AtHeISm:. Is iT ChUrCH OF SpIRiTUaL HvMaNiSM

Just a quick question to ask?


Is this place an exclusive abode of atheism. I was taught that to be an atheist was that a person who asserts this position must prove de facto and de irue that GOD DOES NOT EXIST. Can anyone prove that God does not exist? If you can give some proof? PLEASE?

I suggest that God does exist, as I said I am a Desist, Christian, Catholic who espouses belief in a one, trinitarian God. Father, Son and Holy Spirit. My proof is twothousand plus years of tradition and scripture which predates Christianity and claims to have scientific knowledge that God does exist and has since what some people may call a garden myth. I think that the garden archetype, the account in Genesis is real and a Creationist account of creation is scientifically valid. I do not need to enter the proof of creationism or the idea that there will be a ressurection and and end to what we know to be a fallen world which is corrupt and also very empty in the light of what aethism offers. I understand Creationism (cf. Mr. GISH) Aethism is bankrupt in my oppinion and view. It offers a bleak view of civilization and makind and the hope of it comes to the point of suicide either personal or collective. I respect other peoples views but will not think that to be a spirtual humanist precludes thought in a montheistic God.

The reality of Humanism came to the apex in West in the Golden age of pre Socatic Philosophy and headway in the Renaisance and continues this day in modernism and the errors of the times. Its a sign and it continues to find itself viewed in the opinion that God does not exist. Can you prove this to me? The scientific method is a quite belief/reason method; it came from the People of God and GOD. I speak for my own faith experience and my traing in science and art. It might be basic, but at least I understand that the world is far to complex to explain withou science AND God. Without both I think one is heading for a real problem in life. I don't think its right to bully people into a pro or con. Just that people need to be allowed to chose or belive or live the dream that GOD is REAL or if one chooses to diasagree then know the pro's and con's of both positions. i understand both quite well enough to decide. To belive in reason and the scientific method and not exclusive of one another. They are sisters.

I do not think in any way that science and the scientific method in anyway exclude the idea that there God exists. How can anyone who thinks himself a rational being deny the existence of God? I'M NOT PUSHING IT. I just think that maybe all people come to a conclusion in life and decide for or agaist or somewhere inbetween. Maybe if I thought for the longest time that my idea of something was at least something which gave ME meaning. Its just not myself. As I said religion is not just a subjective experience, the paranormal exists. What proof do I need? I think the burden of proof is in the hands of those who speak against Deism. People need GOD. If the scientific method is GOD to someone than its their GOD. Is atheism someones GOD. I can't take it away. Who can? Faith in reason is one thing, but faith iand reason and in the transcendant and in the here and now is very real to me and collectively to 99% of humanity. True Religion or true science is NOT the bastion of hatered of anything but evil. Call it what you want, morality, ethics---that's part of being a humanist, being a good person. In the end we make a choice to be a person of goodwill or hatred. I hope I never turn to hatred because of an opinion of another. To be incusive and obdient to ones conscience is key to living a real, happy life. So I am saying, is it good to disagree? YES. Just that we should have an open mind when it comes to the idea that maybe GOD does exist? Could God exist? Or do we close our minds and follow the state religion of atheism. Who has the power to decide what we believe? Who has the right to persusade anyone? Its not just scientific inquiry that is at stake in the scientifc quest for the proof that God exists. How about the people who are like me in the bonds of the body not yet liberated to the point of becomeing that which i could become or even want to become? To me the gifts of the HOLY SPIRIT are seven fold, there is proof and as many know one of them is KNOWLEGE to chose between the good and evil. How can we achieve the goal of liberating our minds to the point of knowing absolutely? In my opinion, a sharing in GD'S very life is the reality which I seek. A small share in that science is all i need and have however great or small. I think that science is not all GOD is. She is so much more than what some people make her out to be. Think about the methods we have learned? In the end we are all responsible to self and even to society which ever we belong. And I would go so far as to say we are responsble to GOD alone in the end and if science alone is the way to reach the self actualization of our msall finitude and limits which god can go far beyond than I am not ashamed to say, "yes, I surrender to the Absolute science which to God is part of the very being of GOD." If you are into faith and reason or reason alone than is denial is not the way to find truth? Peace and goodness. Science of GOD is far surpassing science without GOD. The science of the cross is very real. Jesus existed. If we belive that He was just a man and reason dictaes this belive it. But if he was God and man than what? If the science of being God which I think Jesus was and is and always will be appeals to me, why take it away. Can a persons faith be taken away by reason? Atheism does this in many ways.Radical denial of divinity makes man into a human animal. Humanity i t is not just an evolutionary process to what end exept to come to know and LOVE? Do atheists LOVE? I think they do and they know GOD just as anyone can if they truly love just like any human being. What if anyone fails to act in charity and love? The result is lose of reason. Maybe reason is LOVE? If it is than I think that LOVE will conquor hate and give way to faith. Without love?

+MLD

Atheism and Spiritual Humanism are two different things. My understanding is that atheists believe that there is no god. Spiritual Humanists are generally not terribly interested in the question of god one way or the other. There is no scientific evidence of the existence of god. If some comes along, great. In the meantime we work to improve humanity, and celebrate the progress that humans have made. Spiritual Humanists are generally unlikely to believe in an anthropomorphic god like your catholic god. There is no good evidence that a god has ever walked the earth, that god directed or parishioner requested miracles had happened in the past or are happening now.

As I have mentioned in one of your threads before, science cannot "prove" that god does not exist. You can't prove a negative. The only thing that science might be able to do is prove that a god does exist, by testing announced acts of said god as outside of physics and reality. That has never happened. Given how long we have been at this, it is unlikely to ever happen in the future, but the possibility exists.

That is also why I haven't commented on your post about the real date of easter. It just doesn't matter. I neither know nor care whether there really was a rabbi named Jesus who walked the earth. The calculation of the date that he may have or did not die is likewise of no interest or importance. Easter is a nice spring ritual for family gathering, fancy outfits, and yummy chocolate eggs. Oh yeah, and peeps. Love the peeps. Lepers were not magically healed, water was not turned into wine, thousands of little fishies and loaves didn't come rolling out of a Yogi sized picnic basket.

But in essence all of your arguments for god have come down to: "I can't personally imagine that God doesn't exist, therefore I believe he does." Good for you, but that is not Spiritual Humanism. It is a religion of science and proof, not feelings. Certainly the christian god is not reasonable, and is unscientific. I don't deny divinity, I deny that proof of divinity has been presented at this time. I certainly deny the validity of christianity. The god described in the bible cannot exist. It is just as preposterous as Zeus, Ra, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

You also speak of feeling love, you I leave you with The Blue Man Group feat. Venus Hum.

http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=cyberty62&src_vid=W2ytn66X4ZI&annotation_id=annotation_91136&feature=iv#p/u/0/vyL09hTLOls

PastorDave

>But in essence all of your arguments for god have come down to: "I can't >personally imagine that God doesn't exist, therefore I believe he does."

I don't think thats what I said "I can't >personally imagine that God doesn't exist, therefore I believe he does." That's to childish to say. Its not that simple. Its not about I. Its about something that actually does exist. I never said I can't >personally imagine that God doesn't exist, therefore I believe he does." Those are your assumptions. If you have chosen to leave Christianity, hey its your choice, maybe you did, maybe not? I just said that its not always about science....sometimes more or less its about faith too. So I'll keep it, at least its mine. Maybe more in it than that. My faith is based on reason, but not reason alone. I think that sums it up.

+MD

How can anyone who thinks himself a rational being deny the existence of God?
+MLD

Yup, thought so. My interpretation pretty well described what you said. I summarized, but I think I caught your intent. I also did not deny the existence of a general amorphous god. Just the specific gods humans have invented to this point in time.

PastorDave

I know what i said. I don't think you did know what I said. You did say that you had a problem with God.

MD

Hmmmm, not sure whether to keep playing or not. OK, I'm weak.

First to clarify (again). I don't have a problem with a general god concept. I am, quite literally, agnostic on that subject. But I am an intolerant agnostic. I don't know, and you don't either. I do object to your specific god. There is no proof that god exists. But that does not deny the possibility of god. God is possible, there is just no reason to believe in such a concept at this time. But your suggestion that Spiritual Humanism is atheistic is incorrect.

As to our relative summaries of your original post, you say tomayto and I say tomahto.

But let's move on. You state a belief in what appears to be young earth creationism. Let's start out with a couple of easy questions. Do you believe in the ice ages, and when do you think they occurred? My daughter had a high school project looking at the geologic history of the northwest. It was fascinating seeing where the different ice sheets left different deposits of stuff, and carved out different lakes and other features. One of the most interesting bits is just a couple of blocks from our house. It's called the Wedgwood erratic. It is a great big rock rolled down from Canada and dumped right where a street was supposed to go. Do you really expect me to believe that all of this pretty clear geologic evidence is wrong, and the Wedgwood Big Rock was deposited by The Great Flood? The Vashon glacier left it there 14,000 years ago, about 4,000 years before creationism suggests the earth sprang from the darkness.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wedgwood_Rock


OK, now a tougher one for extra credit. If the universe is only 10,000 years old, and light travels at 186,000 miles per second. How come we can see things more than 10,000 light years away? Are the basic speeds and measurements wrong, or did a mischievous god just set it all up with pre-streamed light between the galaxies just to tease foolish astronomers?

Enquiring minds . . . . .

BTW, just pointing to some creationist website and saying that it explains it all is cheating. Let's hear YOUR thoughts on these relatively straightforward questions.

PastorDave

PatorDave: Not quite sure about your question about the science issues of the speed of light and the number of years that the universe may or may not be or existed for; theology is my greatest concern; don't know if the questions that you are asking are the point. What if both creationism and modern science are speaking of the same thing with different ways of explaining the scientific method(s) involved? Both views shed light on things. What if man only began nearly six thousand years since the garden and to the end of time? Or will the universe still be here billions of years from now? Don't know. Just that creation serves a purpose or not maybe just without order leading nowhere....totally random without any order leading where? Somehow, Plato said without numbers there can be no order. Without order can there be a puropse or both order and disorder---chaos and harmony together both existing leadin where? Maybe questions of faith need to be resolved scientifically, but how? Can you demonstrate how this can be done? Thanks. MD+

Pastor Dave,

You presented a relatively straightforward explanation, and this type of approach is useful for some people trying to make sense out of religion or trying to incorporate a rational approach to religion. There are many people that are trying to make sense out of existence, the universe, and purpose for humanity. I do not believe this is the purpose behind MD+’s statements. As I understand the arguments, combining disparate items (creationism and evolutions goat herder stories and science, six thousand years and billions of years, chaos and harmony, order and disorder, on and on) achieves a spiritual experience. Holding things in consciousness that cannot be the same produces a trance state (Confusion Induction to Hypnosis) and yields a euphoric spiritual experience. As I have said before, trying to use goat herder stories to repair you car will make you like Jesus; you will walk a lot. Your straightforward explanation is like an arrow shooting through a ring of smoke. The smoke moves and the new shimmering patterns may be truly glorious experiences, but the smoke is not pierced. MD+’s concern for theology is an end unto itself without destination. We have been here many times before, but I am grateful the posts are becoming shorter.

PatorDave: Not quite sure about your question about the science issues of the speed of light and the number of years that the universe may or may not be or existed for; theology is my greatest concern; don't know if the questions that you are asking are the point.

The questions of science are central to your positions. In order for me to judge the validity of your positions, I need to analyze the assumptions and foundations from which they are based. You are the one who brought up the concept of creationism, and that whack job Gish.

the account in Genesis is real and a Creationist account of creation is scientifically valid.

I understand Creationism (cf. Mr. GISH).

+MLD

When you proclaim a belief structure based, in part, on unreasoning silliness like creation theory, it becomes quite difficult to take any of your thinking, postings, or conclusions seriously. Spiritual Humanism is a religion based on reason and provable scientific evidence. Not feelings and hucksterism. It is possible to lead a spiritual existence and experience spiritual states without abandoning reason, and without accepting myth and superstition. I understand that you have some kind of a need to mash it all together, but there is no rational or reasonable basis for accepting your religious statements. My questions, which you have chosen not to answer, were a test of your logic, science and reason. Which you make a part of your religious paradigm. With your long posts full of meaningless quotes you seem to want to share a Eureka moment that you have experienced. But unlike Archimedes you have not uncovered a deeper understanding of how the universe and god are put together and interact.

Maybe questions of faith need to be resolved scientifically, but how? Can you demonstrate how this can be done? Thanks. MD+

Give me your specific questions and I will tell you what can be resolved scientifically and what can't. Let me give you a hand.

Was there a great flood that covered the earth for 40 days and 40 nights, killing all land based life except for what was in the ark? Uh, no. That's a easy one.

Is the earth only 10,000 years old? No. More like 4 billion. The whole universe more like 13.

Did god install a soul in a single man and woman about 6,000 years ago, instilling humanity in a formerly lesser hominid? There is no evidence that such an event took place, and mankind clearly had written language, tool use, and agriculture long before that.

OK, forget the dates, did god do that at some point in the distant past? Again, there is no evidence that such an event took place. There is no point in believing in such an event or such a god. It would do neither you nor the theoretical god any good to have such a belief.

There are so many garden creation myths common across all religions, doesn't that prove that there is something to them? No, absolutely not. Religion is created to explain the unknown and/or to get power over people by a ruling class. Any religion is going to include a creation story. Most religions are based on the concept that the gods are better than man, that the gods created man, and that because man is obviously imperfect there must have been a fall from grace. Mankind is base and corrupt therefore you need your priests (and to fund your priests) to intercede with god on your behalf. Most religions have a god of thunder. That doesn't prove that such gods exist, only that primitive man didn't understand static electricity.

PastorDave

Oh yeah, and sorry about that Ken, just when you thought the posts were getting shorter.

I think I know what i believe and know what I know. No need to comment on your stuff which has nothingtodo with reality. What have you proven? What you post seems to be really nothing which demonstrates the truth about REAL life and the possibility that GOD exists and that you have faith in nothing except what you believe to be true which is not the case. In fact all the "scientific" facts or your arument is mere jargon which demonstrates your closed mind and what are you proving. I know what I know and believe what I believe. My reason is based on the science of theology and not the science of atheism or agnostiscm. You seem to know something which is so empty and meaningless which can have so many unkind and cruel remarks about my ideas and what I believe. I have come to know what you seem to belive and you think you can prove. What you believe is not real. Science is the sister of theology, not science alone. If science alone is your God then, fine. I don't think it matters much to me. I know what I believe and have no need to demonstate to you my findings or what I know to be true. If I shared with you what has meaning in my life you would trash it under your feet like you have attempted to do with everything I have posted. hay are you so unkind. What did I do to you?

Think about it. All you do is bash me in this forum and you have no idea of what I know or who I am. Who are you? Think about how you can learn from others and not try to kill a person by bashing them. I have no need to prove anything to you ar would I? You demonstarte a belief system that is bankrupt and void. By what you have written you accuse yourselve of your own bigotry and lack of concern and you have no idea of what the truth is. I know who I am. I think I know what you represnt. By what you have shown, it quite evident that you have no concern for the concepts or ideas of others only yourself delusion of what you belive. Remeber to respect others for their veiews and learn from others who may not agree with what you demonstrate to be intollerance and a closed mind. You have shut out the light of reason by your hatred of faith.

I don't want to continue this dialogue anymore. Your closeminded and mean and care nothing for the truth!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_Guidestones

MD+
I think you have said all that needs to be said. Thank you very much.

MD, go back to the top of this thread in LOGIC, REASON, and SCIENCE, and take another look at what you wrote.

Just a quick question to ask?

Is this place an exclusive abode of atheism. I was taught that to be an atheist was that a person who asserts this position must prove de facto and de irue that GOD DOES NOT EXIST. Can anyone prove that God does not exist? If you can give some proof? PLEASE?

You asked specific questions and challenged the fundamental basis of Spiritual Humanism, then proceeded to provide a rather vague description of your personal belief set. Did you really expect not to be challenged?

I've been in support/discussion groups where everybody was expected to sit around and applaud all of the ideas of everybody in the group, regardless of how poorly thought out or internally inconsistent they might be. This is not and should not be one of those places. I answered your questions and asked equally specific questions about the beliefs you hold. You have yet to directly answer any of those questions.

Stay and join in the debate. But if you just come in and trash our beliefs ("How can anyone who thinks himself a rational being deny the existence of God?"), assert that we are not rational, and then refuse to explain the thinking behind your beliefs, you are likely to face some rhetorical resistance. You say that I use jargon. Tell me what was not clear to you and I will explain it. You say that what I believe is not real. I believe in things like The Wedgwood Rock. That's about as real as it gets. In order to be understood and to persuade, you need to do more than just assert something. Take the next step- "You use jargon that is meaningless, and here are three examples from your posts." or "What you believe is not real, and here is why . . . . "

Sure it stings. I get it. You wrote what you perceived to be self-evident and thoughtful post. Turned out not to be as persuasive as you hoped. You got teased a bit and got asked hard questions. If your beliefs are worth having they should be worth defending. If you can't clearly describe your beliefs then perhaps you need to spend more time with them, defining them more literately and literally. Take this as a learning experience and move forward.

Here's another opportunity for you. You posted a link to the Georgia Guidestones. I've got to admit, that was a new one to me. But you did it with no explanation of how you thought it was relevant to the discussion. It definitely requires some justification and defense. The very first principle is "Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature." Half a billion? Really? And what are the other 7.5 Billion of us supposed to do? Walk into the ocean to feed the fishes? How will this population be "maintained"? China has been trying population control for the last half century. It hasn't been very effective and has had some rather grisly side effects. And what does any of it have to do with a discussion about the existence, or lack thereof, of god?

Peace out.

PastorDave

Thank you for your posts. It is a learing experience.. The Georgia Guidestone was linked to show it might shed some light on the Solinox emblem of the Church of Spiritual Humanism. I did not endorse the Georgia stone siad or what it represents. Taken to an exteme what could the religion of reason do? Genocide? There are some posts on this site which speak of CSH as an atheistic? That's why the posts on aethism. Ok, I'm done. Thanks for the help. MD+

I was taught that to be an atheist was that a person who asserts this position must prove de facto and de irue that GOD DOES NOT EXIST.

My understanding is that atheists believe that there is no god.

I'm new here, so sorry if I'm stepping in where I shouldn't, but... where did you guys get this idea about atheist? I don't really know any atheist who would assert that a god does not exist. I've never met one personally, and I only very rarely run across one on the internet who makes this claim. 99% of the atheists I've ever encountered simply deny the claim that a god exists, which is very different from making a positive claim to non-existence.

MLD,

I am curious about why a faith strong Catholic would be doing on a Humanist site.

Are you just here to stir up trouble or are you actually trying to learn something?

From your exceedingly passionate statements and replies one could imply that you feel there is nothing new to learn,
for you know what you know & believe what you believe. So... trouble seems to be the likely candidate.

And to throw even more wrenches in to the works, I am a pagan atheist.

jhdubois - Your post was entirely appropriate. Always jump into discussions here, it adds to the fun.

As to your specific question, I'm not sure I understand your differentiation. You say that

99% of the atheists I've ever encountered simply deny the claim that a god exists, which is very different from making a positive claim to non-existence.

.

That puzzles me. Let's work it through. First case - A priest says "God exists". An atheist says "That is incorrect". Second case - An Atheist says "God does not exist."

Hmmmm, both of those seem the same to me. A statement that there is no god.

Compare that to agnosticism. First case - A priest says "God exists". An agnostic says "There is no evidence that god exists." Second case - An agnostic says "There is no proof that god exists, so I don't believe in or worship a god at this time."

I wonder if you are confusing the two terms. Of if your acquaintances who state they are atheists don't really understand the term. I hope this helps. If I am not understanding your point, please try again.

PastorDave

Is this place an exclusive abode of atheism. I was taught that to be an atheist was that a person who asserts this position must prove de facto and de irue that GOD DOES NOT EXIST. Can anyone prove that God does not exist? If you can give some proof? PLEASE?

I really cannot believe this discussion has gone on this long on this post. Let's go back to basic Logic 101 - one cannot prove a negative.

Ever hear of the white crow? Classic logical argument. One posits the existence of a white crow. All crows are examined yet no white ones are found. Yet, this alone does not disprove the possible existence of a white crow. Only the actual finding of a white crow could prove its existence, yet there is no possible proof of a lack of existence.

Only the actual appearance of God could prove His existence, but no one can prove His non-existence. Any atheist who says he/she can prove that God does not exist is totally ignorant of logic and proof.

As an exercise, please prove that Santa Claus does not exist.
The Flying Spaghetti Monster
aliens
...

I too am very surprised this thread continues for so long. A person that is a Theist believes there is an entity that has been around since the beginning of this universe. He was born of entities that lived before this universe was created. His parents were rotten. Rumor has it they sprang from the head of Zeus. They were called the Zeus headache parents. They did not teach him compassion, love, or kindness. He was taught to be petty, arrogant, and rude. He torture and killed those toys (God’s people) for which he had responsibility. That was why he could not leave this universe while his peers were sent to heaven. Isolation and rejection by his parents and siblings resulted in depression and eventually manic episodes where grandiosity became paranoid delusions. People told stories about how powerful he was to scare little children so they would not get out of their beds in the middle of the night and interrupt the adults having sex. It made for a lot of bladder infections in the young. People that do not believe the existence of this spoilt deity are called non-believers. They are atheists. People who do not know if the stories are true are the “not knowing” people, or agnostic. I hope this finally resolves the questions about pagan theists and atheists.

You do know that Trelane was a Q, right?

PastorDave

Pastor Dave;

Now you are just being silly.

No, it was in a book. I read it on the internet too. So it must be true.

PastorDave