Originally posted by moonbus'There's a hole in the heart of man in the shape of God.
Further note on the 'four most important questions about life':
The four questions posed and which appear fundamental to some people, are peculiar to the Abrahamic religions; they are not universally applicable to all peoples in all cultures in all times and all places.
I cite some examples.
In the Buddhist tradition, there is no immortal soul. Given t ...[text shortened]... ism per se has no ethical implications, and makes no assumptions about origins or purposes or death.
If I believe in the Risen Christ and it's just an artful falsehood, there is nothing to lose.
If true, then I have everything to gain.' -Pascal (1623-1662)
Originally posted by moonbusAtheism is not bound to answer any question beyond "does a deity exist?"
Atheism is not bound to answer any question beyond "does a deity exist?"
Atheism is not bound to answer the question how life got started. It is not bound to even ask that question. If an atheist happens to ask that question, all manner of answers are open to him, including but not limited to space seed, chance, the repeated operation of natural la ...[text shortened]... er colonies in No. America and Oz), and their having completed a broadly standardized education.
Yes but the implications my former master. When one dips ones finger in a pool of water the disturbance creates waves which reverberate outwards in all directions until they either dissipate or meet something solid and thus I reject the premise that atheism is concerned solely with the question of whether a deity exists, it is far more far reaching than that. Furthermore even this is problematic because it cannot be proven nor disproven and thus atheism itself is not concerned with truth but with plausibility as a direct consequence.
Originally posted by moonbusThe four questions posed and which appear fundamental to some people, are peculiar to the Abrahamic religions; they are not universally applicable to all peoples in all cultures in all times and all places.
Further note on the 'four most important questions about life':
The four questions posed and which appear fundamental to some people, are peculiar to the Abrahamic religions; they are not universally applicable to all peoples in all cultures in all times and all places.
I cite some examples.
In the Buddhist tradition, there is no immortal soul. Give ...[text shortened]... per se has no ethical implications, and makes no assumptions about origins or purposes or death.
They are not be applicable to other religions because the other religions fail to answer them?
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkVery unlikely. Grampy is not known for being able to engage in conversation. He prefers to quote bumber stickers that have long ago been debunked.
He might suggest that there is a problem with their perception and that they examine the historical evidence?
Now if you would like to start a thread on the topic and present some historical evidence, I would be willing to have a look at it. Don't expect your 'historical evidence' to stand up to scrutiny.
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkThat would be kind of daft though because the topic is faith [as in "the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen"] and not historical evidence.
He might suggest that there is a problem with their perception and that they examine the historical evidence?
You also have the fact that, according to the ideology that he espouses, those who perceive the evidence differently from him are going to be punished in a ridiculously grotesque way... for all eternity, no less!
So whether it's trite fridge magnet stuff about (somehow) 'deciding' to believe it anyway, even if it's "an artful falsehood", or the notion of demented coercive threats by some sort of depraved, vengeful supernatural being, it just doesn't add up ~ although, I'll grant you, it obviously appeals to the mentality of some people.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieAtheism does not address the question (or any other question, really) of "how life originated" - atheism was around long before we had any plausible idea concerning how life originated on Earth. Likewise, atheism makes no statement whatsoever concerning "morality."
I disagree my former master. Atheism by its rejection of intelligent design must answer the question of how life originated and diversified and the only answer which seems to fit with its tenets is that life originated from non living sterile matter in a pre-biotic organic 'soup'. Thus it does have implications regarding origins and does by its ver ...[text shortened]... stereotypes but one does tend to find that they share many similar values and have pointy ears.
Originally posted by FetchmyjunkOther religions and spiritual traditions can claim, with just as much verve, that Christianity fails to ask, much less to answer, their most important questions.
[b]The four questions posed and which appear fundamental to some people, are peculiar to the Abrahamic religions; they are not universally applicable to all peoples in all cultures in all times and all places.
They are not be applicable to other religions because the other religions fail to answer them?[/b]
Originally posted by robbie carrobieAh, my former Padawan, troubling the waters is the path to the dark side. A genuine master knows which questions not to ask and which waters not to trouble.
Atheism is not bound to answer any question beyond "does a deity exist?"
Yes but the implications my former master. When one dips ones finger in a pool of water the disturbance creates waves which reverberate outwards in all directions until they either dissipate or meet something solid and thus I reject the premise that atheism is concerned sol ...[text shortened]... d thus atheism itself is not concerned with truth but with plausibility as a direct consequence.
Don't think, don't prove, don't stir up implications -- DO!
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyI would be quite happy to discuss Pascal's wager, but it deserves a thread unto itself.
'There's a hole in the heart of man in the shape of God.
If I believe in the Risen Christ and it's just an artful falsehood, there is nothing to lose.
If true, then I have everything to gain.' -Pascal (1623-1662)