Why The Dude Converted

[Sephus]

[ QUOTE ]
The first difficulty with the argument is that it assumes God is subject to the laws of nature and to the laws of thought with which we are familiar.

[/ QUOTE ]

which explains why it's pointless to try and think about god.

[7ontheline]

[ QUOTE ]
alobar is on fire lately

[/ QUOTE ]

Eh, I disagree. (at least on this post) My reading of Alobar's post is that it doesn't really matter either way because everything ends up unknowable. The true concept of God is not able to be interpreted by the limited minds of humans. Ok, fine. Alobar states he isn't sure what his point is - seems like there isn't one.

If this philosophy allows everyone to believe what they want to believe, fine.

I'm not eloquent, so I don't think I'm getting my point across. Basically, if you're willing to throw out the the realm of human perception, then nothing is provable or knowable and no one's opinion is more valid than anyone else's.

At that point, everything is essentially equally likely to be truly "real." However, our perceptions are by definition limited. How is anyone supposed to choose what is "right?" The only thing humans have to go on is our connection to the physical world as we perceive it. Those of us who are more wedded to logic are probably going to have a more accurate relationship with the physical world than those who are religious, and that's about all you can say. The existence/non-existence of God is really irrelevant.

This irrelevance is inherently acknowledged by (most) atheist/agnostics. If you want God to be relevant to a general human reality, you need to be willing to accept some sort of internally consistent system of logic. That's where religions end up breaking down as they become arbitrary, self-contradictory, etc.

Edit: I really suck at writing. Please disagree with anything/everything I posted so perhaps I can explain better or at least clarify my own thoughts.

[TheMetetron]

[ QUOTE ]
alobar is on fire lately

[/ QUOTE ]

Indeed. Alobar has pretty much summed up my reasons for being whatever the hell you would call that (Agnostic, atheist? what is that?).

Basically, I can't possibly comprehend things like that, so I don't bother. Logically, I can see the reasons that god most likely does not exist. But I'm not sure logic is the correct way to go about these things since it is obviously something beyond our understanding.

God may exist, God may not. I don't know for sure, so believe whatever the hell you want as long as you don't try to go around convincing people that you know and they don't. I choose not to take a strong stance one way or another. I'm smart enough to admit I'm too dumb to know for sure.

[TheMetetron]

[ QUOTE ]
At that point, everything is essentially equally likely to be truly "real." However, our perceptions are by definition limited. How is anyone supposed to choose what is "right?" The only thing humans have to go on is our connection to the physical world as we perceive it. Those of us who are more wedded to logic are probably going to have a more accurate relationship with the physical world than those who are religious, and that's about all you can say. The existence/non-existence of God is really irrelevant.

This irrelevance is inherently acknowledged by (most) atheist/agnostics. If you want God to be relevant to a general human reality, you need to be willing to accept some sort of internally consistent system of logic. That's where religions end up breaking down as they become arbitrary, self-contradictory, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think you and Alobar (and me) are really disagreeing on this point. We are all pretty much saying the same thing in different ways, no?

[john voight]

Alobar and Dude are both spot on in their points.
IMO the dude has been questioning the existence, and this book was a strong push toward the non existence side.

IMO the explanation is not very convincing, although The Dude makes it very clear.

My belief is that I believe in God, and therefore he exists. To me this is really all that matters. If one day I won't believe in him, then to me he will not exist.

I also feel it is a subject I should think about: God. But is not a subject I should press onto others. My best friend continuously tries to convert me, and it makes me very uncomfortable. I however never try to convince him that God exists b/c I don't know how, nor do I feel there is a reason to.

PPL have set up all these rules and criteria that they use to evaluate things. IMO there should be no universal way of thought that dictates what is what.

[7ontheline]

[ QUOTE ]

I don't think you and Alobar (and me) are really disagreeing on this point. We are all pretty much saying the same thing in different ways, no?

[/ QUOTE ]

You're mostly right. I'm definitely not ragging on Alobar, who is 10x the poster I am. I guess my point is that those who proselytize and tell everybody else what to do need to prove that their belief system is correct. Either they can't because nothing is truly provable or they can't because when you examine their beliefs using logic (which may be limited but is just about all we have that is internally consistent) they don't hold up. This is true for both atheists and believers, although in general it is the religious who are more fanatical about converting the rest of the world.

[OrigamiSensei]

I've been staying out of the discussions, partly because I'm saddened by The Dude's story and I want to make sure that whatever I say is supportive and useful. Alobar is not a Christian but he has really hit the nail on the head here and introduced an incredibly salient point to the discussion. To quote, "You either feel God's touch or you don't."

Even Christians often refer to what we have in our lives as religion but in reality religion is just a set of rituals and such that often confuse and mess up the real thing that is going on - a personal and ongoing relationship with God. In my case I was brought up Christian but in my late teens I got thoroughly sick of religion and hypocrisy and I walked away from God from the ages of 20 to 33.

During that time I knew that I had been the one who had walked away and just as the prodigal son I was missed and wanted back not by people but by God. It wasn't that my life was messed up or that I was living immorally or that anything in particular was wrong, but I knew something was missing and I knew exactly what it was. I can guarantee very few around me (perhaps nobody) saw that inner turmoil. Those who say it's perfectly possible to live a "good" and "moral" life without God would have seen me doing just that.

In any case I finally came to the understanding that it was about that personal relationship with God and not about church or other Christians or any of the other distractions. Once I accepted that and started living in relationship rather than habit or ritual or obligation things transformed dramatically. It's not a burden, it's incredibly uplifting. I feel God's presence and guidance every day.

That's a very long-winded way of getting the point. The Dude's story makes me ask the question "was he feeling God's touch?" Like The Dude I had intellectually questioned the existence of God and I'll admit I still have lots of questions about creation and how the world works - however, I can no longer question God's existence because I see it and feel it every day. It's not through burning bushes or "900-foot Jesus" but God does speak to me and I see evidence of His hand at work in my daily life and that of others. No doubt some of you believe I am deluded or stupid and I understand that but it's an unquestionable part of my own reality. Having engaged in this relationship it's inconceivable that I would one day read a book and suddenly say "God doesn't exist". I could conceive of becoming very angry at God and rejecting His presence in my life but an intellectual rejection of His existence? I don't think so.

I was reluctant to discuss this point because again, I am saddened by the story - not only because of a fellow Christian falling away but also because his pain and the pain of his wife and family are also very real and very powerful. He's undergoing a terrible struggle here and he needs support. Thus I introduce the question of what the situation was not from a standpoint of being judgmental but in trying to understand. Whatever the outcome of this situation I wish nothing but the best for The Dude, his wife and his family.

[J.A.K.]

Great post NotReady. Obviously science is the tool for man's discovery of the natural world. Logic and reason can push that tool in either direction. This is purely opinion, but I do not think God set it up so that we come to know Him empirically. Faith is illogical and therefore of more value to God. But AFTER that initial step of faith the empirical evidence is there to be interpreted as a matter of reinforcing the believer's faith but not absolute natural proof for the unbeliever. I don't know if I am saying that right. Meh, This thread is great so far.

Dude, I do believe the zeitgeist will continue in your direction. It's kind of sad really and I cannot put my finger on it. But your conversion really brings up the heart of the matter: What is the individual man going to do with God?

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

Even Christians often refer to what we have in our lives as religion but in reality religion is just a set of rituals and such that often confuse and mess up the real thing that is going on - a personal and ongoing relationship with God.


[/ QUOTE ]
Dynomite post all the way.

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

Faith is illogical and therefore of more value to God.


[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for the post. I would say faith is above or beyond logic - I don't think Christianity is irrational, but it isn't based on our ability to reason. A complete theology includes logic and reason, since God is ultimate reason and created us with that ability.