How atheists dodge and quibble on experience and reason.

[gerry]

Okay, still no atheists coming forth to expatiate on their thinking about experience and reason and the existence of God?

What about we work together to expatiate on a God that is all natural and all material?

Still no takers?

What is bugging you guys, the very word of God? but it is just a word, and you are already scared stiff of the word itself?

Or you are scared stiff of doing genuine thinking, namely, founded on experience and reason, instead of ranting and hurling invectives against Christians and God and otherwise dodging and quibbling?


Oh what a bunch of vacuous and thus timorous self-brain -eviscerated and scared stiff phoneys!



Cheers.

Gerry

[gerry]

Well, let's go back to Apologetics 301, and I invite atheists to talk there with me about an all natural and all material God; because you atheists don't want anything that is not natural like as in supernatural, and that is not material like as in immaterial or spiritual, so let's talk about an all natural and all material God.


Cheers.

Gerry

[firstfloor]

But don't think for a second that you will get your secular utopia - Islam will be the power to contend with in the future. Christians will look like mild mannered school boys compared to what is coming.

Quite so. Nature does not guarantee our prosperity or even our survival as a species. As long as we cannot agree what utopia is we will never achieve it because perhaps the fundamental human struggle, or sin, is over the drive to impose one’s own utopia over another’s. The solution might be attention to basics such as the golden rule on which we may all agree, and throw away the rest, the frilly theology, the Christology and the rest.

Synagogues churches and mosques should be places not where you go to meet G-d, but where you go to meet and help your neighbour. Utopians of the near future will not worry about what happens to them when they die but will live much more in the present – the only moment when your actions have any effect.

[seer]

Quite so. Nature does not guarantee our prosperity or even our survival as a species. As long as we cannot agree what utopia is we will never achieve it because perhaps the fundamental human struggle, or sin, is over the drive to impose one’s own utopia over another’s. The solution might be attention to basics such as the golden rule on which we may all agree, and throw away the rest, the frilly theology, the Christology and the rest.

It won't happen, men will find all manner of differences and excuses to impose their will on others. It is our nature.

Synagogues churches and mosques should be places not where you go to meet G-d, but where you go to meet and help your neighbour. Utopians of the near future will not worry about what happens to them when they die but will live much more in the present – the only moment when your actions have any effect.

Why would living for today makes us more kind, rather than more selfish?

[firstfloor]

Why would living for today makes us more kind, rather than more selfish?

People should be kind if it is in their selfish interest to be kind. But if people are kind because they think they are under surveillance by the celestial Big Brother who will punish them after death if they are not kind then they are denying their own nature.

As a first approximation I would say that we are social pleasure seeking creatures and it is when we deny our nature or when we are told that we are wicked or thinking the wrong thoughts that we become ill tempered and withdrawn.

No utopia works without some system of regulation but it ought to be minimal and the consequences of actions should be felt in the present to be effective. Distant rewards or punishments have to be exaggerated to cosmic proportions to have any effect which is exactly why they lack credibility.

[seer]

People should be kind if it is in their selfish interest to be kind. But if people are kind because they think they are under surveillance by the celestial Big Brother who will punish them after death if they are not kind then they are denying their own nature.

I'm not sure what your point is. It is a good thing to be selfish?

As a first approximation I would say that we are social pleasure seeking creatures and it is when we deny our nature or when we are told that we are wicked or thinking the wrong thoughts that we become ill tempered and withdrawn.

So the rapist or child molester should not deny their nature?

No utopia works without some system of regulation but it ought to be minimal and the consequences of actions should be felt in the present to be effective. Distant rewards or punishments have to be exaggerated to cosmic proportions to have any effect which is exactly why they lack credibility.

That is silly, so if we can avoid immediate consequences, like a Stalin or a Lenin, we get away scott free?! What a horribly unjust universe we live in.

[firstfloor]

I'm not sure what your point is. It is a good thing to be selfish?

It is difficult to imagine circumstances whereby any well adjusted person would harm someone else by seeking their own pleasure or satisfaction. For example, offering an arm to a blind person wanting to cross a road is a satisfying thing to do. It is not sacrificial. Provided you are able to correlate your actions with the consequences of your actions in immediate real time you will quickly learn what makes you happy and what actions are to be avoided – discourtesy for example.

There are no rapists and child molesters in my utopia. In it we are wise enough to nurture all our young, we are able to spot early signs of psychopathy and make corrections and adjustments in a loving and humane way. We do not leave our children to fester in front of a television set for hours on end. This utopia is here on earth – it is perhaps something along the lines of John Lennon’s song ‘Imagine’. The Christian idea of Heaven is, in contrast, a dystopia for the dead from where the ungodly are banished to the gulag (hell) and the rest live in fear of causing even the slightest offence to the celestial dictator. It is the ultimate form of apathy.

You see, religious beliefs are a hindrance to us because we may all want to realise utopia but if we are content because of our faith to put it off until we die or to sit on our hands while it is installed by supernatural force then we will never achieve it in the only place it matters; in the here and now.

[seer]

It is difficult to imagine circumstances whereby any well adjusted person would harm someone else by seeking their own pleasure or satisfaction. For example, offering an arm to a blind person wanting to cross a road is a satisfying thing to do. It is not sacrificial. Provided you are able to correlate your actions with the consequences of your actions in immediate real time you will quickly learn what makes you happy and what actions are to be avoided – discourtesy for example.

Well FF, what you consider "well adjusted" is rather subjective. And many actions do not have immediate consequences, or no consequences. Just ask Stalin or Mao.

There are no rapists and child molesters in my utopia. In it we are wise enough to nurture all our young, we are able to spot early signs of psychopathy and make corrections and adjustments in a loving and humane way.

But you said we should not "deny our nature." So we should help others deny their nature in these matters? And who determines what is psychopathic? Perhaps some would believe that homosexual behavior is psychopathic.

We do not leave our children to fester in front of a television set for hours on end. This utopia is here on earth – it is perhaps something along the lines of John Lennon’s song ‘Imagine’. The Christian idea of Heaven is, in contrast, a dystopia for the dead from where the ungodly are banished to the gulag (hell) and the rest live in fear of causing even the slightest offence to the celestial dictator. It is the ultimate form of apathy.

I don't know what Bible you are reading FF. But my God is gracious, and ready to forgive - even the most grievous offense. But like I said in your universe the Stalins and Lenins of the world literally get away with murder - we finally live in an unjust and indifferent universe.

You see, religious beliefs are a hindrance to us because we may all want to realise utopia but if we are content because of our faith to put it off until we die or to sit on our hands while it is installed by supernatural force then we will never achieve it in the only place it matters; in the here and now.

This is utter nonsense FF. Personally I have helped my fellow man much more since I have been a Christian than I ever did as a unbeliever. My little church does a great deal to help the poor and needy in my county and through a sister church in Haiti. No Christian I know sits on his hands. How many Universities and Hospitals in western culture were founded by Christians? So why do you make such inane claims?

[firstfloor]

And many actions do not have immediate consequences, or no consequences. Just ask Stalin or Mao.

This would not happen in Utopia: we do not have criminals or mass murderers among us. I am thinking of the small stuff as well – how we speak to the waitress at our local burger place or how we might avoid people whose sexuality, politics or religion is radically different to our own. There are no such barriers in Utopia.

We need to remember that society breeds the disruptive elements in it by intolerance of difference across the broad spectrum of human beings and human behaviour – that is how groups decide who are friends and who are enemies. Social groups do need to set boundaries but they should not be artificially tight. Human beings are social animals and therefore their behaviour is self limiting in the correct environment. In Utopia there is only one social group. There will still be a bit of competition for and fighting over women of course.

Religious groups set themselves apart and hope for a utopian afterlife especially reserved for their group. This is anti-utopian.

[seer]

This would not happen in Utopia: we do not have criminals or mass murderers among us. I am thinking of the small stuff as well – how we speak to the waitress at our local burger place or how we might avoid people whose sexuality, politics or religion is radically different to our own. There are no such barriers in Utopia.

We need to remember that society breeds the disruptive elements in it by intolerance of difference across the broad spectrum of human beings and human behaviour – that is how groups decide who are friends and who are enemies. Social groups do need to set boundaries but they should not be artificially tight. Human beings are social animals and therefore their behaviour is self limiting in the correct environment. In Utopia there is only one social group. There will still be a bit of competition for and fighting over women of course.

Religious groups set themselves apart and hope for a utopian afterlife especially reserved for their group. This is anti-utopian.

See the real problem with your utopia FF is us, you, me - pride. Things like religion and politics are ancillary to the main problem - human nature. Also, your logic doesn't follow - some of the most religious people I know are the ones who do most for their fellow man. It is not either or.