tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10199920.post3756479262904956560..comments2023-10-20T05:48:35.458-04:00Comments on THE ATHEIST JEW: Pope Pretty Much Admits He Is An AgnosticUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger54125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10199920.post-29394086882563571742007-05-04T14:38:00.000-04:002007-05-04T14:38:00.000-04:00Atheist Jew: I have just written a post I think y...Atheist Jew: <BR/> <BR/>I have just written a post I think you might be interested in about the I.D. vs. evolution debate. <BR/> <BR/>I hope you will stop by and leave a comment or 2. <BR/><BR/>http://fpffressminds.blogspot.com/2007/05/mysterious-ica-stones.htmlStephen Littauhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08543227626299779100noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10199920.post-17959214769461412742007-04-15T11:01:00.000-04:002007-04-15T11:01:00.000-04:00BEAJ:Well, we were discussing belief in God, not r...BEAJ:<BR/><BR/>Well, we were discussing belief in God, not religion. So pretend I didn't mention anything about Judaism. <BR/><BR/>And I will sort of invoke "Judaism is what it does." Since I believe that Judaism had an extremely positive impact on the world, I can now turn to Genesis and say that those stories, though not actually true, have great value as stories. Genesis is like a great movie, or a fantastic book.Michael Pershanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17046644130957574890noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10199920.post-10521066517468121132007-04-15T06:35:00.000-04:002007-04-15T06:35:00.000-04:00Michael, is it rational to believe the earth is le...Michael, is it rational to believe the earth is less than 10,000 years old and that Noah's Ark story is true?<BR/><BR/>Judaism has all kinds of these stories, and it is very subjective whether it has or will continue to "improve" the world. Yet many of stories that Judaism is based on have been proven not to happen.<BR/><BR/>Again, I believe that we are very susceptible to believe in God and the supernatural. Subjectively, you could argue it is rational if that is the case. But did belief in the supernatural help our ancestors cope to the point we would be extinct right now if they didn't look for a supernatural explanation that explained mortality? Is it needed in the future to keep us from going extinct? I would answer a strong maybe to the first question and a most likely no to the second as we now have a lot more gaps filled than our ancestors did, and the knowledge of "this is it" might be the only thing that can save mankind going forward.Baconeaterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11134934827966299989noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10199920.post-82123528636877399182007-04-15T00:27:00.000-04:002007-04-15T00:27:00.000-04:00Krystalline Apostate:I guess you're right. But the...Krystalline Apostate:<BR/><BR/>I guess you're right. But the truth is that I fibbed a little bit--I really needed to stop coming here because of the paper. <BR/><BR/>Anyway, I don't think that there's anything terribly wrong with name dropping. Most visitors of an theist bashing blog aren't going to be terribly interested in hearing a theist ramble on: "If there's no evidence, then you're full of crap so shut up and shed your childish beliefs." But here's what these people--all deep thinkers according to most people's accounts (which I know is meaningless to you guys)--sort of say:<BR/><BR/>Wouk: You don't need a creator to explain the universe. But it helps. And the universe sort of seems pretty great. <BR/><BR/>Platinga: You think that you don't believe in anything without evidence? What about other people's minds?<BR/><BR/>Golding: Believing in something important, even if there's no evidence, is rational. You may not like it, but it's rational. <BR/><BR/>Sacks: Judaism has historically changed the world for the better, and very well might continue to do so in the future. <BR/><BR/>Again, you guys think that it's simple that if there's no evidence, there's no belief. Which is fine, I guess. But these four authors, and I, know this, and still assert that belief in God is rational and positive.Michael Pershanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17046644130957574890noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10199920.post-30950651345684976602007-04-14T23:08:00.000-04:002007-04-14T23:08:00.000-04:00michael:I didn't run away, I had a paper due and I...michael:<BR/><B>I didn't run away, I had a paper due and I needed to write a lot very quickly.</B><BR/>Sorry, you distinctly said that you weren't coming here any more.<BR/><B>But I basically agree with other authors regarding belief in God, and I would rather reference their books then summarize them. So: Platinga, Golding, Sacks, Wouk. I agree with these people.</B><BR/>Well, instead of name-dropping, please do share the meat of your <I>hunches</I>, if you would be so kind. <BR/>Simply dropping a few famous names, saying you agree w/them, is insufficient for a thinking man.<BR/>I assume you ARE a thinking man, are you not?Krystalline Apostatehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09044558668644447375noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10199920.post-88348689547804475412007-04-14T20:48:00.000-04:002007-04-14T20:48:00.000-04:00Krystalline Apostate:I didn't run away, I had a pa...Krystalline Apostate:<BR/><BR/>I didn't run away, I had a paper due and I needed to write a lot very quickly. <BR/><BR/>But I basically agree with other authors regarding belief in God, and I would rather reference their books then summarize them. So: Platinga, Golding, Sacks, Wouk. I agree with these people.Michael Pershanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17046644130957574890noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10199920.post-63331839985811143462007-04-13T23:07:00.000-04:002007-04-13T23:07:00.000-04:00Michael, Your view of what intelligent people beli...Michael, <BR/>Your view of what intelligent people believe is very narrow, based on a very small portion of cultures and time. Intelligent people have believed all sorts of things over the ages. That doesn't make those beliefs accurate.Reason's Whorehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09386477323714963087noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10199920.post-7323301181480066562007-04-13T17:24:00.000-04:002007-04-13T17:24:00.000-04:00gert:Thanks. Note that Michael promptly ran away a...gert:<BR/>Thanks. Note that Michael promptly ran away at the 2nd or 3rd time he was challenged.<BR/><BR/>AA:<BR/><B>One loose correlation I have noticed is that Christian workers generally seem less reliable and a bit flaky – at least in IT.</B><BR/>As I understand it (from my BAX buddy, who's also a YEC'er), is that if you goof off at work, some xtians consider that theft. Not all, but some.Krystalline Apostatehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09044558668644447375noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10199920.post-4291683808143814162007-04-13T14:34:00.000-04:002007-04-13T14:34:00.000-04:00It is kind of interesting that some people believe...It is kind of interesting that some people believe in God and some don’t and that there is not necessarily a correlation with intelligence. A lot of people I grew up with have retained their religious beliefs yet I discarded it in my late teens. The IT industry seems to have a lot of atheists. One loose correlation I have noticed is that Christian workers generally seem less reliable and a bit flakey – at least in IT. You’d think it would be the other way around but the coolest, most generous, people I have encountered have always been free thinkers. If I were God I’d want to surround myself with free thinkers rather than the damaged individuals you tend to encounter within religious institutions, especially those ‘born again’ types (shudder).AngloAmerikanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02002362092073890146noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10199920.post-88337895661767239792007-04-13T13:00:00.000-04:002007-04-13T13:00:00.000-04:00Michael:"I don't want to continue this discussion,...<B>Michael:</B><BR/><BR/><I>"I don't want to continue this discussion, because it's now my belief that this is not an open forum for discussion."</I><BR/><BR/>This shows the ridiculousness of your belief-system. I've been coming here for a while and this is definitely an open forum with frank debate. Perhaps you don't like it when people disagree with you? Well, I don't think you're very open-minded either because it's not open minded to call other people close-minded, just because they happen to disagree with you. You suck...<BR/><BR/><B>KA:</B><BR/><BR/>Right on the money!Gerthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07752117708821629614noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10199920.post-53609602993528373712007-04-13T11:50:00.000-04:002007-04-13T11:50:00.000-04:00Michael I am not trying to hide anything or be dis...Michael I am not trying to hide anything or be dishonest at all. I am responding to what you post. I didn't realize that you are pulling examples out of your ass.<BR/><BR/>Atheists, mostly used to be believers. We are probably the most open minded people on the planet.<BR/><BR/>But you don't "think" so.Baconeaterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11134934827966299989noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10199920.post-2265104162768717682007-04-13T11:33:00.000-04:002007-04-13T11:33:00.000-04:00michael:I think there's a difference between one i...michael:<BR/><B>I think there's a difference between one individual and a lot of people. There's a good reason why it's only one guys/very few guys who believes in aliens. But belief in God is entirely different. It's an issue that has been around for a really really long time, and we have seen so many great people who believe in God. That's what should make you wonder if things are a bit more complicated than they seem to you.</B><BR/>Well, that's an argument from tradition as well as an argument from numbers, both are logical fallacies.<BR/>I might remind you, that (except for specific countries, like France & Prussia) for the most part, it was <I>illegal</I> to question god (blasphemy laws & the like).<BR/>For the most part, people don't question things they were raised in. I think it's very likely that people like Newton, Schopenhauer, etc. were terribly wrong about belief in divinity. Am I smarter than them? Likely not. Do I know more than they did? We've advanced a great ways since those days. Most of us realize that time & space are intertwined (Newtonian vs. Einsteinian physics) - but Newton didn't know that.<BR/>Most atheists abide by Occam's Razor - no need to multiply entities needlessly.Krystalline Apostatehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09044558668644447375noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10199920.post-29531432864668361582007-04-13T11:22:00.000-04:002007-04-13T11:22:00.000-04:00I don't want to continue this discussion, because ...I don't want to continue this discussion, because it's now my belief that this is not an open forum for discussion. However, this:<BR/><BR/>>I ask why you believe or consider God, and your answer is because many others believe and consider God.<BR/><BR/>Is a misrepresentation. Do you misrepresent on purpose? I used that argument only to attempt to persuade you that there must be more to it than you claim.<BR/><BR/>I then tried to give you a sense of my belief, though I purposely didn't clarify why I have the hunch that I do. I didn't do that because I don't want to attempt to summarize many large books in comment posts. Plus, hunches are subjective, and what I find sufficient you may not. But the main point is that I just don't want to be around you guys, because I don't think that you're very open-minded.Michael Pershanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17046644130957574890noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10199920.post-84494447424062301592007-04-13T10:36:00.000-04:002007-04-13T10:36:00.000-04:00Michael, I'm not trying to say God can be proven o...Michael, I'm not trying to say God can be proven or disproven scientifically. I'll accept supernatural proof that God exists as well:)<BR/><BR/>I ask why you believe or consider God, and your answer is because many others believe and consider God.<BR/><BR/>My big question is why do they believe or consider God? My answer is because for the most part they were socialized into the belief, a belief that originally came about as a defense mechanism....in other words, it has evolved in humans, a prewiring of sorts, to be susceptible to superstitious belief as a way of explaining phenomenon we don't want to deal with directly or cannot prove or disprove directly.Baconeaterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11134934827966299989noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10199920.post-1123437018466714502007-04-13T09:53:00.000-04:002007-04-13T09:53:00.000-04:00beaj:I'm done here, because I have said what I wan...beaj:<BR/><BR/>I'm done here, because I have said what I wanted to. I can't do much more if you refuse to respect what I consider to be a probability--that things are more subtle than your blog makes them seem. <BR/><BR/>As for my own personal beliefs, I think that the terms "theist", "agnostic" and "atheist" are not subtle enough to capture the sensitive issue of belief in God. I am neither sure that God exists, nor am I sure that he doesn't. This is a position I hold in deference to the great minds on both sides of the argument. Further, there is a philosophy of science, and I don't believe that one can demand scientific evidence of God's existence. Science can not prove anything, really. Science is a self-consistent structure which is helpful in making predictions about the future but it does not explain what is really out there, ever. So I think that the demand to provide evidence of God's existence is unfair. <BR/><BR/>I hypothesize that God exists. It is not a falsifiable belief--it is not scientific. We have many such beliefs in our lives, and I have no problem acting on this belief. <BR/><BR/>If you want to call that agnostic, fine. If you want to say that I believe in God, fine. But I think that I believe something more subtle. <BR/><BR/>It's a hunch that I have. We all have hunches. I'm just going one farther.Michael Pershanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17046644130957574890noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10199920.post-27382182712934418002007-04-13T09:45:00.000-04:002007-04-13T09:45:00.000-04:00Michael:Bacon is simplifying but so are you and so...<B>Michael:</B><BR/><BR/>Bacon is simplifying but so are you and so am I: this is a blog, not an academic journal.<BR/><BR/>If you take the whole body of theological thought you could easily come to the conclusion that believing/not believing is hugely complicated. It isn't. I'm quite interested in theology (the rational part of religion, so to speak) but find that in the end we get to the point of discussing how many angels can dance on the tip of a needle. Not useful at all.<BR/><BR/>In essence faith is a fairly straightforward matter. There are however many believers who don't understand the first thing about their own religion and in the case of Catholics remain largely in the dark about the Cardinals' position on science, evolutionary biology etc. I've yet to encounter one Christian, who is willing to listen to me and isn't inclined to show at least some doubt after I've put my points across.<BR/><BR/>Religion is more than just faith too: it's social group (from which people don't like to be spat out for deviant views), a community, a political powerhouse and form of social cement. To many who belong to the Church, belonging is perhaps more important than believing.<BR/><BR/>As regards the simplicisms of many atheist bloggers, I think if you drill down a little, you'll find their views to be much more subtle than might appear at first glance. We can't all sit here forever expanding on the finesses of our thinking and endlessly repeating ourselves till we're blue in the face. You just don't like atheists. That would be an indication that you are indeed religious, as none are quicker to judge atheists. Richard Dawkins is supposed to be the most "vociferous, grumpy, vile, crusading, (enter epithet of your choice) atheist", according to his theist detractors. Well, I had the pleasure of meeting that man for a brief moment and it's hard to imagine a more soft-spoken, pleasant fellow. One Christian blogger I came across not so long ago demanded that he apologised to the survivors of Dachau, to atone for atheist sins (huh?) <I>Tres subtile...</I><BR/><BR/><B>Bacon:</B><BR/><BR/>You and that IQ thingy (lol)...Gerthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07752117708821629614noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10199920.post-3387546901165956432007-04-13T09:13:00.000-04:002007-04-13T09:13:00.000-04:00Gert, Michael definitely believes in God. My gues...Gert, Michael definitely believes in God. My guess is he could even be a bible literalist.Baconeaterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11134934827966299989noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10199920.post-10184475256452897962007-04-13T09:12:00.000-04:002007-04-13T09:12:00.000-04:00Michael, you are sounding like a troll. Accusing ...Michael, you are sounding like a troll. Accusing me of being dishonest. That is far from the case. I'm not oversimplifying belief in God. I've already explained that human beings, because of our awareness of mortality, of being able to envision and acknowledge the future both short term and far term have evolved a defense mechanism which leads to susceptibility for believing in God.<BR/><BR/>Again, belief in God doesn't have to have anything to do with intelligence on an individual basis. A person with a 160 IQ (sorry Gert) could easily believe in God. But that doesn't legitimize the existence of God, because if you ask that person why he believes and to show evidence, he will come up with "philosophical proof" at best. And that is just his defense mechanism trying to give him a shot at eternal life and to try to find a meaning in life that doesn't really exist. <BR/>I'm not saying that you need God to have a meaning in life. Atheists like myself make our own meaning of life.<BR/>You don't like atheist blogs, because you don't like our conclusion (the thing is we are as close to 100% knowing we are right as one can be). You feel threatened by us....that is my guess.Baconeaterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11134934827966299989noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10199920.post-24720517361637597072007-04-13T08:45:00.000-04:002007-04-13T08:45:00.000-04:00BEAJ:>The idea of God is not a complicated issue a...BEAJ:<BR/><BR/>>The idea of God is not a complicated issue at all once you become an atheist.<BR/><BR/>That's why I think that you must be wrong. Because you seem to think that it is so simple, but my own experience tells me that it is not. <BR/><BR/>>I'll shut up when all the religious folk shut up in the blogosphere and on TV, about God. How is that?<BR/><BR/>This sounds like the ends justify the means, no? "They're dishonest too, so I can also be dishonest."<BR/><BR/>The issue of belief in God is much more subtle than you make it seem. The fact that you think that it is so obvious and subtle shows that you don't really understand the issue. Because the people who believe in God are not few, nor are they stupid. Nor are they incapable of being totally honest with themselves. <BR/><BR/>If you were totally honest with yourself, you would tone down your blog and respect the probability that the people smarter than you who believe in God probably have thought about it. You would hear what the theologians, philosophers, and scientists have to say. They have heard what you have to say--there is no evidence. If you could think of it, so could they. In fact, they probably have. <BR/><BR/>I think that in the previous comment you more or less admitted that your overly sarcastic tone is simplistic. <BR/><BR/>Beep:<BR/><BR/>>Perhaps religious belief is just a socially acceptable delusion.<BR/><BR/>Perhaps, but this still doesn't explain how so many smart people--today and throughout history--believed something that you guys think is clearly, obviously true. <BR/><BR/>As a rule: If you see a wise man do something that seems childish, you should at least take great pause to understand him. <BR/><BR/>Maybe all of you former theists are genetically inclined to take extreme positions on things. That's why, in the absence of fervent, absolute, simplistic theism you take fervent, absolute, simplistic atheism. But the issue of belief in God is almost surely a subtle issue in between these two extremes.<BR/><BR/>gert:<BR/><BR/>>all of which has nothing to do with BEAJ's position or blog.<BR/><BR/>His rhetoric and style has a lot to do with his blog. I'm objected to existence of this blog, as well as other atheist blogs. He is being dishonest by oversimplifying a difficult issue. Now, so are most theist blogs. Most people in the world oversimplify things. But I thought that as atheists, the supposed champions of reason and self-honesty, there would be a higher standard. Apparently, no.Michael Pershanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17046644130957574890noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10199920.post-71189787251195201252007-04-13T07:53:00.000-04:002007-04-13T07:53:00.000-04:00Geoff's right and I'm one of these epistimithingie...Geoff's right and I'm one of these epistimi<I>thingies</I> agnostics. Agnosticism to me isn't fence-sitting: it's a logically defensible position in its own right. It doesn't require doubt or hope.<BR/><BR/>Michael strikes me as one of those people who's probably agnostic or atheist but comes to the defence of the "poor believers". "They're not all bad", "there are good religious people too", "it's more complicated than this" etc etc, all of which has nothing to do with BEAJ's position or blog. Bacon uses a lot of irony and sarcasm (and we all know the latter is the lowest form of wit - <I>cough</I>) and Michael takes it all a bit too seriously.<BR/><BR/>Or perhaps he is religious and suffers from that famous <I>religious long toes syndrome</I>...Gerthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07752117708821629614noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10199920.post-23855815967699251632007-04-13T07:48:00.000-04:002007-04-13T07:48:00.000-04:00michaelPerhaps religious belief is just a socially...michael<BR/><BR/>Perhaps religious belief is just a socially acceptable delusion.beepbeepitsmehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12931640447011071849noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10199920.post-24719014648709320982007-04-13T03:21:00.000-04:002007-04-13T03:21:00.000-04:00"There are enlightened Muslims out there too, who ..."There are enlightened Muslims out there too, who do not shy away from science or ignore scientific facts that conflict with their literal bible."<BR/><BR/>holy shit Beaj admitted not all Muslims are crazies! next thing you know he'll be saying they aren't the doom of western civilization, i suspect hes a closet MuslimThe Pathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08412481817266615576noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10199920.post-42659295418995894672007-04-13T02:28:00.000-04:002007-04-13T02:28:00.000-04:00Hi Beth, I took Sacred Slut's (I wonder if Imus wo...Hi Beth, I took Sacred Slut's (I wonder if Imus would get fired if he called her that?) comments as being sarcastic.<BR/>The fact is that 45% of Americans believe the earth is less than 10,000 years old and evolution is bogus. I don't think you'll find any atheists on that list. But aside from that, as you pointed out, it is ignorance, but mostly wilful ignorance. And it takes some possible bright minds out of the potential scientist pool, a pool that I feel is needed to expand if our race of humans are to make it through extinction.<BR/>There are enlightened Muslims out there too, who do not shy away from science or ignore scientific facts that conflict with their literal bible. I'm not sure how high a percentage it is. But these aren't the dudes and dudettes who you would find strapping bombs on themselves.<BR/>Like I said, I really don't have a problem with theistic evolutionists since we are prewired to believe in the supernatural.Baconeaterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11134934827966299989noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10199920.post-27913099311166158472007-04-13T02:12:00.000-04:002007-04-13T02:12:00.000-04:00Hey BEAJ,Actually, the Catholic Church hasn't been...Hey BEAJ,<BR/>Actually, the Catholic Church hasn't been anti-science in ages. Pope Benedict's words really aren't anything earth-shaking at all--they're simply noted in the media now because the evolution/creation debate is so intense in recent years (God only knows why, though--and no pun intended). ;-)<BR/><BR/>"Beepbeepitsme" put it in the words of a skeptic, but he/she is correct. It's the Protestant fundamentalists (but definitely NOT ALL Protestants!) who are on the anti-evolution kick.<BR/><BR/>"Sacred Slut" said:<BR/><I>BEAJ, what I don't understand is why Catholicism doesn't disappear at this point. No literal Adam and Eve = No original sin = no need for Jesus' redemption of mankind, right? Or is it all just metaphorical? (eyeroll)</I><BR/><BR/>SS, why do you even care if people choose to believe in God or belong to the Catholic Church? I certainly don't care if you choose not to. Furthermore, your assumption that all of Christianity (particularly Catholicism) is literalist/fundamentalist is frankly ignorant of the facts. You may roll your eyes at the "metaphorical," but there is a huge difference between what we know and how we live now versus two thousand years (and more) ago. Of course, that doesn't apply in some religions, as we all know (cough Islam cough). What we (Christians and Jews) have done is evolved in our understanding of the world just as the atheist and agnostic has, but our faith in God has not.Bethhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17205261634667523531noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10199920.post-75313462644306661802007-04-13T02:05:00.000-04:002007-04-13T02:05:00.000-04:00Good grief, BEAJ, you're pulling in some real weir...Good grief, BEAJ, you're pulling in some real weirdo commenters these days, aren't you? Anyway, I just wanted to make a couple of points. First, in response to the silly kuhnkat, I'd like to point out that the full story about Flew's temporary bamboozling by a bunch of creationists can he found <A HREF="http://geoffarnold.com/?s=Antony+Flew" REL="nofollow">in my blog, here</A>. It's a pretty pathetic tale. Secondly, I'd take issue with your sweeping generalization about agnostics. I know several folks who are <B>operationally</B> atheists - they live their lives as if there wasn't a god - but are <B>epistemically</B> agnostic - they believe that the question of god's existence is intrinsically undecidable. (Obviously this means that they've chosen a particular kind of god not to believe in.) Of course this small band of principled agnostics are swamped by the vast numbers of people who think that agnosticism is the same as doubt - it isn't.Geoffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07521391745343783288noreply@blogger.com