Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Because your minimal qualities are not enough for most others. Most require their god be conscious at the least, with intelligence, intention, and possibly some supernatural abilities.
It's sort of like you choosing to describe anyone who will cook and clean for you as your wife. Those might be a couple of things a wife does, but most everyone else has a much broader requirement in what makes a wife . Sex, love, having children, etc. So while your minimalist version may work for you, others don't have to accept such a barebones definition of what would be an acceptable wife for them.
Your version of God is as inadequate for most as a wife that only cooks your meals and cleans your house and nothing else.
The minimalist attributes simply establish the existence of God. Any and all other attributes must stand on their own. I BELIEVE our Reality is conscious because I encountered it in deep meditation. Since you did NOT you do not. That's what makes for disagreements. I just object to your and others presumptuousness in demanding MORE proof for a God or you want the default to be there IS NO God. That is arrogant and unwarranted.
The minimalist attributes simply establish the existence of God. Any and all other attributes must stand on their own. I BELIEVE our Reality is conscious because I encountered it in deep meditation.
To me, that would make you an agnostic theist, perhaps an agnostic panentheist. You might prefer to be considered a gnostic, whatever works.
Quote:
Since you did NOT you do not. That's what makes for disagreements. I just object to your and others presumptuousness in demanding MORE proof for a God
More proof than your meditative vision? Why would you think that this is enough evidence for anybody?
Quote:
or you want the default to be there IS NO God.
More accurately, without evidence for a god, and certainly no agreement on what god might be if there is, it simply makes sense to conduct public affairs as neutrally as possible. That means keeping official sanction of specific religions out of the public square, and since the multiplicity of religions disagree on virtually everything at some point, it makes sense to conduct legal and legislative affairs based upon probable evidence. That doesn’t benefit atheism any more than it benefits or harms any given religion either.
Quote:
That is arrogant and unwarranted.
I disagree, but can you come up with a better system other than one that is blind to religion?
To me, that would make you an agnostic theist, perhaps an agnostic panentheist. You might prefer to be considered a gnostic, whatever works.
More proof than your meditative vision? Why would you think that this is enough evidence for anybody?
More accurately, without evidence for a god, and certainly no agreement on what god might be if there is, it simply makes sense to conduct public affairs as neutrally as possible. That means keeping official sanction of specific religions out of the public square, and since the multiplicity of religions disagree on virtually everything at some point, it makes sense to conduct legal and legislative affairs based upon probable evidence. That doesn’t benefit atheism any more than it benefits or harms any given religion either.
I disagree, but can you come up with a better system other than one that is blind to religion?
We do not disagree about keeping religion out of Government, but that does NOT mean keeping God out of society. You conflate belief in God with religions and that is NOT required. As long as there are no government mandates based on ANY religion, the presence of references to God do NOT violate church and state separation as the militant atheists insist. Trying to keep references to God from the public square by the legal coercive power of the state is as evil as trying to impose some religion's mandates from God on the public. What gives atheists the right to dictate to the public what can or cannot be referenced in the public square that does NOT involve coercive mandates from the state?
The minimalist attributes simply establish the existence of God. Any and all other attributes must stand on their own. I BELIEVE our Reality is conscious because I encountered it in deep meditation. Since you did NOT you do not. That's what makes for disagreements. I just object to your and others presumptuousness in demanding MORE proof for a God or you want the default to be there IS NO God. That is arrogant and unwarranted.
What is arrogant and unwarranted are your assertions, and reliance on an unreliable personal experience.
The minimalist attributes simply establish the existence of God. Any and all other attributes must stand on their own. I BELIEVE our Reality is conscious because I encountered it in deep meditation. Since you did NOT you do not. That's what makes for disagreements. I just object to your and others presumptuousness in demanding MORE proof for a God or you want the default to be there IS NO God. That is arrogant and unwarranted.
No, there is nothing arrogant about it. Many people simply see no reason to apply supernatural terminology to natural phenomena that exhibits no observable signs of personality, intelligence, consciousness, etc. So again we are merely engaged in semantics . Leaving off your unprovable claims of consciousness, you cannot show a difference between the universe of the atheist and what you call God. It's just terminology. Are Australia, Greenland, and Antarctica islands or continents? It's just semantics .
Most theists reject pantheism , the universe as God .Does that make them arrogant also even though they do believe in God?
Last edited by wallflash; 07-23-2018 at 06:53 AM..
We do not disagree about keeping religion out of Government, but that does NOT mean keeping God out of society. You conflate belief in God with religions and that is NOT required. As long as there are no government mandates based on ANY religion, the presence of references to God do NOT violate church and state separation as the militant atheists insist. Trying to keep references to God from the public square by the legal coercive power of the state is as evil as trying to impose some religion's mandates from God on the public. What gives atheists the right to dictate to the public what can or cannot be referenced in the public square that does NOT involve coercive mandates from the state?
We might even agree on this. What are your opinions on:
Mandatory public school prayer?
Prayers at public school graduations, city council meetings, and other public gatherings hosted by and for the business of public entities?
A political office holder saying “god bless you” or “ I will pray for you”?
A governmental motto, such as “In god we trust”?
Posting a religious icon in public areas, such as a saint, the 10 commandments, depiction of a god, or scriptural verses/sura?
Wearing religious clothing as part of a uniform, such as a turban, cross, headscarf, or colander?
Tax exempt status for religious organizations?
Exemption if religious organizations from regulatory rules, such as a church daycare not needing to follow the same rules as a private one?
I support some of the above, I objectto some. Your thoughts?
again, reasonable people make reasonable laws. tossing things like religion or being gay in people's faces isn't rational. being religious and gay is irrelevant to the people living a fine life. they both get the same rights.
being true to oneself and others is way more important. It requires a deeper understanding of reality than "what I am others must be or they are wrong". Banning religion is a danger to freedom and liberty for all people. separation of church and state is different and, at the very least, as important.
What is arrogant and unwarranted are your assertions, and reliance on an unreliable personal experience.
to me, his assertions and yours aren't much different. they are both based on what you want, maybe even need, not necessarily what is. and not necessarily wrong either.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
