To believe or not to believe - that is the quesiton.

I just don't understand what we are debating.

A

Hundreds of thousands of verifiable scientific observations.

vs

B

Faith


Can one of you give me ONE EXAMPLE of a miracle that the Catholic church deems a prerequisite for sainthood?

[joel2006]

RJT- I am both an 'atheist' and an 'agnostic' although I refer to myself as a 'nontheist'. Although this may seem confusing it actually isn't. I was raised in an Evangelical Christian environment where I was taught that 'atheists' are people who say there is no god. However upon meeting and talking with actual atheists I found that their own definition of an atheist is often different and more literal, that is-an atheist is one without belief. Some (very few) say there is no god, a position that ironically must be taken on faith since there is no way of proving it. But most of them for many different reasons simply chose not to believe. An agnostic is one who does not 'know' whether or not god exists, and according to the strict defintion of 'atheist, all agnostics are without belief and thus atheists. But a 'no god' atheist would differentiate herself from agnostics. Although in my experience most believers think of atheists as the opposite of themselves (there is no god) this is a minority position amongst most atheists, a position far more popular with believers. I personally do not believe in God, mainly because firstly I have no problem with the universe being random, secondly I refuse to take anything so important on 'faith' (that is-without any evidence) and thirdly I have no need for the emotional and psychological comfort the idea of god provides for most people. I won't even bring up the fact that the most common arguement used for the authenticity of the Bible is a circular one (it is the word of god because it says it is) What other people believe is their business, as far as I'm concerned. One of the things that drove me away from Christianity is the lack of verifiable truth of so many core concepts and the utter disregard for truth that many ministers have. To me 'truth' is self-evident, it can withstand any and all challenges and if this is the case then faith should be irrelevant. But almost all religions are based on faith, which precludes the need for verification of any of their most important claims, whatever they may be.

[RJT]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It is indeed difficult to discuss things with one who won’t state anything specific.... Kid likes to do that.

[/ QUOTE ]

I say a lot of things that are specific, but you are asking for unfounded beliefs on faith (since the questions are unanswerable), and I'm sorry if I don't have many of those to offer.

[/ QUOTE ]

All I can say Kid is this: you seem to agree that it is hard to defend the statement “there is not God, period”. You also seem to suggest that there are no such folk who feel such. Then I read Jasper109. What am I to think? Thus my OP.

RJT

[/ QUOTE ]

Come on be fair, no-one is suggesting that all irrational people are theists (ok you can probably find some nutter who does insists that, but that goes to illustrate the point about being fair)

chez

[/ QUOTE ]

No, chez,

But I am suggesting, as was the point of my OP, that if I was agnostic I would be more interested and probably feel that I would have an easier time convincing Atheists (in the way , I used the word) that their position is very narrow minded.

Thus, my glass houses reference. To (somewhat) mix metaphors: Clean your own house first. Then tackle (another mixed metaphor) us believers.

RJT

[ QUOTE ]
Clean your own house first. Then tackle (another mixed metaphor) us believers.


[/ QUOTE ]

One could just as easily say: convert every theist to Christianity, then tackle us atheists.

Joel,

I think I agree with everything you said. LOL

[chezlaw]

[ QUOTE ]
I just don't understand what we are debating.

A

Hundreds of thousands of verifiable scientific observations.

vs

B

Faith


Can one of you give me ONE EXAMPLE of a miracle that the Catholic church deems a prerequisite for sainthood?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why do you accuse agnostics of being gutless when we are referring to those who believe:

1) there is no reason to believe in god
2) they cannot prove god does not exist.

and suggesting that is the what is generally believed by those who call themselves athiest or agnostic, the main difference between them being a confusion over the meanings of agnostic/athiest.

chez

[RJT]

Joel,

It appears that I am (was) as ignorant of the terms atheist and agnostic as many here are of some things we believers think. Thanks for you response.

[ QUOTE ]
Some (very few) say there is no god, a position that ironically must be taken on faith since there is no way of proving it.

[/ QUOTE ]

This quote above was basically the point of my OP.

How ‘bout this: an agnostic is an apathetic atheists - just joking.

P.s. You are correct that one needs faith to understand what religion is all about. One must realize before studying any religion that at one point one has to jump with faith. You are not interested in that avenue. As are most here. But, for those who are interested, it is not like the simplified version most of us learn in Sunday school. That is what is frustrating here sometimes. Those who want to argue the minutia. I worked (am working) it backwards. I like the concept, now I see what (how it )works viz a viz my intellect (or lack thereof).

RJT

[joel2006]

RJT- I never said nor do i accept the statement that one needs faith to understand what religion is all about. I think I have an excellent understanding of that without faith. However one clearly needs faith to "accept" what religion is all about, but that is a very different thing. By accepting the dictionary definition you made a simple but understandable error. You forgot or did not realize that approx 96% of all americans believe in god (according to M. Shermer in "How We Believe"). Since dictionary definitions are based on common usage and believers are the overwhelming majority of americans, it is their usage that is recorded in the dictionary, not the term as used by the tiny minority of actual atheists.

[RJT]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Clean your own house first. Then tackle (another mixed metaphor) us believers.


[/ QUOTE ]

One could just as easily say: convert every theist to Christianity, then tackle us atheists.

[/ QUOTE ]

It was my understanding (assumption) that this whole religion thing was started when David S. suggested that religion is bunk and referred believers to hear what fellow geniuses think. Therefore I say “Mommy, they started it.”

Whether that is the case or not, the tone of many agnostics here just seems to be so militant. I thought it odd is all. Perhaps, it is just me reading things wrong.

[RJT]

Right, I used the wrong word. Good catch.