why do people believe in god?

bg:

1. Violating a member's Bluelight anonymity, even indirectly, is very bad form. Regardless of whether you resent the other member's perceived hypocricy or meanness, that is no excuse. If you had any objective moral sense, you would apologize to Bricoleur and edit your post that contains the reference.

2. We are dealing in opinion, not science. And we are not publishing academic papers, here. If another author said exactly what I wanted to say, I might cut and paste that statement into my post without noting it. I see nothing horrendously dishonset or reprehensible in that. If it is my opinion, it is my opinion regardless of whose words are used. Dishonest would be pretending to hold an opinion that you do not, rather than describing your honestly held opinion with words written by another.

3. You have become angered at both myself and bricoleur for doing nothing more than debating religious beliefs. You repeatedly insist it is mean of us to detail the problems we perceive in another's religious beliefs. You repeatedly insist we SHOULD just say "I disgree with you" and leave it at that. You are being incredibly self-centered and rude by doing so. Maybe that is the kind of board YOU would like, but don't impose that on everyone else. Some of us are are here to debate. If you had read through this entire thread (which I don't think you have) you would see that TR is repeatedly BEGGING bricoleur and me to examine and respond to each of his points. He WANTS to test the logic of his belief by engaging in this debate. You are so wrong for coming on here and becoming pissed and me and Brioleur for partaking in this, I am practically sputtering.

And anyone else who comes into this thread to throw there 2 cents in...well, you can expect some one might disagree and might explain WHY they disagree. You think that is WRONG. You think that is MEAN. You make me sick. You are really skirting the line of what should even be permitted on bluelight.

Free speech and debate are good things. By your reasoning, if some one says, "I think it is good to eat meat" a vegetarian should ONLY say, "I disagree" and if a vegetarian says, "I think it is good to not eat meat" a meat-eater could only say "I disagree." If this forum were run the way you THINK it should be run, we'd never have any fucking debate over anything, no vegetarians and meat-eaters would every engage in serious discussion of the bases for their differing views. Same for other issues.

I mean, are you really so stupid you can't see how inappropriate it is for you to criticize the mere act of an atheist giving his opinion why a theists view is inaccurate? Isn't a theist giving his or her opinion on what god is and why he or she believes really just giving their opinion on why atheists are wrong?

I mean, your whole position could be flipped upside down and you could be screaming that theists should not be coming on here giving details about their religious beliefs, they should just say, "I disagree with atheists" and leave it at that.

Anyway, you are so incredibly hypocritical, it just sickens me and I had to spew forth the bile that resulted.

If an atheist details why he does not agree with a religious belief: Mean.

If a theist details why he does not agree with atheist's disbelief in god: Good.

Shit, get a clue, will you, and think before you keep on with this crap? It really is just too much. How many threads now have you come on with this same stupid approach that I or another atheist are being rude and disrespectful for saying exactly why we don't agree with a particular religious opinion?

~psychoblast~
 
Last edited by a moderator:
TR:

Assuming you are not offended if I continue our debate, I only have enough energy left to make one point.

You claimed that reality = known existence.

God = All existence (known and unknown).

1. What if reality = all existence (known and unknown)? This is how I view it. And this is why I still say you are an atheist who is mis-labeling reality.

2. How do you determine god to be sentient, or do you? I brought this up before, didn't see your response.

Please note that I am very disappointed you patted Beanergrl on the back for her posts. She wasn't agreeing with you. She was defending your right to post your opinion without getting detailed critiques from me and Bricoleur. But you must agree that neither Bricoleur nor I did (or even could if we wanted to) intrude on your write to post any opinion you wanted to. And it appears to me that you WANTED our critiques, WANTED this debate to continue. If I am wrong, feel free to correct me, but I'm pretty sure you expressly asked us multiple times to look at what you posted and respond.

So, anyway, how is it that beanergrl's post was more welcome to you? That you support her posts? Are you saying you would prefer no debate? You would prefer I NOT tell you why I disagree with your view? You would prefer that I just post something innocuous and empty like, "Interesting idea, not sure I agree with it but I support your right to hold it." If that is the kind of response you prefer, you sure hid it well. And if it is not, you should be condemning beanergrl as much as I am for jumping in and trying to "protect" your belief from criticism. More so, in fact, since you are in a better position than me to explain to beanergrl that debate is the WHOLE POINT FOR POSTING AN OPINION IN THIS FORUM. I'm sure she won't hear that from me, but maybe from people like you.

Alas, the hypocricy of society seems to dwell in you. Pat some one on the back of they seem to be supporting your position, no matter how misguidedly. Way to go.

Anyway, unless you clarify this issue, I may boycott this and any other post by you since I will assume that you do NOT want to engage in debate on this or any other issue because you find such debate offensive and infringing on your right to hold you own opinion (sheesh, hard to say that with a straight face, not sure how beanergrl does it).

~psychoblast~
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You would prefer that I just post something innocuous and empty like, "Interesting idea, not sure I agree with it but I support your right to hold it."
Click to expand...
How is this "empty" pb? That just doesn't make sense. I agree that if you disagree with someone's viewpoints you should point out why you believe what you do. But if you qualify your viewpoints with tolerance, then somehow your points become empty? I don't think the guidelines for the forum mention that this place is ONLY a forum for debate.
This forum has been created to open up a tolerant and respectful discussion on a wide variety of topics ranging from Personal Spirituality to Organized Religion, Eastern Philosophy to Western Philosophy, Meditation to Metaphysics, Psychology to Sociology, Science to Mathematics, Technology to Ethics, Ideology to Reality, and any musings about our world you may wish to share. Revelations induced by altered states of consciousness, whether they be through drugs or trance are welcome. This list is by no means exclusive, any topic within the spirit of the forum can be discussed.

It is a place to think, to learn, to challenge others ideas as well as your own to help you gain a better understanding of your individual beliefs and reasons. Through the pooling of our collective experiences, we hope to gain a wider awareness of the many facets of life around us so each of us can use that awareness to affect growth and positive change in our and others lives.

It is a place to argue, and we understand your ego may come under attack here, but there is no need to lose your cool and advertise your lack of reasoning ability. Everyone is entitled to their own point of view regardless of how ridiculous it may seem to you. We encourage frisky discussion and lively debate, as long as they are focused on the issues and ideas, not the person.
I would think anyone would welcome debate, but it is also nice to feel that there are others that believe the same way you do. Otherwise it can get very discouraging.....
Click to expand...

Sorry to post off topic - it just seemed that sometimes these God posts might lose sight of what the forum is supposed to be about...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
^^^^^^^^^
I think we all need to read those from time to time. Thanks.
PB-When most of your posting is cut and pasted and you can't answer the questions that have been brought forth because it wasnt your work that you posted or you have to answer them by another cut and paste or "metaphor" then i'd say that's worth bringing attention too. It's not fair to the board.If you want to say it's okay to cut and paste a line or two or three, fine. But to cut and paste oh, i dunno, say 40-60 perhaps including the authors own personal quotes, thats another story.If you enjoy dishonesty like that then well, living in your light i guess, eh? And if cut and pasting quite a few full paragraphs without saying you were cut and pasting or providing links is your thing too i will be reminded of it and won't read your post in the future again either. I want to read thoughts and opinions from actual bluelighters.

Second, I won't apologize, for i don't think that i've done anything wrong. I took out the links which he requested and inless he wants to go and edit his almost every post into his own words including answering the questions that trails had related to the cut and paste that bricoluer posted, then it will stay. I also seem to remember a few moderators from other forums who have brought situations like this to attention.

It is you again who didnt read the entire board because i have said ,even in a post to you, that i didnt read the whole thing the first time but i went back later and i did and then i could see how everything played out and why it turned into the debate it did. I must of said this in two or three places so that shows you again how much you read and pay attention.
Anyway, you are so incredibly hypocritical, it just sickens me and I had to spew forth the bile that resulted.
If an atheist details why he does not agree with a religious belief: Mean.
If a theist details why he does not agree with atheist's disbelief in god: Good.
Click to expand...
Where do you get this from?

Again on with more of your not paying attention. I didnt say that he was mean (and i didnt say you were mean at all) because he was debating everything. I said he was mean because he consistantly called Trails a liar for not seeing things his way and when Ananda gave her beautiful reply (not even to him)and he jumped her ass for her post and she hasnt been back to bluelight since.I think making someone avoid bluelight because of your unwelcoming words when it was only their 11th post is pretty mean. But what really made me mad was the fact that regardless off his reasons he took a very arrogant and condescending tone on everyones experiences or thoughts. It's one thing to debate, but it's another when you do it in a manner that you're insulting the other person in nearly every post.

Why would Trails be welcome to see my post? I dunno, maybe cause somebody finally came to support him. Why does it make you angry? Also here we go again on you NOT reading things because Trails also said to me that he anticipated the debate and brought it on. Then i said to him, "i know i went back and reread the whole thing". Hello, psychoblast, pay attention. As far as me not agreeing with him you don't know what your talking about.Trails and i have shared several threads where we already know what each other believe and i agree with probably 90% or more of what he does. I also picked up on his cues where he says -i believe twice, that he felt alone in this thread and thats why i jumped in even though it was late.

Do you always get so angry when things don't go your way?
And for your information not everything involves a debate but you want to make it one. Sometimes, like when i make a thread, i want to know peoples opinions. When you debate everyone all the time you appear to be a very argumentive type of person. And i also think those kinds of people are also the one whose minds are closed the most because as far as their concernered their minds have been made up and now they are going to tell everyone about it. It's not hard to have to debate everyone. It's called accepting them how they are.

Trails- See why i hate posting in these threads.
[ 04 March 2003: Message edited by: beanergrl ]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
How is this "empty" pb? That just doesn't make sense. I agree that if you disagree with someone's viewpoints you should point out why you believe what you do.
Click to expand...
You answered your own question. In my example, I merely noted that I disagreed with a post WITHOUT pointing out why. It is the "why" that I and Bricoleur post that beanergrl finds so offensive, which perception by her I find to be incredibly obtuse.

I mean, I am completely tolerant of other opinions even as I disagree with them and explain why I disagree... I never try to stop some one from expressing their opinion. I would never try to outlaw a particular opinion. Tolerance does not mean, however, you do not try to sway, to discuss. Discussion is a two way street. By engaging in debate with TR, we might both end up holding to our positions, I might persuade TR to become atheist OR HE MIGHT PERSUADE ME TO BECOME THEIST. I'm putting my own opinions on the line as much as TR by participating in the debate. But BG chooses to accuse me of intolerance.

Anyway, in this particular circumstance, BG's belief is that atheists are mean if they give their opinion to a theist. Which is a belief that specifically condemns reasoned debate. I mean, take it to the extreme and you have censorship (i.e., If beanergrl ran this forum, no atheist would be permitted to explain the particular logical or evidentiary flaws they see in a theists religious opinion.) It is the antithesis of having a forum for discussing various philosophical ideas, which is why it bothers me so much to see her view go by without the universal condemnation of both theists and atheists. Like theists (like TR) leave the issue alone just because she is a fellow theist. How disappointing.

~psychoblast~
 
Last edited by a moderator:
^^^
Again, will you shut up with "beanergrl thinks atheist are mean if they debate". I never said that. And if i ran the forum then i wouldnt stop people from debating when it was asked for.I don't even think atheist are wrong in some sense, i just think they see things differently.
What?? Accuse you of intolerance. Good grief, you certainly see alot that isnt there dont you? And you scoff at me seeing an angel?
[ 04 March 2003: Message edited by: beanergrl ]
 
By the way, the way I'm characterizing BG's view comes both from this thread and from prior threads where she similarly reprimanded me for giving my opinion about a particular proposed theistic view.
~psychoblast~
 
Where i reprimended you for what you believed? Please find this thread.
--I'm searching now for these threads but so far i have just found quotes from you telling people they were stupid.
[ 04 March 2003: Message edited by: beanergrl ]
 
Not reprimanded for belief, but for giving my opinion.
Let's look in this thread:
I don't like it when people are mean which is why i wrote it to begin with.(i know it's not an eye for an eye, more on that later) When i went back and read every post i saw that you put everyone down who didnt think your way. I thought Ananda gave a very sweet post, if you didn't agree then you should of just left it at that.She didnt say anything to you to demean you.When she went back and read your reply later i'm sure she was hurt.She hasnt replyed on bluelight since. Nobody can say how they feel in one single post without you coming in and taking everything they wrote and putting it your prospective which is only valid to you. Just because you believe in this doesnt mean it's true.
Click to expand...
Now, you wrote that calling Bricoleur mean for disagreeing with another poster, going so far as to say you are sure he hurt her feelings. You have similarly rushed -- uninvited -- to criticize me for giving my opinion on other theological posts. Playing the maternal, "must rescue these poor, defenseless theists" role. It is just totally inappropriate for this forum and, particularly, in this thread.

I mean, to actually get value judgments like who is mean or nice from our opinions on here? And somehow it always turns out that the "mean" and inappropriate posts, in your view, are the ones by atheists critizing a theological opinion? Hmmm... How consistent of you.
~psychoblast~
 
Last edited by a moderator:
To clarify, I think your theological opinions are fine, I like to see your viewpoint. I only have a problem when you characterize any expression of a contrary viewpoint as "mean" or the like, or say things like "why can't you atheists just say you disagree with a view and leave it at that, why do you have to dissect it." I mean, if you hate debate so much, I don't know why you are even in this forum. And if you can't see that posters merely telling each other, "I disagree with you, that is all" would be the end of debate, and the end of this forum, then I guess I give up on you.
~psychoblast~
 
That comment was only about her (ananda) and it was not in reference about you . If i saw a new poster i certainly would make her feel welcome and not tell her she was "arrogant and egotistical" when she certainly wasnt trying to be at all and wasnt even speaking to him. She was only giving her opinion. I certainly don't feel it was wrong of me to say that i believe that was mean.
And as far as your concernered you will go out of your way to reply with post just like this to me or anyone else.You seem to really enjoy when you create conflict and bring in "bad energy" to a post. I'm not out to rescue "defenseless theist" in a maternal role. Cripes, give me a friggin break. It is also totally appropriate for this forum and, particularly, in this thread to respond in the manner to which i did.
I didnt even want to speak to you at all which is why i didnt post alot sooner.I knew you'd be there with your same song and dance and now here i am posting post after post to you when there is so many better things i can do with my time then waste it on you. - by that i mean that it just goes in circles and circles and i do feel my time incredibly wasted. (not that i think another human isnt worth spending time on)
[ 04 March 2003: Message edited by: beanergrl ]
 
If i saw a new poster i certainly would make her feel welcome and not tell her she was "arrogant and egotistical" when she certainly wasnt trying to be at all and wasnt even speaking to him. She was only giving her opinion.
Click to expand...
And Bricoleur was just giving his opinion. You seem oblivious to the inherent arrogance of some one saying something like: "Well, I know god exists because he showed himself to me -- [raises nose and sniffs] -- Well, maybe one day if you are lucky he'll show himself to you. Until then, I guess you'll just wallow in your ignorant belief in atheism. Bye now."

I mean, that kind of post is EXTREMELY condescending. The whole idea that god chooses to one-on-one PROVE his existence to you, but not me, and have you say, "Yep, I know what I know, guess God hasn't chosen to enlighten you yet."

This is another issue we could probably go back and forth on. You don't think her (and your) view on this is condescending or arrogant, and I don't think that it is wrong or mean to label her (or your) view on this to be condescending or mean.
Your view that Ananda's post is not arrogant hits me like some one saying, "Blacks are inferior to whites, but I'm not being racist...that's just how god intended it to be." I mean, sure some one may post that all well-intentioned and not MEANING to be racist. Hell, I could picture some sweet old lady in Mississippi saying this while baking cookies for her church. But does that make it not racist? Same idea.

~psychoblast~
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ok, thats enough. If anyone wants to continue the discussion about what the thread was really about, please start a new one.
Closed.
 
Eat a bunch of Acid and sit in a field on a perfect day once then let your mind drift into thinking about life. It answered my my questions.
 
when we upgraded from UBB to VB a lot of the formating in posts was lost (quotes, paragraphing etc) I need to go through old threads like this and fix them but it takes time to look up what was actually the quote and what was the posters own opinion.
 
Religion and God are difficult subjects to debate because by its very nature debate is an intellectual activity while meditation and prayer are acts that deal with clearing your mind of thought and connecting to the spirit. How do you prove a feeling? Aren't feelings relative? Can you disprove something you have not felt for yourself? It seems to me that the atheist tries to approach the topic from a scientific standpoint, relying on proofs found in the physical world around him. But if that proof could be found, then what value at all would a person's faith have? And furthermore, spirituality has nothing to do with the physical world anyway. Faith itself is so strong a feeling that it needs no proof to the person holding it. But don't misunderstand me. I am not against your arguments, PB, I admire someone who questions everything around him (or her) in a critical way. It means they are searching for truth. But are you open minded enough to leave the possibility open that everything you know is wrong? If not then you may be closing yourself off from a lot of potential learning experiences.

On a different note, though, I also believe that almost all religions (religions with titles anyway) are bullshit. As soon as you put a title on your beliefs ('I'm Lutheran' 'I'm a Catholic' 'I am Quaker') you diminish their value since it now becomes way of restricting yourself to a number of predetermined rules, beliefs and rituals. It seems to me that the path to God (and I actually hate using that word since it is, itself, a title) comes not from study and practice as much as it comes from feeling and awareness. I think all religions throughout time have truths in them, but it always comes back to the individual's relationship with the spirit. And that is something that can not be proven by anyone other than the one experiencing it.

peace
 
Alot of atheists believe in a higfher power after taking a strong dose of DMT :p

Maybe, the DMT release at birth triggers some sort of life changing experience our deep sub conscious has since hidden, but an underlying question of who is the creator or is there always erxists.. and we fear it will be angry if we dont bleive in something with powers :p
 
God is religion. Religion is power. One must keep God in the head. One must not spread the knowledge of god.
-Shomac
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top