I Lost My Religion

[erowe1]

Why do you feel you need to believe in something supernatural?

Believing in something supernatural is not something we do to satisfy some felt need. It's something we can't help doing because it's logically impossible not to. Even people who claim not to believe in the supernatural actually do.

 

[WilliamC]

Believing in something supernatural is not something we do to satisfy some felt need. It's something we can't help doing because it's logically impossible not to. Even people who claim not to believe in the supernatural actually do.

Why do you insist on making such transparently false claims?

You don't know what everyone else believes, and neither do I nor does anyone else.

I don't have a problem with your religion, just your lies that everyone else believes the same way you do.

It's not a way to convince anyone of your correctness, to simply state that they "actually do" believe in something just because you do.

Is your faith really so weak that you must resort to lies to support it?

Hey, guess what? Even people who claim not to believe in evolution really do, they just don't admit it to anyone else.

(Hint, the above is a lie both because it is not true and I know it not to be true. If you really think everyone on Earth believes the same as you then you aren't lying, just very confused.)

 

[erowe1]

Why do you insist on making such transparently false claims?

You don't know what everyone else believes, and neither do I nor does anyone else.

I don't have a problem with your religion, just your lies that everyone else believes the same way you do.

It's not a way to convince anyone of your correctness, to simply state that they "actually do" believe in something just because you do.

Is your faith really so weak that you must resort to lies to support it?

Hey, guess what? Even people who claim not to believe in evolution really do, they just don't admit it to anyone else.

(Hint, the above is a lie both because it is not true and I know it not to be true. If you really think everyone on Earth believes the same as you then you aren't lying, just very confused.)

We've already been over this.

Using your own chosen definition of "supernatural" I showed that it's logically impossible to believe that there exists nothing supernatural. Is that not the definition you want to use any more?

Granted, it might be the case that there are other ways to define the word that would allow for people to believe that nothing supernatural exists. But my claim was on the assumption of a definition such as the one you provided in that other thread.

 

[wizardwatson]

I used to go to church every Sunday. I stopped when Bush jr won the 2nd time around. I just realize that I don't see eye to eye with Christians after they elected him twice. I heard so many Christian people say but he's a christian Lisa when I would point out something wrong with Bush. That is the only most people who voted for him coul give: he's a christian. I won't ever renounce Jesus but I can;t go to church anymore with those people.

Now it looks like the stupid Christians are going to nominate someone at least as bad as Bush because he held some prayer rally. My head is about to explode. I won't vote for Perry even if raon says to I hope he doesn't cause I know he would win if he does. I would rather see Obama win

Consider what JC said:

Matthew Chapter 10:
34 Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth.
I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.
35 For I have come to turn `a man against his father, a daughter
against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law -
36 a man's enemies will be the members of his own household.'

Jesus said he was "the Way, the Truth, and the Life". I take this to mean that if you live your life with the faith that the Truth is the highest goal, that walking the narrow path is the only way, then you are bound to have conflict with not only members of a so called "church" but with the family members in your own house. So its only natural that your position on issues like war and killing will separate you from those who do not share your position.

As far as the "Just War Doctrine" I'd agree that there is a time for war but only in self-defense and only as a last resort. And one should conduct oneself in war with a compassionate heart and as the Tao Te Ching says:

Chapter 31
Weapons are the tools of violence;
all decent men detest them.

Weapons are the tools of fear;
a decent man will avoid them
except in the direst necessity
and, if compelled, will use them
only with the utmost restraint.
Peace is his highest value.
If the peace has been shattered,
how can he be content?
His enemies are not demons,
but human beings like himself.
He doesn't wish them personal harm.
Nor does he rejoice in victory.
How could he rejoice in victory
and delight in the slaughter of men?

He enters a battle gravely,
with sorrow and with great compassion,
as if he were attending a funeral.

 

[WilliamC]

We've already been over this.

Using your own chosen definition of "supernatural" I showed that it's logically impossible to believe that there exists nothing supernatural. Is that not the definition you want to use any more?

Granted, it might be the case that there are other ways to define the word that would allow for people to believe that nothing supernatural exists. But my claim was on the assumption of a definition such as the one you provided in that other thread.

Actually you abandoned that thread with numerous unanswered questions.

Well, again, it's not my intention to belittle you, I really am trying to understand.

My understanding is that you are satisfied to accept that everyone believes the same as you even if they don't know it.

If it works for you ok, as I assume (or in your lexicon I have faith that) you aren't one to impose your beliefs by force or you wouldn't be supporting Ron Paul.

Good luck in all you do sir.

 

[erowe1]

Actually you abandoned that thread with numerous unanswered questions.

Well, again, it's not my intention to belittle you, I really am trying to understand.

My understanding is that you are satisfied to accept that everyone believes the same as you even if they don't know it.

If it works for you ok, as I assume (or in your lexicon I have faith that) you aren't one to impose your beliefs by force or you wouldn't be supporting Ron Paul.

Good luck in all you do sir.

I don't think everyone believes the same as me.

But I do think that everyone who uses the word "supernatural" with the definition you provided necessarily believes that something supernatural exists, since it's logically impossible to use that definition and not believe that, as I demonstrated in that thread. But that's just one belief. It's not a whole world view by itself.

I'm not sure what questions were unanswered. But I am sure about the demonstration of the logical impossibility of holding that definition while also disbelieving in the supernatural. And to me, anything else in that thread didn't really matter.

 

[WilliamC]

I don't think everyone believes the same as me.

"Even people who claim not to believe in the supernatural actually do. "

Sounds to me like you claim that everyone believes in the supernatural even if they don't know it themselves, and you admit you do.

Sorry erowe, but while I cannot conclusively disprove the existence of the supernatural, I do not "believe" in it.

But if you want to pretend I do then that's ok, so long as you refrain from trying to coerce me.

 

[erowe1]

"Even people who claim not to believe in the supernatural actually do. "

Sounds to me like you claim that everyone believes in the supernatural even if they don't know it themselves, and you admit you do.

Sorry erowe, but while I cannot conclusively disprove the existence of the supernatural, I do not "believe" in it.

But if you want to pretend I do then that's ok, so long as you refrain from trying to coerce me.

Yes. All human beings agree on that one point. There are lots of other beliefs in the world too.

If you're still using the definition you provide before, then you do believe in it of logical necessity. Do you mean you're using a different definition now?

 

[WilliamC]

Yes. All human beings agree on that one point.

Must be nice to have an omniscient understanding of 'all human beings'.

Besides, all you have ever done is assert your conclusion.

Try starting with the definition in question and deconstructing it, instead of simply asserting your premise as your conclusion, and maybe I'll understand what you mean.

 

[erowe1]

Must be nice to have an omniscient understanding of 'all human beings'.

I don't. I just know that if something violates the laws of logic, it can't be right. There's nothing special about that.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

Fixed it for you.

See how easy it is to make baseless assertions?

Must be nice to know what everyone else believes.

I certainly don't claim to.

It's not baseless. If you get an anthropology book, you'll find that religion is a universal human concept/institution, and has been since Neanderthal man. Even atheism ("hard" or "soft") are religious perspectives.
[h=2]re·li·gion[/h]   [ri-lij-uh

n]

noun 1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.

 

[Working Poor]

But if you want to pretend I do then that's ok, so long as you refrain from trying to coerce me.

Yes because we believe in liberty let us refrain from coercion

 

[WilliamC]

It's not baseless. If you get an anthropology book, you'll find that religion is a universal human concept/institution, and has been since Neanderthal man.

Ah, since religion is 'universal' then atheism doesn't exist.

No wonder I was confused.

And, which anthropology book?

Perhaps this one?

The Epicurean Philodemus (ca. 110–35 b.c.) classified the various
kinds of atheists in antiquity as follows:
(1) Those who say that it is unknown whether there are any gods or
what they are like;
(2) Those who say openly that the gods do not exist;
(3) Those who clearly imply it.4
Although this classification is a fairly acceptable one, it stays at the
level of ideas and neglects practicing atheists. More seriously, it does
not mention atheism as a labeling device to slander your opponents,
be they religious or philosophical ones.

Oh but Philodemus was an idiot of course since there were not any atheists in ancient Greece.

Sorry, but atheism has existed throughout history.

Again everyone, I really don't care what we believe so long as we refrain from forcing our beliefs on others.

But to deny that beliefs different from yours exists or to suggest that everyone in the world believes in a certain way is just ignorant and does nothing to advance one's understanding of others.

edit: for what it's worth I fit into the first of Philodemus' descriptions, so technically I'm an agnostic with strong atheistic leanings, but since I accept I only have incomplete and partial knowledge I am skeptical of my atheism.

 

[WilliamC]

Yes because we believe in liberty let us refrain from coercion

Thank you.

+ rep

 

[erowe1]

Ah, since religion is 'universal' then atheism doesn't exist.

No wonder I was confused.

And, which anthropology book?

Perhaps this one?



Oh but Philodemus was an idiot of course since there were not any atheists in ancient Greece.

Sorry, but atheism has existed throughout history.

Again everyone, I really don't care what we believe so long as we refrain from forcing our beliefs on others.

But to deny that beliefs different from yours exists or to suggest that everyone in the world believes in a certain way is just ignorant and does nothing to advance one's understanding of others.

Of course, by Philodemus' definition, I would be an atheist, since I don't believe in the beings he calls "the gods." Centuries after Philodemus Christians were persecuted as atheists for that reason.

It's important not to mix different things here. Philodemus did not entertain the notion that nothing supernatural exists, or that it was possible for anyone to think so.

Also, the universality of religion doesn't mean atheism doesn't exist, since atheism is a religion.

Finally, the Cambridge Companion to Atheism does not count as an anthropology book.

 

[WilliamC]

Oh, and because I am fully aware of the limitations of logic and reason in appealing to others I also cheat and use my very own poetry as well.

So happens I have one that fits this thread fairly well, one moment please...

Ah, here it is....

I'll let you know a secret if you promise not to tell a soul.
I'll say what I've never said before if I may be so bold.
You may think I'm crazy or perhaps I'm just plain weird,
I've no idea of who I am nor what the hell I'm doing here.

Oh I don't mean to sound as if I don't know my own name,
Or I can't fool those around me into thinking that I'm sane.
Most of the time I don't worry much about what's supposed to be,
But occasionally these questions come and I wonder about me.

Could there be a master plan of which I am unaware?
Or some benign Deity who about us all does care?
Is my future predetermined all my choices already made?
Am I fated to live a lifetime to my destiny enslaved?

Did stars and planets and cosmic forces influence my birth?
Some Astrological foretelling of why I was put on earth?
Is there meaning in the numbers that define the days I've lived?
Can they to me explanations or a hidden message give?

Could I find the answer somewhere in a deck of Tarot Cards?
Will I gain awareness by staring into crystal shards?
Are there fortunes to be told from the lines that crease my hand?
Is there any magic anywhere that can help me to understand?

Can I reason out the answer with cold logic and hard facts?
Will empirical observation explain what I say and how I act?
Should I be a skeptical enquirer and doubt all the evidence?
Not look for explanation beyond mere circumstance?

Is there really nothing out there except an endless Universe?
Will growing older make me wiser or just make me feel worse?
Must I always stay contained within the confines of my mind?
Could I really live forever or will I die before my time?

I'll take you into my confidence if you don't betray my trust,
I'll speak what I've never spoken of if you insist I must.
You may not like the answer but you can't deny the truth,
You'll never know just who you are until you're old and out of youth.

 

[idirtify]

I don't. I just know that if something violates the laws of logic, it can't be right. There's nothing special about that.

Erowe, you repeatedly admitted in a recent thread in this forum that you cannot possibly know that, sans basing it 100% on a leap of faith. It was also demonstrated in that thread that the least likely kinds of things you would know are those about other people. So why are you continually contradicting yourself with these kinds of assertive claims about other people, as if you never made the admission and the “faith logic” you like to aim at those with whom you religiously disagree doesn’t apply to your own posts? But here you are again, making quite confident claims about what others believe. Why are you wasting time doing that? You have already reduced your credibility in that area to the point of insignificance.

 

[erowe1]

Erowe, you repeatedly admitted in a recent thread in this forum that you cannot possibly know that, sans basing it 100% on a leap of faith

So? I'm not one of those people who thinks there's something wrong with leaps of faith. We all do them. All knowledge would be impossible without them. That doesn't make all our knowledge somehow invalid.

You keep repeating this same argument. And I keep correcting you with the same answer. I think you're doing this on purpose.

 

[oyarde]

I lost my mojo once .

 

[idirtify]

Of course, by Philodemus' definition, I would be an atheist, since I don't believe in the beings he calls "the gods." Centuries after Philodemus Christians were persecuted as atheists for that reason.

It's important not to mix different things here. Philodemus did not entertain the notion that nothing supernatural exists, or that it was possible for anyone to think so.

Also, the universality of religion doesn't mean atheism doesn't exist, since atheism is a religion.

Finally, the Cambridge Companion to Atheism does not count as an anthropology book.

And there you go again, forgetting to put your disclaimer on your confident assertions of knowledge; so I will include it for you:

“When Erowe says things such as ‘Philodemus did not entertain the notion that nothing supernatural exists, or that it was possible for anyone to think so’, or that ‘atheism is a religion’, Erowe is only making 100% leaps of faith and should be given no undue credibility.”