Thoughts on God, part one...

amicus

Literotica Guru
Joined
Sep 28, 2003
Posts
14,812
Thoughts on God (part one)



On a personal level I am appalled at the number of people, world wide, here in the 21st Century who claim a belief in God.

I have been an atheist from a very early age as I perceived the shallowness of church and Sunday school exhortations.

Later I came to think that my own ego got in the way in terms of submitting my very young ‘self’ to the will of God. I just could not do it and feel whole…I could not become part of a larger concept by sacrificing my own identity. If that makes sense to anyone outside my self.

In my college years and later…as a formal pursuit of understanding continued, I maintained the quest for truth but as with many others, found the total history of man, his religions and his philosophies, around the globe, to be contradictory, confusing and due to the sheer volume, a bit overwhelming.

Here on Literotica…there has been some of the best debate, discussion and presentation of views at all levels that I have ever witnessed and participated in.

Typical discussions on both religion and philosophy usually degenerate into closed reasoning, technical terms beyond the comprehension of most and the real killer of all intellectual pursuits; the insistence that ‘man’ cannot ‘know’ anything with any certainty. If you hold that position, then nothing said by anyone at any time in history is of any meaning…it becomes only ‘opinion’ no matter how well supported anecdotally by expressions of faith or logic.

I opened by saying I found it appalling that many still believe in God. I need to qualify that in a small way.

While I stipulate that every psychologically healthy human individual is born with a brain capable of reason and logic; I also conclude that most do not cultivate the use of the mind to a level required to think rationally.

I also observe/propose that the intellectual quotient of a large percentage of mankind is not sufficient to encompass conceptual abstractions wide enough to deal with questions of logic and reason.

As many on this forum have lovingly pointed out, I have adopted a ‘gender bias’ when cogitating on the differing natural qualities of male and female human critters. I am often amused at the vehemence of those when I make such a small and obviously true statement that: “men and women are different.”

And they are different and not just in genetalia.

In summary: only a small percentage of man and an even smaller percentage of woman have the intellectual tools to deal with the question of the existence of God. The vast majority, not having those tools, but still having the human requirement to function, depend of ‘faith’ to round out their lives.

I choose to address those who are capable of pursuing the question of the existence of God and the ramifications of either conclusion.

To be continued….

Amicus the unbeliever….
 
I'll take Pascal's wager over disbelief Amicus. Consider me a fire insurance christian if you like, but I don't wanna burn and see no percentage in not believeing.

-Colly
 
I understand Colly...and my response is in general at not targeted at you personally....

It is often perceived as a win/win situation to hedge a bet against there being a supreme being who knows all sees all and promises immortal life, peace and eternal happiness.

After all, what's to lose?

Only your soul. That innermost ingredient of every human being that can be kept clean and pure and consistent or sullied by accepting a 'ruler' over ones most basic dreams and desires.

To give your heart and soul to god...is to sacrifice that uniquely human aspect of a sentient mind: individual free choice and responsibility for ones own actions.

The instant you give over your ability to judge and make moral decisions to a 'higher authority', you are lost. You are no longer free to exercise free will and become yet another follower of a dogma.

Relinquishing that free will is the root cause of mental illness as the mind continues to struggle to 'rationally' interpret reality and oppose the contradictions and inconsistencies of an adopted set of rules.

Since the rational mind is humanities only claim above the animal kingdom....followers and believers become less than human but remain above the animals.

Religion, faith....is the greatest evil in all of history.

Yes, I am a 'militant' atheist....no apologies offered.

amicus....
 
amicus said:
Religion, faith....is the greatest evil in all of history.
Evil in itself, or a cause of evil acts and suffering? Greed and xenophobia have often been painted with religios connotations to justify grand acts of evil.

#L
 
Religion: My personnel relation with my personnel God.

Church: A multi-national business engaged in controlling a membership by use of mysticism and fear. Also removing as much legal tender as the membership will tolerate.

The Big Bang needs a "Mono block" to explode from. Where did it come from?
 
Both what you call greed and xenophobia can be identified in other terms.

Since we exist as individuals first and foremost, then 'self interest' is a rational characteristic of mankind. To be interested in self preservation, to acquire and keep things to further that existence...is not a bad thing. Taken to extremes...yes...I understand.

Xenophobia...a hatred of things that are strange to us...can also be understood as a protective emotion. We are comfortable and relatively safe with things we know and understand.

Acceptance of the new and different...or strange...is an extension that does not come easily for many. It was also a necessary ingredient for early man to survive in a hostile world.


I understand your point, but the concept of replacing thought with faith is to me the most destructive, thus most 'evil' aspect of our nature.


thank you for the post....amicus...
 
Theoldman....

Hello...thank you...I do not quibble with one having faith, only when they claim that those who do not are somewhat less likely to pass the pearly gates...and insist that I at least should try.

Big Bang Theory......somewhere in philosophy there was the 'Watchmakers argument' in that the existence of a 'watch' certifies the existence of a watchmaker.

The existence of a universe does somewhat imply one who created that universe. However...one can ask the same of those who postulate the existence of God....who created God?

The answer usually is, God is and has always been. Which is sufficient for the faithful.

Where did that highly compacted speck of matter that was the core of the big bang come from? There are no answers.

If the absence of an answer justifies assuming a deity, then by all means do so. For me, I would rather the investigation continue to discover the true origins of that first speck of matter.


amicus...
 
O M G

I am not a believer in God - and like Amicus (oh my!) I think that organised religion is the bane of this world but please - to say that man and even fewer women cant cope with the idea of God is ridiculous - man and woman created God - so I think they are the ones who will in the end deal with the concept - and yes Amicus I said MAN and WOMAN because like it or not we are here togther!
 
amicus said:
... I also observe/propose that the intellectual quotient of a large percentage of mankind is not sufficient to encompass conceptual abstractions wide enough to deal with questions of logic and reason.
...
In summary: only a small percentage of man and an even smaller percentage of woman have the intellectual tools to deal with the question of the existence of God. ...

I choose to address those who are capable of pursuing the question of the existence of God and the ramifications of either conclusion. ...
Nearly unbelievable arrogance. If I were to think the above, you would not be included in that small percent.

This woman believes any discourse with you to be beneath her and a waste of time.

Perdita
 
Dear Goldie Munro....

Yes indeed, we are here together, as nature, not God, intended.

And evolution...a process of insuring the survival of the fittest, has seen fit to provide one with a penis and one with a vagina, of which I thoroughly approve.

Fortunately, father nature also saw to it that the genders have more differences than just gentitalia and he saw that, that was good, albeit contentious.

I do not and never have, demeaned the fair sex. I do not lord it over them that I am larger and stronger and better suited to chase and kill and skin a critter for the campfire.

I do, however, maintain, that the two sexes have such differences between them as to be nearly incomprehensible to each other in any area save procreation.

As with any appendage we have, the use of that appendage improves with use but degenerates through non use.

It was the nature of man and woman, to develope and specialize in different areas of endeavor. Nature provided that we compliment each other, rather than compete with each other.

The rabid women's libbers of the 60's are still hanging around, insisting on complete equality and it has become a little silly.

There are ample sources to learn of the physiological and psychological and the 'mental' differences between man and woman.

Or did you think I just made it all up?

amicus...
 
Ooops!!! wrong thread, sorry... I'm a bit dyslexic, I thought this was for Dog lovers.
 
amicus said:
Dear Goldie Munro....

Yes indeed, we are here together, as nature, not God, intended.

And evolution...a process of insuring the survival of the fittest, has seen fit to provide one with a penis and one with a vagina, of which I thoroughly approve.

Fortunately, father nature also saw to it that the genders have more differences than just gentitalia and he saw that, that was good, albeit contentious.

I do not and never have, demeaned the fair sex. I do not lord it over them that I am larger and stronger and better suited to chase and kill and skin a critter for the campfire.

I do, however, maintain, that the two sexes have such differences between them as to be nearly incomprehensible to each other in any area save procreation.

As with any appendage we have, the use of that appendage improves with use but degenerates through non use.

It was the nature of man and woman, to develope and specialize in different areas of endeavor. Nature provided that we compliment each other, rather than compete with each other.

The rabid women's libbers of the 60's are still hanging around, insisting on complete equality and it has become a little silly.

There are ample sources to learn of the physiological and psychological and the 'mental' differences between man and woman.

Or did you think I just made it all up?

amicus...

Men and women are differernt biolgically but intellectually they are they same - always have been always will be
 
We have trouble getting our minds around the idea of no beginning. Our whole lives we see things begin and end. It becomes such a part of us that we have trouble thinking otherwise, much like trying to think in four dimensions when we never see but three.

Our thinking is reinforced by our being taught that everything must have a beginning. We seem to have less trouble accepting the notion that something can never end, such as a soul lasting forever and light waves steadily diminishing but never ending.

Accepting that something could never end means accepting the concept of infinity. Once you accept infinity, you are accepting the concept of no beginning as well as no end. There is no half way to infinity, you are just somewhere along the road to never ending and therefore, when you look back the other way, there is no beginning, you are just somewhere along the way in the other direction as well.

Once we can conceptualize that there is not necessarily a beginning or an end, then the notion that everything "had" to have a creator goes out the window and it is easier to accept that there may not be a God.


Ed
 
amicus said:
Dear Goldie Munro....

Yes indeed, we are here together, as nature, not God, intended

amicus...

Thought you didnt believe in God? Yes in nature we have our own biology but we also have natures own given intelligence
 
Goldie Munro said:
cant stand dogs myself - horrible slobbery creatures!


:eek: I say that's a bit strong, all God's creatures you know.:devil:
 
Edward Teach...


"Once we can conceptualize that there is not necessarily a beginning or an end, then the notion that everything "had" to have a creator goes out the window and it is easier to accept that there may not be a God.


Thank you...interesting comments...also rather fits in with physics, in that matter can never be destroyed. Curious...


amicus...
 
Goldie Munro said:
Yeah so in my world there would be no dogs - YEAH!

Umm... Ok... how do you feel about cats:)


Hold on I'll cover Monty's ears before you reply in case
 
pop_54 said:
Umm... Ok... how do you feel about cats:)


Hold on I'll cover Monty's ears before you reply in case


Awww wee sweet cuddly things - ahem yeah I like cats...
 
Goldie Munro said:
Awww wee sweet cuddly things - ahem yeah I like cats...

Thank goodness, he was getting restless with his ears covered like that. I think I'm off to bed and hand poor Amicus the thread back from the hi-jackers.

Oh and by the way, Amicus & Goldie, I don't believe in God either, the idea of a supreme being unseen yet ever present above us is about as far fetched as man having landed on the moon... oops!! Now there's another thread hi-jack on the way.

Although I am a good clean religious guy, pass me another choir boy, this one's split.
 
Back
Top