Cause

Originally posted by Starrman
A lack of intelligence is far more likely to lead to the acceptance of magic and angels, than it is to a common sense, natural view of the world without god.

I have found that some highly intelligent people believe in God and Angels and the lacking in grey matter scoff at it all so i naturally disagree with your explanation Starrman.
i have had arguments with solid Atheists who have studied the Bible and everything religious just in the hope that they will catch a believer out.... misuse of intelligence me thinks !!!

Originally posted by Jay Joos
Im a believer...does that make me christian?

If you are a believer in Christ, yes.

I feel Christians say one thing then practise something totally opposite...hypocrisy is a terrible thing to taste... 🙂

So you consider yourself to be better than other Christians?

Originally posted by Nordlys
If you are a believer in Christ, yes.

[b]I feel Christians say one thing then practise something totally opposite...hypocrisy is a terrible thing to taste... 🙂

So you consider yourself to be better than other Christians?[/b]

I believe in Christ so therefore i am... thanks for that

No i do not consider myself to be better... i am not perfect nor are they... i try to say one thing and then back it up...it doesn't always work but i try... mine was a general sweeping statement about all christians myself included....

Originally posted by Jay Joos
I have found that some highly intelligent people believe in God and Angels and the lacking in grey matter scoff at it all so i naturally disagree with your explanation Starrman.
i have had arguments with solid Atheists who have studied the Bible and everything religious just in the hope that they will catch a believer out.... misuse of intelligence me thinks !!!

Strong atheism (what I think you mean by solid) is as unsupported as strong theism, so very few intelligent people hold to that view. I sincerely doubt any atheist studies the bible purely to try and catch out christians.

Just on this site alone I think there's a lower level of intelligence in the theist camp than the atheist camp.

Originally posted by Starrman
Strong atheism (what I think you mean by solid) is as unsupported as strong theism, so very few intelligent people hold to that view. I sincerely doubt any atheist studies the bible purely to try and catch out christians.

Just on this site alone I think there's a lower level of intelligence in the theist camp than the atheist camp.

Oh you would be surprised Starrman.... i have met SO many Strong Atheists who have purely studied in great depth and detail purely to get points over on the believers.

I disagree with your sweeping statement regarding which camp has the lower level.... we all have opinions...no one is lower than the other...some back it up and others use their feelings.... how wonderful debate is do you agree?

Originally posted by Jay Joos
Oh you would be surprised Starrman.... i have met SO many Strong Atheists who have purely studied in great depth and detail purely to get points over on the believers.

I disagree with your sweeping statement regarding which camp has the lower level.... we all have opinions...no one is lower than the other...some back it up and others use their feelings.... how wonderful debate is do you agree?

Like I said, strong atheism is a fool's game.

Those that debate with their heart are not using their intelligence.

Originally posted by Starrman
Like I said, strong atheism is a fool's game.

Those that debate with their heart are not using their intelligence.

Any kind of Atheism is a fools game...

If you debate with your heart you are passionate about the subject therefore you must have knowledge and intellect and surely must know what you are getting yourself into... i believe there is such a thing as passionate intellect... Im passionate about God so therefore i want to know everything...same goes for my other interests...footie,cricket,drama...and so on....

Originally posted by Jay Joos
Any kind of Atheism is a fools game...

If you debate with your heart you are passionate about the subject therefore you must have knowledge and intellect and surely must know what you are getting yourself into... i believe there is such a thing as passionate intellect... Im passionate about God so therefore i want to know everything...same goes for my other interests...footie,cricket,drama...and so on....

Why is atheism a fool's game?

You're confusing passion for a subject with the ability to be clear headed, knowledgeable and methodical in your debating. Intelligence and a desire for knowledge of a thing are not equatable.

Originally posted by Starrman
Why is atheism a fool's game?

You're confusing passion for a subject with the ability to be clear headed, knowledgeable and methodical in your debating. Intelligence and a desire for knowledge of a thing are not equatable.

You can be passionate and clear headed surely ! passion is what drives you to want to learn the facts yes?

My own personal opinion to Atheism is that its wrong... but then seeing as im a believer im bound to say that am i not?!?!?!

Originally posted by Jay Joos
You can be passionate and clear headed surely ! passion is what drives you to want to learn the facts yes?

My own personal opinion to Atheism is that its wrong... but then seeing as im a believer im bound to say that am i not?!?!?!

No, passion is exactly what creates an unclear head. It drives you to act without consideration, to speak wihtout thought. Passion is the enemy of debate.

But why are atheists fools? Being wrong and being foolish are two different things.

Originally posted by Starrman
Strong atheism (what I think you mean by solid) is as unsupported as strong theism, so very few intelligent people hold to that view. I sincerely doubt any atheist studies the bible purely to try and catch out christians.

Just on this site alone I think there's a lower level of intelligence in the theist camp than the atheist camp.

Actually, I have known, quite well, theists whose level of intelligence was intimidating. They were also of the kind that tended not to mind having their positions challenged, and generally acknowledged a wide range of possibilities (that is, they tended not to be “dogmatic” in their beliefs).

I once shredded my mind on a book by Alvin Plantinga in which, at the end of an arduous labor, he concluded that both theism and atheism could be rationally held beliefs. At the time, I thought of the parable of the elephant laboring to bear a mouse...

Of course, intelligent people can hold unintelligent beliefs for a variety of reasons. On the other hand, although I am not in the theistic camp*, I’m not yet convinced that all kinds of theism must be a fool’s game. I tend to argue vis-à-vis particular theistic arguments, rather than against the reasonableness of any such notion.

* Use of the word “God” does not a theist make; whether the person using the word is an Advaita Vedantist, or Spinoza, or myself.

Originally posted by Starrman
No, passion is exactly what creates an unclear head. It drives you to act without consideration, to speak wihtout thought. Passion is the enemy of debate.

But why are atheists fools? Being wrong and being foolish are two different things.

Its foolish to think there is no God and negativity in that case is wrong...my opinion...
Sorry i cant agree with you about passion... i have seen rational passion on subjects... speakers i have seen that know such a wide knowledge of their subject and they love it so much it pushes them to want to learn more and more and to express it to others.
Until i see evidence to the contrary... Passion is an ally to Debate !!!

Originally posted by vistesd
Actually, I have known, quite well, theists whose level of intelligence was intimidating. They were also of the kind that tended not to mind having their positions challenged, and generally acknowledged a wide range of possibilities (that is, they tended not to be “dogmatic” in their beliefs).

I once shredded my mind on a book by Alvin Plantinga in which ...[text shortened]... theist make; whether the person using the word is an Advaita Vedantist, or Spinoza, or myself.

I don't disagree with any of that save for Plantinga's conclusion, though I conceed it is a matter of how I personally percieve the universe.

All I was intending to say was that there are less people like RBHILL in the atheist camp.

Originally posted by Jay Joos
Its foolish to think there is no God and negativity in that case is wrong...my opinion...
Sorry i cant agree with you about passion... i have seen rational passion on subjects... speakers i have seen that know such a wide knowledge of their subject and they love it so much it pushes them to want to learn more and more and to express it to others.
Until i see evidence to the contrary... Passion is an ally to Debate !!!

Again, you're confusing a passion for knowledge with a process of debate. Any debate won on emotion is nothing more than good acting making an impression on the audience. It is not a solid, clear and well tested position.

Originally posted by Starrman
I don't disagree with any of that save for Plantinga's conclusion, though I conceed it is a matter of how I personally percieve the universe.

All I was intending to say was that there are less people like RBHILL in the atheist camp.

Raymond Smullyan hypothesized (in his The Tao Is Silent) that perhaps it is analogous to a hypnotic suggestion, perhaps nurtured and deepened over time by cultural conditioning. And maybe for those of us who cross religious boundaries fairly readily, even as non-theists, but nevertheless find some profound aesthetic value in various religious expressions, and spend so much of our time there—

—perhaps in such a case, the suggestion remains, not in terms of a particular religious content, but in how we think about things (as well as the aesthetics).

I’ve been thinking of this in light of the Zen counsel, in meditation to ignore any conceptual imagery or content that arises as makyo, bedeviling illusions. The trick may be, in meditation, not to re-hypnotize oneself. Also, how koans may act to crack the hypnotic shell; and why, once one has experienced clear-mind, one (okay, myself) almost compulsively seeks to return to what is a more familiar way of viewing the world, over and over again... But I’ve also wondered if one could use a self-hypnotic suggestion to unravel all prior suggestions or conditioning...