuratively, but hypocrisy requires literalism. There may be some correlation between beliefs in gods and beliefs in other spirits, but there is no necessary reason to yoke the two together. Besides,agnosticism doesn't exclude the special class of spirits to which it refers, gods, so cannot exclude all spirits outright.

You called out to see who or what would answer, not knowing one way or the other in advance. I don't see any hypocrisy in that. It may not be typical behavior in the agnostic community, but it's not a reason to be excommunicated (?) either, IMO.

[XenoFish]

Well the thing about me is I want to know. I test. I can't simply go on faith. Which is one of the reason I hold an indifferent state of mind when it come to religious and spiritual beliefs. I do feel that you get out of them what you expect of them. Maybe that how it all works, perhaps?

[Just_Seeking]

Wow.. Frustrated and angry I don't force feed anyone. Everyone throws us religious types together but I get frustrated with the pushy types too. I know God exists if I tell you how, you wouldnt believe me. But anyway have a good day man and next time someone tries to force feed you just tell them no thank you I'm full.

[Mr Walker]

Couldn't have been said that when I did practice magick I was a hypocrite? I mean being an agnostic occultist, and calling forth spirits and other such entities. Even though I held a curious view of god. I found such rituals a the middle piller and both the greater and lesser banishing rituals of the pentagram to be highly effective on a personal level. I began to regard them as a placebo of sorts. The banishing rituals began to give me a psychological release, I felt calmer and more relaxed after. The middle pillar increased my energy level, which I liken unto a placebo effect. Yet I believed in what I did. It kept me calm, it helped me focused, and most important I was happy. I did worry about god existing. I just found that the philosophy of Christianity to be simple and effective, though I still had a curiosity about god's existence, what I hated was the structure of the religion. The basics were to me (might need correction), have faith, pray, act kindly/honestly, treat other as you wish to be treated, and that was it. Very, very simple and back in my occultist day I did this. You could say I was spiritual rather than religious. Even during those times I didn't require the validation of a higher power, I didn't need proof nor did I even care if god existed. It was a odd mix of beliefs that worked. I just did the work because it made me feel good.

I sure this might not be making sense to anyone.

Au Contraire. One of the most sensical things I have read for a while.