chairman bill wrote:Yes, the human mind's capacity to conceive of a being greater than the god described in the bible, suggests that God cannot be God at all. If God exists, s/he isn't the one described in the bible. Maybe in a Marvel comic? Thor, anyone?

I don't think this is a good argument because it seems to be arguing that "God" is not unbelievable enough. I haven't worded that quite right, but my brain is ring alarm bells at this because it seems to be a very similar argument to the believer's own.

Nebogipfel wrote:

michael^3 wrote:

Nebogipfel wrote:

The lack of a compelling reason to do so.

If you WANT to believe, what better compelling reason can you have? Want is the only real compeller.

I want to believe that I have the physique of Arnold Schwarzenegger, the sex appeal of Brad Pitt, and the combined IQ of Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawking.

Do you really want to believe that? Why would you want to believe a thing that you have the physique of Arnold Schwarzenegger, if there are clear indications that it ain't so?

Given that none of these things are, alas, true, do you think simply wanting to believe it is really a compelling reason to do so?

Of course, if you don't want to believe, that's not a problem either. Then just don't believe.

The problem there is that at the end of this road lies wandering around in one's own little dream-world. I'm sure the 19th century Xhosa warriors wanted to believe that they were invulnerable to European bullets, and that sacrificing all their crops and cattle would prompt the ancestors to drive the colonists into the sea.

Unfortunately, tragically, they were mistaken.

michael^3 wrote:

Nebogipfel wrote:

michael^3 wrote:

If you WANT to believe, what better compelling reason can you have? Want is the only real compeller.

I want to believe that I have the physique of Arnold Schwarzenegger, the sex appeal of Brad Pitt, and the combined IQ of Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawking.

Do you really want to believe that? Why would you want to believe a thing that you have the physique of Arnold Schwarzenegger, if there are clear indications that it ain't so?

I think you may regret writing that.

John

CookieJon wrote:

sennekuyl wrote:Want in a hedonistic sense, yes.

But if you want to have a modicum of integrity or desire to be true to some reasonable common principles, such as wanting to be the result to be true, fair, and reality based, wanting is not in a vacuum. I wanted to believe in God desperately, but by the principles I was raised with --- which I hinted at earlier --- if I cannot see that my desire is aligned with those simple principles I cannot believe without become a hypocrite.

"You can if you want to" is just pushing the problem back one step, anyway.

The question simply then becomes can one choose what it is that one wants?

Can you make yourself "want" to eat gravel for breakfast if you naturally want Coco-pops instead? I don't think so.

I you can't choose what you want, and you have to want to believe in God to be able to, then the statement "everyone can believe in God" is still erroneous.

Isn't that obvious to these people??

Ok this thread has convinced me that many people are really unable to believe in god.

But even if you don't believe in god, you can always pray to god.

Nebogipfel wrote:The problem there is that at the end of this road lies wandering around in one's own little dream-world. I'm sure the 19th century Xhosa warriors wanted to believe that they were invulnerable to European bullets, and that sacrificing all their crops and cattle would prompt the ancestors to drive the colonists into the sea.

Unfortunately, tragically, they were mistaken.

Believing something that is not true may be harmful, I know that.

michael^3 wrote:

CookieJon wrote:

sennekuyl wrote:Want in a hedonistic sense, yes.

But if you want to have a modicum of integrity or desire to be true to some reasonable common principles, such as wanting to be the result to be true, fair, and reality based, wanting is not in a vacuum. I wanted to believe in God desperately, but by the principles I was raised with --- which I hinted at earlier --- if I cannot see that my desire is aligned with those simple principles I cannot believe without become a hypocrite.

"You can if you want to" is just pushing the problem back one step, anyway.

The question simply then becomes can one choose what it is that one wants?

Can you make yourself "want" to eat gravel for breakfast if you naturally want Coco-pops instead? I don't think so.

I you can't choose what you want, and you have to want to believe in God to be able to, then the statement "everyone can believe in God" is still erroneous.

Isn't that obvious to these people??

Ok this thread has convinced me that many people are really unable to believe in god.

But even if you don't believe in god, you can always pray to god.

But what would be the point?

Alright lets see...

This is such a load of bullshit.

Bad start!

Belief is not a choice. You can want to believe and not be able to,

No thats not true, you can believe anything you want freely. Wanting and not being able too in your case is choosing not to believe because of X reasons, but then again this is a choice you made based on these reasons and not downright impossibility of belief as if you had some condition that rendered belief impossible to you. This was your choice and I hope you are happy with your life.

so much is obvious by the number of ex-Christians who did not want to lose faith, tried praying harder to God to restore it to them, but were unable to fool themselves and in the end had to face up to the fact that they could no longer hold onto belief...

The fact that they lost faith dosen't prove anything. This smells of fallacy , namely the appeal to a certain group ( these christian who lost faith). For instance, we have a wide number of people who lost faith in NATO's intervention in Afghanistan, however this cannot prove that the intervention is good or Bad.

even though it had been a great comfort and otherwise beneficial to their quality of life. I used to really want to believe too. Strangely, that didn't make it happen.

St-Augustine- I found thee not, O Lord, without, because I erred in seeking thee without that wert within. Refelct upon that.

This 'if you ignore God's love that's up to you' rubbish is just a massive guilt trip,

Please define what for you is ''God's love'' Id hate to think we are talking about something entirely different, wich I suspect it is.

attempting to pass off the fact that non-believers exist by blaming them for not accepting fairy tales as truth.

Yes, Its sad that some people blame others for these things, I don't think any judgement can be passed here on this earth regarding these matters.

I've seen nothing of God's love,

What is ''God's love''? Please tell us.

I have no reason to believe it is even there, so why should I, and how could I be expected to?

You need to tell us what you mean by ''God's love'' do you think God would love you if you won the million, or if your life would become wonderfull in the blink of an eye, what is God's love for you, tell us!

michael^3 wrote:

CookieJon wrote:

sennekuyl wrote:Want in a hedonistic sense, yes.

But if you want to have a modicum of integrity or desire to be true to some reasonable common principles, such as wanting to be the result to be true, fair, and reality based, wanting is not in a vacuum. I wanted to believe in God desperately, but by the principles I was raised with --- which I hinted at earlier --- if I cannot see that my desire is aligned with those simple principles I cannot believe without become a hypocrite.

"You can if you want to" is just pushing the problem back one step, anyway.

The question simply then becomes can one choose what it is that one wants?

Can you make yourself "want" to eat gravel for breakfast if you naturally want Coco-pops instead? I don't think so.

I you can't choose what you want, and you have to want to believe in God to be able to, then the statement "everyone can believe in God" is still erroneous.

Isn't that obvious to these people??

Ok this thread has convinced me that many people are really unable to believe in god.

The message you may have got from this thread is that beliefs aren't a choice we make but are as a result a primarily unconscious process of assessment.

michael^3 wrote:But even if you don't believe in god, you can always pray to god.

I would imagine that amongst the emotions that would rise to the fore, embarrassment would be high on the list, if anyone were to do that.

John

sennekuyl wrote:

chairman bill wrote:Yes, the human mind's capacity to conceive of a being greater than the god described in the bible, suggests that God cannot be God at all. If God exists, s/he isn't the one described in the bible. Maybe in a Marvel comic? Thor, anyone?

I don't think this is a good argument because it seems to be arguing that "God" is not unbelievable enough. I haven't worded that quite right, but my brain is ring alarm bells at this because it seems to be a very similar argument to the believer's own.

Or it could be that it's not serious. You know, in a 'taking the piss' sort of way.

z8000783 wrote:
The message you may have got from this thread is that beliefs aren't a choice we make but are as a result a primarily unconscious process of assessment.

michael^3 wrote:But even if you don't believe in god, you can always pray to god.

I would imagine that amongst the emotions that would rise to the fore, embarrassment would be high on the list, if anyone were to do that.

John

Even if you can't believe in god and you can't pray to god, you can always just keep god in mind.

michael^3 wrote:

Nebogipfel wrote:I want to believe that I have the physique of Arnold Schwarzenegger, the sex appeal of Brad Pitt, and the combined IQ of Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawking.

Do you really want to believe that? Why would you want to believe a thing that you have the physique of Arnold Schwarzenegger, if there are clear indications that it ain't so?

Thank you for appropriating the argument against belief in your god! Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, I've heard.

Why would you want to believe that one of the Abrahamic myths is real, if there are clear indications that it ain't so?

michael^3 wrote:

CookieJon wrote:

sennekuyl wrote:Want in a hedonistic sense, yes.

But if you want to have a modicum of integrity or desire to be true to some reasonable common principles, such as wanting to be the result to be true, fair, and reality based, wanting is not in a vacuum. I wanted to believe in God desperately, but by the principles I was raised with --- which I hinted at earlier --- if I cannot see that my desire is aligned with those simple principles I cannot believe without become a hypocrite.

"You can if you want to" is just pushing the problem back one step, anyway.

The question simply then becomes can one choose what it is that one wants?

Can you make yourself "want" to eat gravel for breakfast if you naturally want Coco-pops instead? I don't think so.

I you can't choose what you want, and you have to want to believe in God to be able to, then the statement "everyone can believe in God" is still erroneous.

Isn't that obvious to these people??

Ok this thread has convinced me that many people are really unable to believe in god.

But even if you don't believe in god, you can always pray to god.

And..?

CookieJon wrote:

michael^3 wrote:

Nebogipfel wrote:I want to believe that I have the physique of Arnold Schwarzenegger, the sex appeal of Brad Pitt, and the combined IQ of Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawking.

Do you really want to believe that? Why would you want to believe a thing that you have the physique of Arnold Schwarzenegger, if there are clear indications that it ain't so?

Thank you for appropriating the argument against belief in your god! Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, I've heard.

Why would you want to believe that one of the Abrahamic myths is real, if there are clear indications that it ain't so?

He was warned...

misterB wrote:

Belief is not a choice. You can want to believe and not be able to,

No thats not true, you can believe anything you want freely.

No that's not true - you can't believe anything you want freely.

Your move.

CookieJon wrote:

michael^3 wrote:

Nebogipfel wrote:I want to believe that I have the physique of Arnold Schwarzenegger, the sex appeal of Brad Pitt, and the combined IQ of Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawking.

Do you really want to believe that? Why would you want to believe a thing that you have the physique of Arnold Schwarzenegger, if there are clear indications that it ain't so?

Thank you for appropriating the argument against belief in your god! Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, I've heard.

Why would you want to believe that one of the Abrahamic myths is real, if there are clear indications that it ain't so?

You can measure your biceps and safely conclude that is less impressive than Arnie's. This is inside the realm of science. But concerning Abrahamic myths, things are not so clear.

michael^3 wrote:

z8000783 wrote:
The message you may have got from this thread is that beliefs aren't a choice we make but are as a result a primarily unconscious process of assessment.

michael^3 wrote:But even if you don't believe in god, you can always pray to god.

I would imagine that amongst the emotions that would rise to the fore, embarrassment would be high on the list, if anyone were to do that.

John

Even if you can't believe in god and you can't pray to god, you can always just keep god in mind.

I don't believe in the Traffic Light God, and I don't pray to the Traffic Light God, but I do keep in mind that the Traffic Light God may turn red traffic lights green as I approach, and I'm not such a dickhead as to be ungrateful.

Is that sort of what you meant?

michael^3 wrote:

CookieJon wrote:

michael^3 wrote:

Do you really want to believe that? Why would you want to believe a thing that you have the physique of Arnold Schwarzenegger, if there are clear indications that it ain't so?

Thank you for appropriating the argument against belief in your god! Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, I've heard.

Why would you want to believe that one of the Abrahamic myths is real, if there are clear indications that it ain't so?

You can measure your biceps and safely conclude that is less impressive than Arnie's. This is inside the realm of science. But concerning Abrahamic myths, things are not so clear.

"safely conclude"? I beg to differ...

Perhaps the tape measure you use is a magical one that always gives false readings or something? You never can be sure... things are not always so clear, I've been told!

At the very least, a magical tape-measure is certainly more believeable than a magic-working deity/human hybrid who gives birth to himself so he can be killed and resurrected before whizzing off into outer space, wouldn't you agree?

misterB wrote:Alright lets see...

This is such a load of bullshit.

Bad start!

Why?

misterB wrote:

other person wrote wrote:This 'if you ignore God's love that's up to you' rubbish is just a massive guilt trip,

Please define what for you is ''God's love'' Id hate to think we are talking about something entirely different, wich [sic] I suspect it is.

No, (I don't remember who you were quoting misterB) didn't claim that God's love existed. If it is supposed to exist, the positive claimant must define it clearly, show how the claim matches the existence and then we can discuss whether the unobservant are blind. If I claim elephants don't exist and you ask me what I think an elephant is, I'm going to tell you that it is a made up word. The reasonable response on your part is to say something like: "Well, in Africa there are these large creatures that have greyish skin, walk on all fours, huge floppy ears and this weird appendage hanging off their head that seems to be able to pick up things by wrapping it around the object. That appendage can also suck and blow fluids. I call that an elephant. Actually I saw one in the circus down the road. Let us go look at it. That is complying with burden of proof.

Then I can respond with various reasons why what you describe is not an elephant. Unless I can point out significant changes from what everyone else calls an elephant and/or I can show that it is probably/really a rhino with a fake nose and ears then and only then am I wrong to make the original statement.

misterB wrote:<snip>

misterB wrote:Alright lets see...

This is such a load of bullshit.

Bad start!

You are entitled to your opinion. However perhaps you could explain why it is a bad start, instead of just pronouncing it as such.

Belief is not a choice. You can want to believe and not be able to,

No thats not true, you can believe anything you want freely. Wanting and not being able too in your case is choosing not to believe because of X reasons, but then again this is a choice you made based on these reasons and not downright impossibility of belief as if you had some condition that rendered belief impossible to you. This was your choice and I hope you are happy with your life.

It's cute that you think you have a better insight into my life than I do, but you've said precisely nothing of any worth here. Say you wanted to break the 100m world record but you were unable to. Is that simply a choice you made not to? I had no choice in the matter. I am not interested in your ill-informed proclamations.

so much is obvious by the number of ex-Christians who did not want to lose faith, tried praying harder to God to restore it to them, but were unable to fool themselves and in the end had to face up to the fact that they could no longer hold onto belief...

The fact that they lost faith dosen't prove anything. This smells of fallacy , namely the appeal to a certain group ( these christian who lost faith). For instance, we have a wide number of people who lost faith in NATO's intervention in Afghanistan, however this cannot prove that the intervention is good or Bad.

You seem to be talking gibberish. The fact that they lost faith BUT DIDN'T WANT TO shows that they had no say in it. The stuff about whether something is a good or bad idea seems to be irrelevant. Perhaps you could enlighten me.

even though it had been a great comfort and otherwise beneficial to their quality of life. I used to really want to believe too. Strangely, that didn't make it happen.

St-Augustine- I found thee not, O Lord, without, because I erred in seeking thee without that wert within. Refelct upon that.

You are demonstrating the worst part of your religion here - blaming people for the inability of your god to make itself evident. Reflect upon that.

This 'if you ignore God's love that's up to you' rubbish is just a massive guilt trip,

Please define what for you is ''God's love'' Id hate to think we are talking about something entirely different, wich I suspect it is.

What for me is God's love? I'm an atheist!

attempting to pass off the fact that non-believers exist by blaming them for not accepting fairy tales as truth.

Yes, Its sad that some people blame others for these things, I don't think any judgement can be passed here on this earth regarding these matters.

You've just made such a judgement yourself in your post. Don't you realise that? What is your excuse for passing judgement on someone on this earth? What do you think your god would have to say about that?

I've seen nothing of God's love,

What is ''God's love''? Please tell us.

How many of you are there? And why the hell would I be telling you about God's love? I'm an atheist. Ask yourself - or ask the person who claimed it was out there for all if you are unsure.

I have no reason to believe it is even there, so why should I, and how could I be expected to?

You need to tell us what you mean by ''God's love''

No, I do not need to tell however many of you you think there are what God's love is. If you claim it is out there, you explain what it is.

do you think God would love you if you won the million, or if your life would become wonderfull in the blink of an eye,

This is getting silly. I am an atheist. Consequently, I do not think God can love me under any circumstances, because I do not believe that God exists.

what is God's love for you, tell us!

I am an atheist, I don't believe in God, and therefore do not believe it loves.

chairman bill wrote:

sennekuyl wrote:

chairman bill wrote:Yes, the human mind's capacity to conceive of a being greater than the god described in the bible, suggests that God cannot be God at all. If God exists, s/he isn't the one described in the bible. Maybe in a Marvel comic? Thor, anyone?

I don't think this is a good argument because it seems to be arguing that "God" is not unbelievable enough. I haven't worded that quite right, but my brain is ring alarm bells at this because it seems to be a very similar argument to the believer's own.

Or it could be that it's not serious. You know, in a 'taking the piss' sort of way.

so a atheists poe... which will be claimed as an atheists most robust argument. Remember irrespective of "God's" state of being, fundamentalists do exist.
I'm reading Ravi Zacharias response "The End of Reason" to Sam Harris' "Letter to A Christian Nation"* and getting quite frustrated as Ravi picks up on Sam Harris' (a fallible man regardless of your theistic stance) worst arguments and ignores the main thrust; the inability for a superior, powerful (or not) being to express its desire in a rational way.

I realise you are quite the kidder Chairman Bill. But Here be believers.

* Haven't read it. Makes for a very confusing read of TEoR