Man is both innately good and evil. It is our job to figure out which nature to embrace. So the statements all people are good and all people are corrupted are both true.
All of us do. IQ isn't a static number, it fluctuates throughout one's lifetime. The very idea of IQ was invented as a way to gauge how much children were benefitting from school.
Things like learning/practicing skills and studying can literally increase your IQ. While things like TV, social media and CNN can literally decrease it.
Your IQ can only vary by about 5 points up or down in one's lifetime. If you have other info, sauce me, because I am about 90%+ sure of what I am talking about. IQ tests are not skill assesments, they are about your ability to puzzle things out, use creative reasoning, and innate logic and intellect.
The original and official IQ tests are designed for any age to be able to gauge the intellect regardless of its stage of development.
Many of the "IQ" quizzes and tests that you find online nowadays are not actually IQ tests. A real IQ test measured with a proper test will give you a result that throughout your life rarely changes more than +/- 3 points.
They have shown that IQ can be affected by your surrounding peers, but only to an extent. You get what God gave you.
Any IQ test that tests your recall of facts or tests your skills is not a real IQ test. A real IQ test consists entirely of puzzles where you don't have to have any intellectual rote knowledge to correctly solve the puzzles. For instance, I took mine when I was 5, and I remember a picture of a shirt with diagonal stripes, and the question was "if you turn the shirt inside out which way do the stripes go?" Another big one is number sequences or shape sequences, where you solve for the next in the sequence. You dont have to know who was president in 1974 or word is to word as word is to word problems, or adding fractions or any of that shit. Precisely so they are NOT testing study skills and rote knowledge.
Your original statement depends greatly on the test taker's age - the younger you are, the more you will fluctuate up or down, since you're still developing.
But my main point, and the thing I think you're dismissing, is that yes, your IQ will change throughout your lifetime. 5 points up or down might not seem like much to you, but considering that it's normalized for the average score to equal 100, a fluctuation of 5 full points (sometimes more) is a big deal.
Edit: The reason I feel it's so significant, is because it charges us with the responsibility to cultivate our own minds. If you don't take care of yourself, that baby's going down.
not true about the age part. I was part of a university research program that administered the tests, and they say when they give them to you that your score is not likely to change much at all throughout your life, regardless of the age you take it at. That's the whole point of IQ tests working. That you can test anyone at any age with any knowledge set and the resulting score is ACCURATE. If it wasn't accurate, the test would be for shit and the number meaningless.
To create a whole 5 point change in IQ would take a lifetime of rigorous attention and focus, if it can be done at all. I suppose a half a standard deviation's worth of IQ points might be worth the struggle for some, but its not much of a budgeable aspect of the self.
I think its good to practice good mental hygiene and stay sharp and informed, but IQ doesnt seem to me like something to be obsessed over precisely because theres not much you can do to change it.
This sounds more accurate, but I really have no idea and haven't looked into it much. I can say, however, that I've been administered an IQ test 3 times in my life (age 12, age 18, and age 26) and my scores were always very similar. My lowest score was 7 points below my highest
It is more likely that one of your tests was inaccurate than it is that your IQ actually changed by 7 points... that is such a large variance, that it points to the test and not the person who took it.
Not to say that it could not have happened but statistically the chances of that are incredibly low... When in doubt just nix your lowest score and claim your highest ;)
ha, I'm more than ok with that. I attributed it to my age. While I know age doesn't make a difference, I did also have a lot more issues with attention/focus when I was younger, so just assumed that was what contributed to a lower score. My last two were both much closer together, hitting 139 and 142 (and 135 with my first, when I was young).
Out of curiosity, since you seem to know a lot more about this than I do: what would make an IQ test inaccurate? If they are professionally administered, shouldn't they all essentially be the same test (just swapping out variables in the same questions or something to ensure you don't take the same test over and over?)
yes, if they were professionally administered they should all be accurate, and that would make you one heck of an anomaly!
There are other factors that can affect your test, like if you had an emotional trauma or were extremely sick that day or whatever. I'd go with my top two, if they were all 100% legit tests. The reason for that is that there are reasons why you may test out low (divorce and death and stuff), but there isnt any reason why on one particular test you would test out high on accident. If it were me, I'd say it's "around 140" and be done with it.
Besides, as someone who tests in the top one percentile, you know like I do that the higher you get on the scale, the less discernable difference there is in your ability to perform and relate. I find that people with an IQ of over maybe 125-130, there's rarely a whole lot of PRACTICAL difference. Functionally theres a pretty big diff between 100 and 120, but way less-so if youre comparing someone with a 140 to someone with a 160. Smart is smart.
Congrats on your score BTW, not too shabby my fren.
ow man... have you noticed how the people that never had an interest in Science, completely suck at maths, are the most crazy about fixing "Climate Change", I know many Engineers and people with a Science background that have seriously looked at climate change are like "What the fuck, those climate models suck ass, they basically input the warming into them, how is this even called science. Fucking yet another governmental institution IPCC screwing things up".
You can create a super high iq 4 your year old by teaching then to read and basic math. That kid would crush other 4 year olds. But the older kids get the more difficult it becomes to give a child an edge with teaching techniques. When the brain fully developes at age 24 any previous edges from teaching techniques or living situations get wiped out completely.
The uncomfortable truth is the most significant factor in what someone's IQ will be are the IQs of their parents.
"The uncomfortable truth is the most significant factor in what someone's IQ will be are the IQs of their parents."
This. This is part of the thesis of Charles Murray and Richard Herrnstein's book 'The Bell Curve.' The other part is summed up by smart people marry and have children with other smart people, average people marry and procreate with other average people, likewise those on the left side of the curve. Not sure how this came to be known as a 'racist' theory. I am familiar with the town Murray grew up in; there is no doubt he observed this in his pre-college days. Funny thing, you can not get most of his works, especially 'The Bell Curve' from his hometown library.
Innate IQ doesn't change, but applied IQ can. Some of the smartest people I've met have been complete dipshits who harness only the tiniest kernel of what they could use. Other times, I meet people who have very low limits, but who constantly stay as high as they can fly through effort and vigilance.
Like, Steven Hawking could have just rode his ass through life cheating at gambling and been a stupid asshole.
I've gone through similar phases, but I still can't accept the idea that god, as religion defines, exists. However I have fully accepted that god, as christianity defines at least, is not only good for civilization, but necessary for a safe development of the human race. But I just don't think any of it as explained in religious text is true. I wish I could though, religion provides so many benefits, from structure to community to mental health. Like I see it all, but, I dunno.
One thing I know to be true though, a universe doesn't just exist out of nowhere.
“One thing I know to be true though, a universe doesn't just exist out of nowhere.”
That’s a good start! Grasping the concept, nature etc of God is impossible for us to do fully. Just as the concepts of infinity in the future or infinity of the past are impossible to understand.
We will never fully comprehend God, but we can still see His existence every day around us.
Even some the greatest saints had major doubts all the time. That’s good - means you’re actively questioning & learning.
A big hiccup I've had lately is the hands-on God versus the creator who set it in motion and took a hands off approach. It just seems logical to me that it was created but I have a hard time with complete control. Not saying it's beyond the power, obviously it wouldn't be. I guess I'm not really sure why I'm stuck on this.
But if I were to fully believe in a creator who set it in motion and left it alone, that would make me a sinner going to hell.
"But if I were to fully believe in a creator who set it in motion and left it alone, that would make me a sinner going to hell."
Who says that would make you a sinner going to hell?
I think God does not have complete control because God allows for us to have our free will. We are fully allowed to succeed or fail, of our own agency and decisions.
I'm not a Christian, but I'm almost certain that believing that God isn't nit-picking through everyone's lives isn't a mortal sin in any denomination. They actually have a list of what sins qualify as hell-worthy, and it's pretty short and clear.
It really only brings up an issue with Christ specifically, because in Christian thought that was God himself showing up to nit-pick through everyone's life.
Basically, it puts you with the modalists and deists and groups like that: generally classed as heretics by mainstream Christianity (especially Catholicism) but all-in-all not really a "going to hell" sin.
God becomes much easier to understand when you realize that most people trying to explain God to you are just giving you their best educated guess. You can see that Christianity is good for the world because it is true, despite there being a whole lot of fake Christian's giving us a bad name. If you have been on this board long enough you damn sure know that radical, spiritual evil exists. That puts you ahead of most people.
Other than that, seek God and he will find you. Look for books on what Christian's and Hebrews believed around the time of Christ. Some of the teachings were different and offer interesting perspective that can help. Other than that enjoy the journey. Seeking God and your place in creation is the great adventure that we all share.
A lot of religious text is setting standards for human decency, especially in the Old Testament. Take Noah's flood for example.
God could have literally flooded the world, but it is difficult to scientifically explain the entire planet under water. I don't know if he did, or if there was just a significant flood for a region that someone with no perspective of "the world" beyond their sight couldn't comprehend the situation.
Instead, if the story is taken more figuratively, it demonstrates the rewards for being faithful and the punishment for those who mock the faithful.
The eyewitness accounts of Jesus' actions are not figurative. Those parts of the Bible contain a lot of wisdom for living, just like the lessons in the Old Testament.
The Flood is quite fascinating from a literal perspective. I'm no expert, but one of the more interesting historical backings of the flood is the fact that many many early civilizations have a great flood in their histories. Additionally, Christian scientists speculate that not only was the Earth covered in water, the immense force of the water literally cracked the crust of the Earth and created the tectonic plates. The lifespan of humans also diminished rapidly post-flood, leading them to believe that the pre-flood atmosphere contributed to the centuries long lives biblical figures had.
There's some arguments about fossilized trees found standing up straight, and how they couldn't have occurred slowly over hundreds or thousands of years, whatever "the science" claims.
All I know is that the idea the universe started from a dot is beyond stupid.
Edit- the point of the fossilized trees is that they probably had to be covered very suddenly, like perhaps a big flood.
Same I actually came back to Christ recently after finding an amazing woman going through the same journey I am. We were Christians and stopped going because we thought we found answers that transcended the bible through science.
We now do devotionals every day, watch streaming Sunday service, and have Him as the cornerstone of our relationship. We like to think that God brought us together so that we could come back under his wing.
"Once you take a sip of science you lose God, when you reach the end of the glass you find him again"
The way I see it, there are only 2 types of leftists: the ones who know nothing but just follow the loudest voices on tv, and the few ones who really do understand the policies and are pretty evil.
Have a red pill: Islam is religious socialism. Think about it. The hold the same ideals; conquer, subjugation, lies (to infidels), infiltration, subversion....
Pedophilia (Aisha, 9 yo).... These similarities are not accidents.
Atheists will seethe at this and truthfully I went through this phase as a teenager. Muh how can the bible be true if evolution is true. Muh nukes wouldn't work if the world wasn't millions of years old.
The thing is, God is above logic. We're all smoothbrains to Him. Do you really think the creator of the fucking universe is not capable of manipulating the flow of time? Really?
There’s two types of atheist. The type that just doesn’t believe in any religion and leaves it at that. Then there’s the type that has to shove it down your throat as snuggly as possible that they don’t believe in any religion.
Atheist pede here, definitely disagree with the post and your comment but not "seething" about it, nobody should be "seething" over a meme lol. People can peacefully disagree.
Atheist as well- this meme makes me laugh because I do disagree with it, but am perfectly willing to let people believe whatever they like if it improves their lives at no one elses expense.
People can peacefully disagree.... But why would we want to? Die Heretic! :P .
I consider myself very devout in my faith. I also believe that most atheists are either too intellectually lazy to attempt to understand theological doctrine or they have done the intellectual legwork but are too emotionally invested in their atheism for them to admit the validity of thousands of years of theological thought from great thinkers like Pascal, Aquinas, and Descartes. BUT I don't think that you guys are stupid. Misled perhaps. But far from stupid. You ask good questions that need to be asked. I just wish that we could have a discussion without either side attempting to use rhetorical slight of hand in order to belittle and berate the other side.
Let me throw in my two cents here. I was raised by democrats who say they're "athiest/agnostic" and of course I fell into the same line of thinking respectively growing up. I also do not judge every athiest the same. Some are anarchists, some just spent an hour thinking about it and made up their mind in a way they believe. That's how it was for me. Very smart individuals as we can see by how many fellow atheist and agnostic pedes we have. A lot of atheists are brainwashed leftists of course. I personally believe I was saved and if you asked me if I believed in a god existing in some kind of form or fashion 4 years ago I probably would have laughed at you lol. I dont assume atheists are stupid but I do assume they think differently than me on those issues. I have my own opinions on whether they are right or wrong considering I was a pretty full blown athiest/agnostic type myself. That doesnt mean you're not allowed to freely think imo. You're allowed to be an athiest but I will accept them back when they are done with their demo trip to hell.
The main problem I see is when I was an athiest, I turned into a socialist among other things. It seems to me when people remove god they just replace it with something else and it seems to always be worse for some reason. I frankly enjoyed talking to people who believed in god when I was an athiest and in equally as interested today to have those conversations from the other side.
The thing that turned me away from atheism was when I first started to realise that the Democrats were lying to me with many republicans as well. I decided to figure out how much they were lying about and it turned out nearly everything I suspected was a lie so I asked myself "well is there anything they haven't lied about?" Which lead me to thinking about the bible because I had never even opened one to read it before that moment. I grew up thinking it was just some religious fairytale book. So rather than just reading the book with all my judgments I instead spent some time thinking about what mindset I should have been in when I first read it. I decided to go in as open minded as possible and judge it for exactly what the book is. No more, no less. Big surprise to me, it had a better recount of history than any history class or historian I've ever seen. That was interesting to me. I'm not the best reader of complex deep books and I normally never read books at all. Yet I spent months making little progress every few days or weeks just reading a little bit every time to actually understand what it was saying rather than just reading through it fast. I seriously read the beggining of genesis maybe 7 times before I even moved forward. It's now my favorite book.
I love all my athiest pedes and I have one thing I would like to say. I'm not going to try to convince you away from what you believe in. As a previous full blown athiest agnostic type I understand where you're coming from. All I want to to is encourage you to read the bible even if you dont believe it yet because it's quite the book just historically. I personally think it's worth orders of MAGNITUDE more than something like the mona lisa yet you can go buy one off the internet or download an app for free to read it.
I could put all the details in about how I was saved and people would agree and disagree that it was the work of god but that's a whole other story for a different comment. If I'm ever in an argument with any of you athiest pedes just know I love you 😂 just know I dont want to tell you how to think. I just want to help as many people to know how to use their god given free will to think for themselves. ❤ it's great to see these posts where atheists and religious people are talking about how shit the radical communist left is getting. They are trying to decide us and it's not working lol. We're all one big family and its great
Definitely agree with you here. Someone I like to listen to always says 'We don't always serve God, but we all serve someone', and I think I know what he means. We can disagree and debate about important theological questions. I welcome that. But we do need to lock arms as brothers and sisters when the deceiver comes knocking. I think that's what the Lord teaches us; love your neighbor and do not judge him, because he too is a child of God.
I’m an atheist for one reason...I believe I’m best served to have the most accurate view of reality possible.
The process to achieve this accuracy is to only accept propositions that can be demonstrated through evidence.
The greater the scope of the proposition, the greater amount/reliability of evidence is required to prove the claim.
If someone were to propose Bigfoot is real, I would require evidence sufficient to support the claim.
If someone were to propose a god with certain attributes exists, I would require sufficient evidence to support the claim.
I don’t believe most of you are any different EXCEPT in the acceptance of the Christian god.
If I were to ask Christians why they do not believe in Scientology, many would require the same level of evidence to prove the claims of Scientology as I require from Christianity...in both cases that evidence does not exist. If evidence sufficient to prove the claims of Christianity existed, it would not be a “faith”.
There was many reasons back then why I would say I was an athiest. To me back then it was the best logical reasoning I could come to at the time. That along with the family and circle of friends I was around. I for sure 110% believed atheism was right growing up even until the end of high school about 3 years ago maybe. Convincing me to be an athiest was easy. Convincing me to believe in God was extremely unlikely. So unlikely that the fact I turned into a believer still seems pretty wild to me. I wouldnt say I was convinced to be an athiest as much as I was raised and lived around people so much to a point it seemed obvious that being was seemed "right" even if my town I grew up in had more believers than not, I was still around the nonbelievers most of the time I was out of the house and none of my family believed at home.
We sound very similar but I'd say a good difference between you and me is that you say it helps you get a good view of reality and I believe viewing reality through a sense of atheism gives you a bias view of reality as I dont think you should nessessarily view reality as a "Christian" either. To me reality is reality and no matter what word fits me better be it athiest, agnostic, christian, capitalist, whatever words I've said describe me over time. Reality is reality and if I look at reality though a word like atheism or Christian then I get a bias view of reality which is just reality. You should view reality just as it is imo for the best results at seeing reality accurately. The universe probably doesnt care if you're athiest or christian you know?
There was a point one time only maybe 2 or so years ago where I really sat down and thought. I thought about atheism. I didnt even really know what a real Christian was. I didnt know so many Christians werent real Christians or any of that stuff. I thought about how the big bang doesnt disprove if god exists or not although thats what I was explained by all the atheists I was friends with and educated by growing up.
I have a hard time for some reason following along with complex books eventhough I'm a really good reader I'd say imo. It wasnt until I started thinking about how the year we keep track of time with starts when jesus walked the earth. I figured, something absolutely crazy must have happened surrounding jesus, the circumstances of world events and people who knew him for me not to have been taught about jesus in school just off a historical point of view. The fact we all follow a year following certain events that isnt taught in school is a BIG clue that there is more than meets the eye concerning the events with jesus. Not even including if god exists or not. So I went on to learn about jesus and that was the first time I actually got to see what a real Christian was and the results of such a real Christians actions. I do not follow the teachings of "Christians." I really enjoy the teachings of jesus who I believe was the best Christian that's existed. That doesnt prove god exists but that's also not what got me to believe god exists either. I convinced myself a god existed with an entirely different situation, opinion and point of view at the world individual to me. Sadly itll probably take me 10 hours fo describe the events that happened that actually lead me to be a believer. Including me being saved. I dont really talk about that because it's a long story and it's kinda weird to talk to people about stuff you might not nessessarily want to talk about. In totally comfortable talking about it if I'm given the time to accurately explain what I believe and why.
I'm not a regular Christian I'd say compared to many of the Christians I see in churches today. Most people I believe dont fully understand what it means to be a real Christian. I'm not the type of guy to use christianity to try to disprove science but rather I like to use science to prove how I became a believer. Or I like to show how me actually being a believer doesnt actually break any of the laws of science as we know them. Of course, that in itself is also another 3 hour long conversation we could go into. One day maybe I'll start a youtube or write a book explaining what I've experienced. Maybe that'll help people understand how my head works lol. To put how I became a believer simply, it was a happening of events so unlikely that I'd probably have a better chance at winning the lottery twice in a row than to experience what I experienced in my honest opinion as far as I know. It happened when I was at my most vulnerable. Depressed and helpless. When I was an athiest more than I ever was.
Another thing I tell people that is interesting to me is they cant prove if god does or doesnt exist as you understand because you greatly described the situation surrounding how it's all "faith" but we know for sure that at the center of where the big bang happened the laws of physicists seem to break down themselves. So we know for a fact that the laws of physics dont apply equally across the entire universe If we know one specific place where some other "set of rules" completely different and nothing like our own seem to apply to a point we probably wont, or ever be able to figure out exactly what seems to be happening. A lot of my fear for god came from me not knowing god existed, but suddenly experiencing and witnessing actual battles between good and evil. The way I tell nonreligious people to think about it is to think about god as an archetype for good and satan is the archetype of evil. If you only have good, that is the embodiment of god, and if you only have evil, that is the embodiment of the devil. I know for a fact evil exists, and so that means good must exist as well and they must be opposing but equal forces. I had learned just how whicked and actually soulcrushingly horrifying evil was, which to me was a clear sign that if evil is that bad, then whatever is at the far end of what is good, must be really really good. so it was easy to chose to follow god even if it means being treated like an idiot or like I'm stupid by everyone who follows satan and dont even know it. Or do know it and joke about being a satanist just to try to feel better than the "believers"
I would encourage you even if your a nonbeliever to download the bible app and read some of the beggining of genesis, the first book of the bible. Read it like it matters and try to understand what it says even if it takes you 10 tries to understand it. Genesis has such a good explanation of good and evil with this magical tree of life. It's not going to convince you god exists nessessarily but it's kind of this fairytale feeling lesson on the battle between good and evil that I was searching for forever when I was an athiest. It was right there smack at the front of the bible the entire time and I didnt know it because I never picked up a bible to read it until just about 2 years ago. It describes this tree as "the tree of life of good and evil" it's this amazing metaphorical writing written god only knows exactly how long ago about how if you climb the tree of life and grab onto the evil apples, you'll probably fall out of the tree and lose all your progress if your even lucky enough to survive. And evil makes those apples sooooooooooooo hard not to grab onto and take a bite out of. That's not what it says directly but that's what I believe the tree segment of genesis to be referring to. The battle of good and evil. Absolutely amazing writing and absolutely hate reading books 😂
And if they were writing these things way way way way before any kinds of civilization like weve built today, then the people of the past were a lot smarter than people give them credit for in my humble opinion. I love that book so much 😂
I actually started reading the quaran before read the bible. Two very interesting books to read side by side. It's clear to me which book Is good and which one is evil. Only in the usa are you probably allowed to read both side by side. Thank God. Would suck to live somewhere where you only had access to the quaran but not the bible.
I'm only 21 and I've been friends with atheists, anarchists, believers and nonbelievers of all kinds already so I'm happy to be friends and talk to all of the people I can. I just want people to think as freely as they can and it's become clear to me over the years that most athiests and most Christians even dont nessessarily think freely eventhough they might believe that they are although if seems we have a big population of those kinds of folks right here on thedonald which is good for us all imo.
Anyway your comment was just such a great comment I got a little carried away. I hope me expanding on my situation and beliefs helps clarify anything for you. Dont think I'm just some crazy religious nut. In some ways I am in ways I wasnt only a couple years but I think that's more because seeing man in a fallen state kills me a little inside more than I'd like to admit sometimes. Great comment though for real. I used to be this regular visitor to r/atheism on reddit lol. Weird how things turn out.
I would like to ask you just this. You say you're an athiest for one reason and that's to because you believe it helps you get a more accurate view on reality. I'm going to assume maybe when you first found atheism it actually did seem accurate. If you found out there were other perspectives to get a more accurate view on reality, would you still be an athiest? I say this for the same reason I'm not a feminist. I simply do not believe I have to identify as a feminist to actually really care about the wellbeing of a women. The difference between me and many other Christians like maybe a lot of the Christians here on td.win is that we dont want to force you to deny what you believe and submit to god eventhough we are more than willing to ourselves considering our knowledge of good and evil, we simply want to make sure that you're thinking about what you believe in and not actually believing in anything that you might want to rethink and consider. For example myself, I left atheism before I found God, it wasn't god that got me to leave atheism, it was the abundant evil. As soon as I was all alone and a cast away for not being apart of the tribe of the left, I had time to think about the circumstances around my life that lead me to not being an athiest, and that was the very very very beginning of me being able to consider that just maybe a god in some form or fashion might exist out there considering the probability of what happened to me was greater than any lottery I've ever seen.
Anyway. Farewell and safe travels. Keep on doubting everything and you'll do just fine in my opinion. Remember. Real actual fear of God is the beggining of wisdom they say and from my experience it's pretty accurate. Dont let the devil get you down. That's what he wants. If you fear god and not satan, you're on the right path. Of course your a non believer like I was so that part might not matter to you but if you believe in good and evil the concept is the same. Dont let the bad things get you down. The good things more than make up for it. Every day is a gift. You could die tomorrow. Dont forget that either.
Edit: I'm going to add that I'm not going to explain the time period, situations and happenings surrounding jesus because that's a whole adventure for everyone to go through on their own if they want. Truely facisnating stuff. It would be better if anyone reading this is curious to go look into yourself rather than have me tell you. You won't regret it. So much history untold in the schools. Dont forget rome fell right before they staked up jesus and jesus said it would fall and instead of blaming the people for killing them he looked to the sky and said something along the lines of "forgive them father, for they do not know what they are doing" absolutely wild that he said that at a massive turning point in the history of man
you greatly described the situation surrounding how it's all "faith" but we know for sure that at the center of where the big bang happened the laws of physicists seem to break down themselves.
I’m not going to agree to this but for the sake of this one discussion...
If this were true and it proved there is a supernatural power, why would you think it’s the Christian god and not one of the 100,000+ other gods man has invented? What evidence would you base that choice on?
You should understand that’s it’s human nature to need an explanation to the unexplained. The most recent example of this phenomenon is the JohnFrum religion and other cargo cults.
The most difficult answer for humans to unsolved phenomena is the accurate answer “we don’t yet know”. Unfortunately the default answer throughout human history is “a god did it” until we discover the correct answer.
I would say that I never said god was a christian. I believe god is god just like reality is reality.
Just like how I believe a lot of Christian's are liars even if they dont think they are.
I also dont believe the laws of physics breaking down at the big bang is proof god exists either. I'm just saying it's not proof god doesnt exist as well. It is proof that the laws of physics dont work equally across 100% of the universe and if it doesnt follow the laws of physics itself then there has to be something interesting happening the likes of which is above our understanding. That doesnt prove god exists but it is also very God-like nonetheless. Evidence that something bigger than physics is happening that is.
I'm also open to the idea that just because it goes against the laws of physics doesnt nessessarily mean the laws of physics could just be unknown and apply differently at the center of the big bang. Maybe it does follow the laws of physics and we just dont have the tools to make it concrete science yet. That being said, if something like the ingredients to the universe being required to trigger a big bang then how did those things come into existence?
The problem for me is that no matter where we draw the line, before during or after the big bang, none of that proves whether a god does or doesnt exist. So to me, athiests are equally if not actually more religious than Christian's. That's of course just my opinion as an ex athiest agnostic type, turned to god in the last couple years. I hope that helps your question. Good question btw.
This YouTube link is an hour long video breaking down the history of quantum physics from the past to today and towards the end it talks about what we believe to know as the ingredients to the universe that can be used to create everything as we know it in the visible universe. If a god existed and wanted to summon a universe into existence, the very very end of that video right there would probably be the handful of ingredients nessessary to pop a whole universe into existence. Very interesting stuff. God existing or not imo. Figuratively speaking if you were a god in charge of creating a universe, you really wouldn't need much to do it, and youd probably be able to do it fairly quickly and easily tbh. The bible makes it more of a fairytale "he created the oceans and the sun and the cows and the birds" I myself dont believe he popped a bird into existence. I believe he put the simple ingredients to a universe in place that allows for life to prosper, thus through nature and the universe evolving as we know it, life comes and goes. At least that's my opinion right now at this very moment. Tomorrow It could be different. I'm always changing my mind. Constantly. Many things change, many things downt. Doesnt really seem up to me but kinda seems more up to God in a way. Sometimes I change my mind on things I never expect. Sometimes you cant be friends with the people you want. You cant control reality, reality controls you.
You say you're an athiest for one reason and that's to because you believe it helps you get a more accurate view on reality.
I did not say that...
I said, I believe I’m better served with an accurate view of reality. I require evidence to ensure the accuracy of claims presented.
I do not have a belief in a god (atheist) because sufficient evidence has not been presented to support the accuracy of the claim a god exists.
My point here is that you're not actually doing what you just said. If you require evidence to believe god exists then you should require evidence to prove god doesnt exist to justify being an athiest rather than hypocritically not believing in god and then using the same thing you just said you cant do to suddenly become an athiest with no evidence god doesnt exist. See what I'm trying to say here? You're doing the same thing you say your not doing, one sentence after saying you cant do just that.
That's my point. You say you "believe" it gives you a more accurate view on reality but what if I told you what you believed was wrong? Just because you believe something doesnt mean you're right nessessarily. Myself included. If you needed evidence to prove god existed then you should have evidence to prove he doesnt in order to justify being an athiest. So by your own standards you shouldnt be an athiest or a believer. Yet you do not follow your own standards in the very same comment were you proclaim needing evidence.
If you have to put a word front of what you believe in order to better see reality, you are not seeing reality. You are seeing your own reality which is not what reality actually is. Reality is reality. If you used your own standards you just explained, you wouldnt be an athiest or a believer. Instead you need evidence to prove God exists but you ignore and dont seem to want evidence to justify being an athiest other than the seeming lack of evidence of god existing.
I just dont understand why a lack of evidence is enough for you to ignore your own standards. You do not believe in god but do not be fooled you are still a believer, just not in god. You are equally as religious as me. You are equally as religious as me because your own standards for being an athiest are based on the same faith that mind are for being a believer In God.
I want to be clear I'm not arguing here. You're bringing up great points. I'm just trying to get you to see what I'm seeing as the problem in your argument is exactly what drove me to not being an athiest anymore. If you need evidence that god exists to believe in god then you should have evidence proving he doesnt exist in order to be an athiest. That's not what you're doing though. What you're doing is hypocritical. I'm not being mean when I say that just so you know so you can fix it and have a better point of view you can work with in your argument knowledge. Great comment though. I appreciate your conversation ❤
If someone who believes in god needs to have evidence to convince you he exists then how come athiests dont have any real evidence God doesnt exist?
Atheists are as religious if not more religious than people who believe in god if that's the hypocritical standard they are using.
It's like me saying "I drive trucks because all the people I see driving sports cars cant explain to me how they're better" it's just a bad argument when you could say "trucks are better because x example" when you should just be driving whichever one works for you rather than making decisions because it's not the decision the people you disagree with made. Just because you think someone else is wrong doesnt mean you're right. That's why I ask athiests for evidence god doesnt exist. None of them have ever given me any proof. Meaning they are equally as religious as I am.
Amazing question by the way. I'm glad you asked me that. You ask good questions
Great comment! Every human being is an individual, so it always amazes me why everyone wants/needs to belong to some group. I guess the group behavior is so deeply engraved in us.
And to me personally, God is a spiritual energy that I can access thru meditation. Most people don't call it God, but that doesn't mean it's not the same essence/energy/entity.
Jordan peterson has an interesting explanation of god youd probably enjoy listening to. He says it's hard for him to talk about whether he believes god exists because it's hard to even tell if two separate people are thinking about god in the same way. Interesting point of view imo
Plus, can we really blame the atheists? Have you seen some of the people on television pretending to be Christian leaders? Reading their books and never coming across Aquinas would really twist a person up.
I think you're getting at an interesting point here. We can debate about 'purpose' and what what means, but I doubt I'll get anywhere like that. Instead, let me ask you a sincere question that I'm curious about.
On a practical level, do you think that atheists are more vulnerable to cults and extremist indoctrination than Christians? After all, if you are fully free to make your own purpose, then any choice you make is just as correct and valid as anyone else's choice. If not, then you're being inconsistent. For example, if a fellow atheist decides that the 'purpose' they want to make in their life is to - for example - become a terrorist and murder innocents until they achieve their political objectives. Or become a drug addict. Or become a gold digger. Then do you claim to have any moral authority to say that their choice was the wrong one? If you do, then what moral authority can you claim that they can not also claim? If not, then doesn't that imply that atheism is an evolutionary dead end (e.g. atheists will simply slowly self destruct over many generations until all that remain are people who are naturally inclined to be spiritual)?
Of course, none of this is a theological argument or affirms the validity of my own beliefs. But I am still curious to hear your answer.
No, because a Christian can likewise be convinced that God wants them to be a terrorist, as has happened in the past, including on a large scale in the case of religious wars. Actually the opposite is probably true as you can convince a good person to do bad things by convincing them that “God wills it” and bad people will do bad things regardless, religion or lack thereof does not stop them. There are plenty of Christian murderers and rapists, the BTK killer was caught because he used his Church PC to write his digital letter to the press. Bad people will do bad things. That said, atheists that did not reach their position themselves and were just raised or peer pressured into it are more vulnerable to political quasi-religions like socialism.
As to your point about an absolute moral authority, that is a very complex question with a complex answer, but the short answer is that a legal system can exist outside of religious rules and be based on personal rights and the limitation of the ability to infringe on the rights of others which is necessary for a functioning society. An abstract absolute moral code does not stop sociopaths anyhow, it only really works for good people that wouldn’t kill or steal or rape anyhow, just as I have somehow managed to avoid doing any of those things despite not believing in God. Finally, just because something is socially convenient does not mean that it is true. In other words, just because Christianity makes for a good and easy to follow social foundation flowing from its absolute moral code does not make it true, just useful.
By the way, I am pro-Christian in the sense that while I do not believe in God, or that Jesus resurrected or anything else supernatural, I readily admit that as most people seem to need religion, I would much rather live in a Christian nation than one driven by political religion.
"An abstract absolute moral code does not stop sociopaths anyhow, it only really works for good people that wouldn’t kill or steal or rape anyhow, just as I have somehow managed to avoid doing any of those things despite not believing in God."
You're sort of missing my point here. I'm very glad that you have decided to be a good person and not do those things. But shouldn't you have? Surely if you had stolen things then you would be wealthier. If you had done drugs and slept around you would have had more fun. If you murdered someone inconvenient then you would be better off. Sure, you might not do it because you fear the law... but what if you could get away with it? If you were Mao or Stalin or Clinton then no one would dare accuse to you. What does it even mean to be 'good' if you surrender all moral authority to say that any particular action is evil?
As for your discussion about some Christians being bad and that convenience does not imply truth - you are correct, of course. I do not challenge those assertions. I am simply making the observation that atheism as an idea is not capable of long term survival in the battle of ideas. By the way - I hope you don't interpret anything I'm saying as overly aggressive or insulting! I'm just very curious to see how the other side thinks about such things.
But I don’t want to rape or steal or kill, that’s the whole point. I respect other people’s right to their bodies and property, and I suspect most people innately do as well, as humans evolved as a social species. Those that do not largely end up in prison, segregated away from the rest of society, except for some very well connected people like Murder Gramma. To turn it around, would you rape, steal and kill but for your fear of going to hell or otherwise acting counter to God’s authority? I would hope not. Edit: also, if you became convinced that God told you to commit murder, would you? If all morality flows from God, then it is infinitely malleable, he need but change his mind or make an exception.
As to the meaning of “good” outside of an objective moral system, that’s a long answer but suffice it to say that it’s something that can be deduced from some basic principles of personal autonomy. But yes, it requires some axioms to be taken, but again, religion being “easier” as a moral foundation does not make it correct as to its supernatural claims.
I'm not really religious, but recently I started to believe in God's existence. A lot of things in my life outside of my control went right, and a lot of things went wrong before and it made me a better person. God's tough love has never been more apparent.
Seek a personal relationship with God. Not being religious will benefit you like crazy. How many churches had pastors jumping up and down every Sunday about how much they love Jesus, but shut down and abandoned their parishioners during covid? Finding a good church can be like hunting for buried treasure. Definitely look for one, but seek Christ in your home and in your life until you find that special community that will be your home.
I'm Agnostic as a very conscious choice, and my life is pretty great. Nothing bothers me, and my credo is, "Don't work or wish for someone else's detriment and things will just work out," and they always do.
Can it be credited to sidestepping a lot of controversy by saying, "I have no horse in this race"?
"And the elder said to the younger Our father is old, and there is no man left on the earth, to come in unto us after the manner of the whole earth. Come, let us make him drunk with wine, and let us lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our father. And they made their father drink wine that night: and the elder went in and lay with her father: but he perceived not neither when his daughter lay down, nor when she rose up. And the next day the elder said to the younger: Behold I lay last night with my father, let us make him drink wine also to night, and thou shalt lie with him, that we may save seed of our father. They made their father drink wine that night also, and the younger daughter went in, and lay with him: and neither then did he perceive when she lay down, nor when she rose up. So the two daughters of Lot were with child by their father." [Genesis 19:31-36]
"When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again."
Exodus 21: 7-8
"Slaves, be subject to your masters with all reverence, not only to those who are good and equitable but also to those who are perverse." (1 Peter 2:18)
"She lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses." Ezekiel 23:20
Incest, slavery, selling your daughter, and quite the description of someone's genitals and blown load size. Quite the logical book
It's like the intricate workings of a watch. If you find a watch in the middle of the forest, you don't assume it came into existence naturally. You know that someone designed and created it. Same is true for the universe.
This. Every actual physicist that I know ends up at the conclusion of intelligent design, or God.
I once had a Physics professor in college who spent a good fifteen minutes talking about how some mathematical formula did something with planets and atoms and other stuff (it was way above my head.) He said, "You can believe what you want but I look at this and think, 'This is God's doing.'"
My grandmother’s brother had degrees in mathematics and physics. He wrote several books on various subjects that are still relevant today. He worked as a scientist at Lawrence Livermore Lab and retired from there.
He was a devout Christian.
He was a fervent anti-communist.
It was my marriage and a lifetime of learning that brought me here. My wife is Christian and she introduced me to God via her actions and I wanted that, whatever it was (I had no idea what it truly meant at the time). I study mysterious things about the universe that just make more sense in a universe created by Him. Hard to put into words.
There was no "ah-ha!" moment. It was a slow realization that Jesus Christ is my Lord and Savior and that God became flesh to save us all from our sins.
I went from atheist/agnostic (most of my life), to a kind of pantheism (for a few years I guess), to Christian (past few years). When the Truth is so obvious, it finds its way into your heart.
The Holy Spirit worked hard to get me where I am today. Still feels like I am living in some weird dichotomy, but I am coming to know God more every day and I know everything good came from Him.
In the same way, you wives must accept the authority of your husbands. Then, even if some refuse to obey the Good News, your godly lives will speak to them without any words. They will be won over by observing your pure and reverent lives.
1 Peter 3:1-2
My wife and I make a great couple. We've been going through some rough times (two miscarriages this year -- the last one was very recent). Trying to focus on God and I know He is bringing me through this. I am much stronger after the first one happened, so now I can be present for my wife and lift her up. I lost my mind after the first one.
Soon, Jesus will come back and He will wipe away every tear.
I was atheist my whole life. Never went to church because my family didn't -- though we were conservative in every other sense. A few years back, thanks to my wife, I started reading the Bible and going to church.
I don't really talk to my colleagues about my faith, except a few of my friends who are also astrophysicists and also Christians. It just never comes up.
People in astrophysics generally don't care what you are, as long as you are doing interesting things and publishing lots of papers. Most of the people in the field are autistic (like me) and generally just love solving interesting problems. I had a problem in my life -- I had no hope. I had no reason for things. I wasn't nihilistic (thank God); I thought everything mattered equally (a strange problem to have).
God solves all of it and brings me joy, and I hope I do a good job representing Him.
I study black holes (excuse me, holes of color), cosmology, general relativity, gamma-ray bursts, etc. Knowing God created the universe makes these studies so much more meaningful. Otherwise, I am just a robot calculating away for no good reason other than to "advance knowledge."
Contractors feel the same way. Framing another house just to "advance the housing market" gets old after the fist 10 years. Deeper meaning is so key to fulfillment.
I'm sure growing in faith has brought you and your wife closer together as well
I grew up in faith, lost it getting a hard science degree, then found my way back with a few fits and starts.
For me I found 1. As a scientist I believed in truth and enlightenment and knowledge, and God is basically that personified. 2. My life just works better when I believe (like you said, God solves all of it)
I'm a scientist (physics/Elec. Eng.) that worked at Sandia Natl. Lab, and did my post-doc at MIT. I have met Christians everywhere, being one myself, of course. My group at MIT was also heavily Jewish, and really exceptional people.
Life and this world are complex. Their are some midwits who think they have achieved some higher level of mental capacity, that supercedes a religious capacity, but I've met some truly brilliant people over the years that were Christians, or at the very least religious.
For a fun read, check out my personal favorite super-genuis (maybe more so than even Einstein), Christian, super-anti-communist, John von Neumann.
He was not able to accept the proximity of his own demise, and the shadow of impending death instilled great fear in him.[208] He invited a Catholic priest, Father Anselm Strittmatter, O.S.B., to visit him for consultation.[18][207] Von Neumann reportedly said, "So long as there is the possibility of eternal damnation for nonbelievers it is more logical to be a believer at the end," referring to Pascal's wager. He had earlier confided to his mother, "There probably has to be a God. Many things are easier to explain if there is than if there isn't."[209][210][211] Father Strittmatter administered the last rites to him.[18] Some of von Neumann's friends (such as Abraham Pais and Oskar Morgenstern) said they had always believed him to be "completely agnostic".[210][212] Of this deathbed conversion, Morgenstern told Heims, "He was of course completely agnostic all his life, and then he suddenly turned Catholic—it doesn't agree with anything whatsoever in his attitude, outlook and thinking when he was healthy."[213] Father Strittmatter recalled that even after his conversion, von Neumann did not receive much peace or comfort from it, as he still remained terrified of death.
If someone says that religion is real, then I would say that it is only a cultural thing instead of the truth.
For the question on the existence of something which may or may not exist, it is impossible to disprove the non existence of any deity or a higher power. So, it is more logical to be agnostic rather than a believer or an atheist.
Von Neumann didn't believe in the same. It was out of fear, that he did try to use Pascal's wager to justify his belief in his final days.
Pascal's wager is too simplistic of an argument to make. Something similar on the other side would be the atheist's wager.
I don't totally disagree with you, but he was baptized into Catholicism in 1930, way before his death. Of course you could argue that it was so that he could marry Marietta.
"Prior to his marriage to Marietta, von Neumann was baptized a Catholic in 1930."
So, it would seem that there were at the very least, some Christian inclinations, in addition to Pascal's Wager. Christianity also teaches that even an 11th hour Christian is still a Christian, as well. You don't necessarily have to agree with that point, but that is the position of scripture.
So, in total, motivations aside, the guy was baptized in 1930, years before his illness, seemed to teeter on the side of Christianity, and did take a Christian stance on his deathbed. Yeah, I'll call that a Christian, but will acknowledge that it's subject to debate.
The most obvious conclusion would be that despite anecdotal evidence, this study shows that scientists are less religious in general.
A bolder claim from this would be that scientists, whom I would say are more intelligent on average, become more irreligious, because they study things more methodically, apart from religions being at odds with science.
Something interesting, which I found counterintuitive was that younger scientists are more religious than older ones. I think a probable reason for that may be because they might not have completely formed their views and may be reflective of the beliefs of their family and friends.
Another interesting thing I found is that the younger people seem to be more decisive of their views. Only 3 percent are shown to not know or didn't share.
While on the other hand, physicists are shown to be the most undecided or not their claim to not know. It isn't surprising to be honest. Their field of study does involve a lot of about matter and how things exist/how processes happen. So, it makes sense that they could claim to not know because it is a very difficult question.
Also, chemists seem to believe in gods more than most groups. I think a reason for that could be that they abstract out chemistry and keep it separate from religion. On the other hand, biologists seem to believe lesser. It is intuitive as well, because they do study about cells, organisms, the possible mechanisms about how things in organisms work.
So, while physicists and biologists believe in gods to a lesser extent, their perspectives are shaped by the questions they ask themselves. Such as the nature of life and the way matter/energy/waves exist and interact and interact. Chemists on the other hand would have a different perspective though.
I would really want to know what the percentages for psychologists and historians are.
Seemingly at odds but not necessarily. Depends on your theology. Whether God exists in the gaps of science or God exists for a higher purpose than this.
It's a shame, really, that many churches still teach evolution exclusionism. It's such weak theological grounds
We truly don’t even know so many things in our universe. Are there other universes? Is there other life? What’s at the end of the universe? I could go on and on. We can’t answer these questions, but people want to be so arrogant as to say there for sure is not a god. It’s ignorant at best. Of course these things don’t prove the existence of a god, but to be so arrogant and demeaning to others is dumb.
I'm an agnostic, and the reason is simple: for me, the data doesn't necessarily indicate divine existence. And the thing is, I get that theists look at miracles and other data points and come to the conclusion that God does exist. And even if I don't yet share that view, that doesn't invalidate their interptetation of the data points.. Actually, stick a pin in that one, maybe it's the fact that I can acknowledge I might be wrong? Considering how much millennial atheist culture is about rejecting any version of reality other than your own, extending beyond the question of divinity and going into politics, economics, etc., suddenly their fervency makes a whole lot more sense. Huh.
But it is the pinnacle of arrogance and stupidity to be a gnostic atheist. We can not possibly execute the breadth and depth of experimentation to disprove God's existence. To do so, you would have to, yourself, be omniscient and omnipresent.
If you answer anything about their than “yes” to the question “do you believe in god”, you’re an atheist. You can identify however you want but I don’t think there’s a justification for casting aspersions.
Nnnope, I disagree. I'm not "casting aspersions", at least not without a clean conscience.
The factual existence of God or not is independent of my recognition of the fact. If a child doesn't know nuclear fusion, that doesn't make the sun suddenly stop shining because his belief is what generates its existence.
Gnosticism/Agnosticism (the state of knowing/not knowing) is a binary state much like Theism/Atheism (the state of having belief in the existence of God/non-existence of God). You, presumably, are a gnostic theist, as are most adherents to a faith system, as it is the teachings of your religion that prove the point to you. You can also be an agnostic theist, having a general belief that there's some sort of higher power than humanity but lacking any sort of evidence for it, or feeling that current explanations or systems fail to capture the reality.
A gnostic atheist, i.e. a person who says there's "proof there's no god", is suggesting they have an infinite data set to prove their conclusion. By virtue of how tiny we are in the universe, this is literally impossible.
You opened up by saying atheism is dumb. Then you later acknowledge that atheism in general is distinct from gnostic atheism. Atheism, when used without qualifiers, means the absence of a positive belief in god. Gnosticism/ agnosticism pertains to knowledge as you know. You are an atheist if you lack a positive belief in god (or a god or gods). You can choose whatever label you want but it’s silly to call others dumb The way you have.
Then literally all you needed to say was "you should have opened with 'gnostic atheism is dumb'."
I feel like you're just taking potshots at semantics with no real purpose other than to try to dunk on the stupid agnostic guy. We all know that "atheism" is a byword with "gnostic" presumed to be in front of it. Otherwise, agnostic is used.
I thought I had made that clear in the body of my post.
You're right, agnosticism is a position of ignorance, and the theistic position of the person who claims to be agnostic is more or less irrelevant. To me, though, the distinction is important.
If a physicist lays out string theory or something, and points to a bunch of data and equations and stuff showing it, then they have gnostic belief in that system. An agnostic may be a layperson who says "yeah, I don't know about all this quantum string stuff, it sounds like something beyond the scope of human perception, but hey, the physicist has his data indicating it." That's the agnostic atheist. The agnostic theist, on the other hand, enrolls in that physicist's lecture, because they are curious to find out more about the data that led the physicist to that conclusion. In other words, they don't doubt string theory may exist, but they are aware of their lack of knowledge on the concept.
The gnostic atheist is the rival physicist who says "no, fuck that, string theory can't be right". When you ask them for an alternative theory, they don't have one to present. They simply declare that we already have sufficient data to disprove string theory, despite the concept being beyond an level of spatial awareness a human is normally capable of.
You’re calling people dumb but you say I’m taking potshots for suggesting you don’t insult people?
Look brother (or sister), I’m just saying that there are lots of people, like me, that describe themselves as atheists and don’t claim to know for a fact that a god (or gods) doesn’t exist. Gnostic is not and should not be presumed when a person calls themselves atheist. I am an agnostic atheist but I call myself an atheist because to me that’s the important part; I don’t have a belief in a god.
That being said, we can logically reduce that certain supernatural entities don’t exist, including certain versions of god. The Invisible Pink Unicorn can’t exist because it is logically impossible to be both pink and invisible.
At the same end of the day, I’m just looking for understanding. You may have more allies than you think. And if you are insulting people, you may never discover that you are on the same side.
I always like to ask people of that mindset what happens after we die. Does our soul go to another plane of existence? They usually try to say something like that's it, there's nothing, just blackness, and in a "matter of fact" type manner, of course. Then I ask them how they know that, because as far as I can see, we've had scientists studying everything on this Earth for many, many years, millions upon millions of people have died for many millenniums, and as far as I know, not a single one of them can say definitively what happens to us after we die.
Can you put a tiny little area all the way to the right that says ‘God does not exist’, and a brain the normal size with normal facial expression. Then you’ll be accurate. Belief in God is not required for good ethics and morality. Belief in God is pure mysticism. Bring on the downvotes. I support Trump based on reason, not mysticism.
Those who believe in god due to what you define as "mysticism" are the ones on the left side of the graph. Looks like you are in are falling somewhere in the middle 😆.
The deeply educated belief has been silenced for some time (and not exactly taking great effort to communicate) so it's not an unfair question at all. There are some exceptional resources on youtube if you want to go all the way through the looking glass, but C.S. Lewis's books are an easy place to start.
If you need it now, in once sentence, the more you study the material world, the more clear it is a medium, not the source of reality. Ancient people discovered this, recorded it, mythologized it, ritualized it, and passed it down to us where many now blindly reject. Questions about the mechanisms of God's agency in this process is an open question from the modern era, potentially flawed in the framing.
The chart is misleading, not everyone in the middle intellectually is stupid enough to believe that the crowd-sourcing of natural theology into science is robust enough to make them their own gods. Most people don't even realize that is the garbage they are being fed in modernism and post-modernism, I know I didn't when I was younger.
Wouldn't what you want just be another, calmer one in the center? If you want it to be a "normal" brain after all.
Unless you're intentionally saying "oh man, normal atheists are smarter than any Christians" (which is what putting it one the right would indicate) in which case you still belong in the center, just for different reasons.
I grew up catholic. Church every Sunday all that. Around mid twenties started questioning everything. Became agnostic. As I got older I would give really deep thought to it all. Now. I am back to a man of God.
No one can know, anyone who claims otherwise is either lying or just an idiot. I prefer to refer to myself as a human, and neither atheist or agnostic, but if i had to choose one i would say agnostic.
I've lived with Christians who openly lie and make up fairy tales about their religion to make it sound more convincing. Unfortunately for them i have done my research and am not easily fooled, however i don't claim to know whether god does or doesn't exist, i would be lying if i did.
All this stuff going on these days has made me want to just say screw it and join their ranks regardless though, because i am convinced that a good portion of people do need religion in order to keep themselves in check. I just can't bring myself to say that the bible is anything more than it is, a collection of ancient stories.
I completely agree with your positions. And it depends on the definitions people have in their head when they think atheism. In a lot of Christian circles they define "atheist" as someone who hates god and wants to be their own...
Others use it to refer to people who assert the positive claim that god doesn't exist.
Most internet atheists will define it as the opposite of being a theist. So if you do have a positive belief that a god exists, then you're a theist. If you don't hold that belief you're an atheist. Sounds like you could fit into that definition, but I don't care what you call yourself.
For me, I've seen nothing to convince me there's any truth to the supernatural claims of any religion, And so that's why I don't believe. Like you said, it's a collection of ancient stories.
Yep i agree, the vast majority of atheists actually fall under the category of agnostic, but have either been pushed into the atheist category by the religious, or through opposition to religion itself as sort of a self defense against it.
Mostly because they see the lies and hypocrisy and simply want to take a hard line stance against it. Cause for the most part the general populace knows nothing about either stance, they just choose one and go with it.
The difference as I understand it is subtle and mostly semantic.
gnostic / agnostic addresses what you claim you know.
theist / atheist address what you claim you believe.
Personally, I believe there's no god, but I won't claim to know it.
But I'm confident I can at least rule out the christian god of the bible as not existing based on the claims and characteristics described in the bible.
Logically cannot and factually cannot prove things which are matters of faith.
The best analogy is that right now our understanding of the universe is occluded by our current limitations however our ability to infer what maybe behind the complete truth of everything is an all mighty creator which personally loves each and everyone of us, and grants each of us the opportunity to succeed or fail spectacularly.
So if there's some things we don't understand, and some things we do understand, How does that tell us anything about whether or not there's a god?
Also, How do you define faith? Seems like the context in which you used it you mean believing in things in which there's no proof.
Do you think it's a good thing to believe other ideas without proof, because it's an act of faith? Like, Islam, Buddhism, new age, etc?? Or is there only one particular ideology that gets special consideration and a different standard of proof than all the others?
How does the lack of proof tells us anything about whether or not there is a God? It doesn't and if you frame things in such a manner, the only result will always be it doesn't.
God maybe humanity's long attempt to understand the nature of itself and the universe. This sort of argument necessarily implies that God is the collective creation of Man, rather than the other way around.
But God is not a natural force which bends to our wills upon demand.
I do not believe things without proof though the proofs only indirectly rather than directly proving the existence of God: the wonderful circumstance which has created the world I live in and the life I've been able to live. I believe that there seems to be a guiding hand behind where my destiny will lie, and defies or challenges all other social manipulation. I do not know the exact dimensions of this destiny but it seems to be one that is not probable given where I started. And this goes the same for you, and everyone.
Religion, imho, is a relationship between Man and God.
Islam, I find, is not a religion largely because of its origins and then its history: It has, and seems to always will be, not a personal relationship between God and Man but primarily a political movement and merely co-opted some of Eastern and Greek Christian traditions into itself with the capture of the Alexandria, Jerusalem and Antioch- the traditional hearts of Christianity.
Nor is Buddhism a religion because the primary beliefs, the eightfold paths and the five aggregates, sound like the early attempts at psychology and the internalization of civic morals. It does not seek a relationship between God and Man, but attempts to better oneself to save oneself but only oneself.
It is inaccurate to frame Christianity as merely an ideology for all the other faiths have similar ideologies and themes - bettering oneself, peace through domination, some manifestation of justice - but only one has the divine manifested itself and continues to manifest itself.
Christianity is special for it is the one where during the 2000 years of its existence, has its primary entity of veneration manifested itself (albeit capriciously but then again so does any living entity and much more so perhaps a divine one) to its followers.
Framing Christianity as an ideology seeks to prove that it is an ideology rather than a doctrine of faith. You've come up with a conclusion before making the argument.
How does the lack of proof tells us anything about whether or not there is a God? It doesn't and if you frame things in such a manner, the only result will always be it doesn't.
So then what's the default position when there is no evidence and someone makes an extraordinary claim? Do you just automatically believe the claim until it's disproven? Or do you think it makes sense to wait until there's evidence before believing something?
Christianity is special for it is the one where during the 2000 years of its existence, has its primary entity of veneration manifested itself (albeit capriciously but then again so does any living entity and much more so perhaps a divine one) to its followers.
You claim there have been manifestations of god, but that claim that comes right after you wrote out a bunch of text explaining why you don't need evidence to believe something.
See a problem there? Anyone can claim there have been manifestations of ANYTHING if evidence isn't part of the equation.
What if... he/she/it/whatever always was, always existed, from the beginning of all time & will always be, always exist until the end of time?
Also, not sure if anyone can say they KNOW God exists, but can say we have FAITH that God exists. Maybe we see and feel the existence of God more than we see / feel the impossibility of the existence.
Which god? They can't all be real at the same time...
And if faith is the standard for believing in something, Can't I just say I have FAITH that there is no god, And now I've got equal weight to my position as you have yours, right?
Anyone can believe anything on faith if expecting proof or evidence is completely taken out of the equation.
Maybe there’s only one god? And different cultures expressed this God in their own way, but that in reality, it’s the same?
Your position has always had equal weight to mine - it’s a free world and you are fully allowed to believe any way you do.
The reason why faith comes into play for me (& for many) with regards to belief in God, is that the full existence & understanding of that existence, is bigger than what our brains can comprehend.
Can you fully know time? Not like hours and months etc... but as a concept. Eternity? Infinity? Always was, alway will be. What was at the very very beginning of the world?... before the spark or primordial ooze or whatever you believe, whatever you know... how did it get there? Think about it for a minute, 5 minutes... it’s literally unfathomable to our minds.
That’s how I feel about God. He’s there. I feel it. I see it. But I can never fully KNOW it. I just believe it. 🤷♂️
Well.... The way I see it is not all positions are equal, not all beliefs are equal.
There are doctors who believe the best way to treat an infected cut is with antibiotics, and there are shaman who think the best way to treat it is by pissing on it and stuffing it with goat shit.
Objectively, one of those group's beliefs are more correct....
Point I'm making is the way true ideas are separated from false ideas is with evidence and testing. We can test what happens to cuts stuffed with shit vs cuts treated with antibiotics, and our beliefs can be informed by this.
I'm not about to believe a bunch of supernatural claims that demand all kinds of actions and adherence from me, when the people making those claims have conveniently exempted them from needing any evidence.
For me, a question as large as the origins of mankind and the universe REQUIRES proof before I will say I know or believe.
I hear what you’re saying w regards to not all positions being equal, but really that’s not ALWAYS the case. There are positions that elicit an outcome, like those of medicine, which have a provable causality. One works. The other doesn’t.
But my belief in God and your doubt in it, are equal since neither can be fully proven. And if your belief requires proof first, then maybe your full disbelief should also require proof?
For me I don’t think it’s possible to have full proof either for OR against God.
Maybe, just maybe, your willingness to disbelieve without need for proof, has more to do with this:
“ that demand all kinds of actions and adherence from me”
Right now, don’t think of God & religion as the same thing. Start with: is there a possibility that God exists... without automatically jumping to actions & adherences etc.
There are positions that elicit an outcome, like those of medicine, which have a provable causality. One works. The other doesn’t.
Does religion not also promise tangible outcomes? It promises you an afterlife and depending on who you listen to, also promises changes in your personality and life.
Religion promises a lot of stuff I don't see it delivering...
But my belief in God and your doubt in it, are equal since neither can be fully proven. And if your belief requires proof first, then maybe your full disbelief should also require proof?
Let me ask you this... Do you have garlic hanging in your windows? I mean no one has ever provided proof that vampires don't exist.
Maybe your full disbelief in vampires should also require proof... If not perhaps you should hang the garlic up just to be safe.
And keep a gun loaded with a silver bullet for the werewolves... They too have not been disproven.
Same with zombies... Not disproven either.
Are you starting to see why, You shouldn't need proof to disbelieve something? The reason the person making the claim has the burden of proof is because anyone can claim anything and you can't prove a negative.
If to you, vampires & werewolves & God are worthy of the same understanding, then go ahead and feel that way. Make light of it & joke about God.
But to me there is no greater wonder in the world, than that of God. To me, the presence of God is is seen in so many things on this earth and in the celestial heavens.
How do you explain your id, the part of your consciousness that knows you are you & not someone else? How do you explain how the universe was formed & what was here before it existed? How do you explain near death experiences?
God is part of you, at all times, but especially when you love. You can feel Gods presence. God is in you & in me, whether you acknowledge that or not. It’s ok. God will still be there for you either way. God happily allows you to make your own choices in life.... including in the belief in God.
Edit to add: “ Religion promises a lot of stuff I don't see it delivering”. I mentioned earlier, if you take “religion” out of the equation right now, I bet you’ll be able to see Gods existence without so much internal push back. Maybe.
An afterlife literally isn't a tangible outcome.
Death and thus the vague concept of what happens after life is an inevitability.
If you do good things, you will go to Heaven isn't scripture. Loving God will bring you to Heaven. Doing good things MIGHT be your manifestation of loving God. But you are not assured of your place in Heaven. There are no tangible outcomes with God.
We cannot directly prove God exists. Those of us who are Christian believe He exists.
I do not believe vampires exist, which is why I do not hang garlic out.
You are not demanded to do anything when you go to church, you are invited.
Your arguments seem to keep ignoring the starting premise that you cannot directly prove the existence of God and to insist on it seems that you are uninterested in the concepts of faith. God is no beast or force of nature which acts on our whim or manipulation.
Of course not. Just as nobody can convince anyone that god doesn’t exist. I’ll tell you for me I did the whole teenager struggle with believing in god thing. But I always had that nagging gut feeling that god exists. Something I can’t explain. One day I was browsing through wikipedia of famous founding fathers of our country and the like. Some of the smartest people. I kept noticing something in common with almost all of them: deism. It all clicked after that. A god that set up and uses science and laws of nature. It didn’t have to be magic fairy tales or no god. There are other options.
Well.. Just because something can't be proven to not exist means nothing.
Leprechauns, Vampires, Werewolves, Zombies... No one can prove they DON'T exist. No one can prove they DO... By that standard god is on the same footing evidence wise.
Personally, I spend about as much time praying for the salvation of my soul as you do hanging up garlic in your windows to keep vampires out.
And the problem I have with deism is it seems like the halfway point to just realizing there's probably no god at all. I mean... The foundational idea of a monotheistic god comes from religion. Zoroastrianism, Judiasim, and later Christianity and Islam.
And in all of those belief systems it's very clear that god is not just a mere mindless force of nature, but rather a being with human like characteristics and supernatural involvement in human affairs.
So to just change the definition to mean some force or causal event that resulted in us being here... Great... But you're miles and miles away from where the concept of god started. At that point why not just recognize you are no longer talking about the same thing?
I'd be happy too. But first I'd ask if you ever considered the possibility that reality being purely determined by mechanical cause and effect isn't itself simply a "made up" perspective. Assuming of course that a modern secular mindset is the one you are coming from.
Because the process of religion is not about "what we know" most of the time. Although I will concede that many practitioners falsely focus on that. The purpose of religion, at least my faith, is exactly the dilemma you present at the bottom. It provides us a process by which we are to map out the unknown. This is presented most clearly in the form of death.
So those parts of reality that we don't understand, the way to confront them is sacrificial love towards those around us. That is how the divine order (love) is brought to the unknown.
I recognize this is all abstract and possibly meaningless to you, but if you'd like me to go into greater detail on any of the claims, building them up in more systematic and secular manner I'd be happy to do so.
That's only if your curious tho, if your instinct is to argue I will say before hand that I have no interest in that. (Also not implying that you are argumentative)
Because the process of religion is not about "what we know"....
It provides us a process by which we are to map out the unknown.
Well here's my point. Faith is a TERRIBLE process for mapping out the unknown.
Think of all the things people used to not know anything about.... Germs, Gravity, Radio waves, electricity, the cosmos, chemistry, etc... Think of all the tangible benefits we have gained from understanding these previously unknown things.
Now let me ask you this.... Did we use faith to gain an understanding of germs? Did we use faith to discover and make use of radio waves?
Or is there perhaps a better method than faith for mapping out the unknown?
You are blind to what you are arguing against. The principles of the faith are the exact thing that brought those discoveries. In fact it is the only thing that even makes them meaningful at all. You betray a lack of curiosity in your counter point, however, as you didn't ask for explanation of the claims which you obviously misunderstood and I stead insisted on making a point that every 18 year old in his first year of college, myself included, thinks is a reasonable argument against the belief in a transcendent meaning providing structure to their life.
Actually according to quantum mechanics, we know about states which aren't deterministic. Unless we have a non local deterministic theory, it is safe to assume that it is non-deterministic.
Assume a true random number generator made up of a qubit is used to decide upon a classical deterministic decision. The randomness of the previous random number generator will make sure that the further action cannot be predicted through deterministic mechanics.
So, reality needn't be deterministic. Yet, it can still be predicted to a certain degree. If anything, people can consider axioms which explain things the truth. We probably don't need a god for explaining that.
I'm still agnostic atheist, but I'm a Christian agnostic atheist. I grew up and live by Christian values. Really, what most people are mad about religion is the dogma, and not the underlying belief system.
Most atheists throw the baby out with the bath water and then someone comes and fills their bath up with shit.
Aye same muh dood. Both my parents are christian but my brother and I are agnostic athiests. Still a die hard conservative and always will be in most non religious aspects.
This meme is based on that fact that scientists through the ages mention that what they cant explain must be god's work. It was because they couldnt explain it. Like back in the time, religions were invented to explain things that couldn't.
It's not because some old clever guys couldnt explain some stuffs that beliving is god in somehow a mark of intelligence.
The logic behind this meme is 101 how leftism try to convince gulible people
Mid-wits believe in God, you find them crying out for him at their darkest moments. Leftist Atheism is just another manifestation of hating their dads, authority figures, hierarchies, and the "cruel" order of universe they don't (want to) understand is necessary.
There is a force and order to all creation that is eternal and beyond us.
Evil exists, and with discernment we see it's presence where God's spirit is not.
We were given an example, in physical human form, of the miracles and of sacrifice we are unable to make, but if we believe the greatest sacrifice has already been made for our sins, we can repent and strive to rid ourselves of those sins to be closer with God and the higher order he wants for us.
For those pedes that are having a hard time with an intellectual argument for god i really enjoyed Jordan Petersons Biblical lectures. They were a great introduction to thinking of religion as a meta narrative.
Their is much more big brain religious stuff out there though, and it is worth steal manning the argument for God.
I'm in the minority but I dont believe in a god. I still vote red. I would never take religion away from anyone or tell anyone how to live!! I'm libertarian and I know I'm in the minority.. I see the joke and I get the just. KEK and freedom of religion is important!!!
lol I am in a christian family so I act like one and I got the moral compass down. I find it funny that in a lot of ways I am more conservative than my conservative christian friends.
I would argue this is not accurate. Faith should and most likely does not have anything to do with IQ. It's just a decision someone makes to have faith or to not. There is nothing out there that proves God is real, therefore you have to have blind faith. You are trusting what others have told you
I dont believe in God but I do believe it is possible a God exists. I think it's fair to admit no one actually knows.
I feel like this, with parental influence as a kid, I fully believed. 18-30 I think the cultural bombardment got the best of me, didn't believe at all. 30s now, fully believe and having a daughter that will be raised to believe.
Mediocrity is a statistical certainty, yet everyone becomes convinced that they are full of wisdom. Merely making a law that everyone will be above average (such as 'no child left behind') does not change the universe of human experience. We have a generation of young people who have been assured that their little thoughts are brilliant. This is mostly because this is a good way to get them to go into debt at universities full of cynical rent seekers and exploiters. Watch the student loan bubble - its gotta burst.
I've been a science lover since I was little, but the people who think science can work as a moral foundation, or that morality is self-evident to a rational mind, are incredibly confused. I've seen these people cite the "golden rule", not understanding that the very reason they think it's a good idea is because they've been raised within a religious framework that properly contextualizes such an idea to them.
I honestly was agnostic until I started listening to Jordan Peterson. Now, if anything, I truly appreciate the foundations Christianity has laid out for this country and modern civilization.
Study involving atheism, magnetism, brain function and the posterior medial frontal cortex
"This has to be embarrassing . . . if you’re an atheist. A new study performed at the University of York used targeted magnetism to shut down part of the brain. The result: belief in God disappeared among more than 30 percent of participants.
That in itself may not seem so embarrassing, but consider that the specific part of the brain they frazzled was the posterior medial frontal cortex —the part associated with detecting and solving problems, i.e., reasoning and logic.
In other words, when you shut down the part of the brain most associated with logic and reasoning, greater levels of atheism result."
~University of York, Study: Magnetism and Brain Function.
Religious individuals and thicker cerebral cortices
"According to the Journal of the American Medical Association - Psychiatry, people who place a high importance of religion in their lives have thicker cerebral cortices and may be better able to fight depression. Thicker cerebral cortices in individuals is positively associated with higher intelligence."
Regular prayer/meditation and larger frontal lobes
According to Scientific American:
“Several studies have revealed that people who practice meditation or have prayed for many years exhibit increased activity and have more brain tissue in their frontal lobes, regions associated with attention and reward, as compared with people who do not meditate or pray."
Atheists and dopamine levels in the brain
According to Scientific American: "Research also suggests that a religious brain exhibits higher levels of dopamine, a hormone associated with increased attention and motivation."
Irreligion and domestic violence
Research suggests that irreligiousity is a causal factor for domestic violence.
The abstract for the 2007 article in the journal Violence Against Women entitled Race/Ethnicity, Religious Involvement, and Domestic Violence indicated:
“The authors explored the relationship between religious involvement and intimate partner violence by analyzing data from the first wave of the National Survey of Families and Households. They found that: (a) religious involvement is correlated with reduced levels of domestic violence; (b) levels of domestic violence vary by race/ethnicity; (c) the effects of religious involvement on domestic violence vary by race/ethnicity; and (d) religious involvement, specifically church attendance, protects against domestic violence, and this protective effect is stronger for African American men and women and for Hispanic men, groups that, for a variety of reasons, experience elevated risk for this type of violence.""
Atheism and belief in pseudoscience and the paranormal
“The reality is that the New Atheist campaign, by discouraging religion, won't create a new group of intelligent, skeptical, enlightened beings. Far from it: It might actually encourage new levels of mass superstition. And that's not a conclusion to take on faith -- it's what the empirical data tell us."
-September 08, the Wall Street Journal
What Americans Really Believe," a comprehensive new study released by Baylor University, shows that traditional Christian religion greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of astrology. It also shows that the irreligious and the members of more liberal Protestant denominations, far from being resistant to superstition, tend to be much more likely to believe in the paranormal and in pseudoscience than evangelical Christians...."
Whether God exists or not is irrelevant. Most people cannot be trusted to do good unless they feel like accountability is inevitable. God's omnipotence provides that along with a clear moral path. Also, people have an innate need for God (some could argue this is evidence of existence) which if not nourished will just manifest itself in bizarre and degenerate non-deity based religious movements like the political Left. Last believing in God promotes humility because you are not the rulemaker of your own universe. Basically, believe in God if you can.
Awesome lol. I've gone through all three phases tbh. God is Good.
All the time
God is good
God is great. Most people are good
Negative. Man is innately corrupt at heart since the garden of Eden.
Hello there, fellow Calvinist.
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
sup guys
Positive, Negative, Man's heart is split between good and evil
Man is both innately good and evil. It is our job to figure out which nature to embrace. So the statements all people are good and all people are corrupted are both true.
God is great, beer is good, people are crazy
I like beer.
good song. i approve. bigly.
“There is none righteous, no, not one.” - Romans 3:10
I know what you are getting at though. Most people are good by a worldly standard, but not God's standard.
Most people are good in Western Society, excluding Democrat controlled cities, because it is based loosely upon God's standard.
Look at what happens when people turn away from God's standards, ie. Democrat controlled cities.
LOUD NOISES
There is non good, no not one.
You’ve had 3 different levels of IQ?
No, thats not really how IQ works. I've always been a stable genius.
You... you're good you...
and he GETS WHAT HE FUGGIN DESERVES! (a MAGA president)
perfect answer 10/10
ty pede
All of us do. IQ isn't a static number, it fluctuates throughout one's lifetime. The very idea of IQ was invented as a way to gauge how much children were benefitting from school.
Things like learning/practicing skills and studying can literally increase your IQ. While things like TV, social media and CNN can literally decrease it.
Your IQ can only vary by about 5 points up or down in one's lifetime. If you have other info, sauce me, because I am about 90%+ sure of what I am talking about. IQ tests are not skill assesments, they are about your ability to puzzle things out, use creative reasoning, and innate logic and intellect.
The original and official IQ tests are designed for any age to be able to gauge the intellect regardless of its stage of development.
Many of the "IQ" quizzes and tests that you find online nowadays are not actually IQ tests. A real IQ test measured with a proper test will give you a result that throughout your life rarely changes more than +/- 3 points.
They have shown that IQ can be affected by your surrounding peers, but only to an extent. You get what God gave you.
Any IQ test that tests your recall of facts or tests your skills is not a real IQ test. A real IQ test consists entirely of puzzles where you don't have to have any intellectual rote knowledge to correctly solve the puzzles. For instance, I took mine when I was 5, and I remember a picture of a shirt with diagonal stripes, and the question was "if you turn the shirt inside out which way do the stripes go?" Another big one is number sequences or shape sequences, where you solve for the next in the sequence. You dont have to know who was president in 1974 or word is to word as word is to word problems, or adding fractions or any of that shit. Precisely so they are NOT testing study skills and rote knowledge.
Your original statement depends greatly on the test taker's age - the younger you are, the more you will fluctuate up or down, since you're still developing. But my main point, and the thing I think you're dismissing, is that yes, your IQ will change throughout your lifetime. 5 points up or down might not seem like much to you, but considering that it's normalized for the average score to equal 100, a fluctuation of 5 full points (sometimes more) is a big deal.
Edit: The reason I feel it's so significant, is because it charges us with the responsibility to cultivate our own minds. If you don't take care of yourself, that baby's going down.
not true about the age part. I was part of a university research program that administered the tests, and they say when they give them to you that your score is not likely to change much at all throughout your life, regardless of the age you take it at. That's the whole point of IQ tests working. That you can test anyone at any age with any knowledge set and the resulting score is ACCURATE. If it wasn't accurate, the test would be for shit and the number meaningless.
To create a whole 5 point change in IQ would take a lifetime of rigorous attention and focus, if it can be done at all. I suppose a half a standard deviation's worth of IQ points might be worth the struggle for some, but its not much of a budgeable aspect of the self.
I think its good to practice good mental hygiene and stay sharp and informed, but IQ doesnt seem to me like something to be obsessed over precisely because theres not much you can do to change it.
IQ be rayyciss
Wait now I'm stuck which way dey go
dey go datta wei ---->
This sounds more accurate, but I really have no idea and haven't looked into it much. I can say, however, that I've been administered an IQ test 3 times in my life (age 12, age 18, and age 26) and my scores were always very similar. My lowest score was 7 points below my highest
It is more likely that one of your tests was inaccurate than it is that your IQ actually changed by 7 points... that is such a large variance, that it points to the test and not the person who took it.
Not to say that it could not have happened but statistically the chances of that are incredibly low... When in doubt just nix your lowest score and claim your highest ;)
ha, I'm more than ok with that. I attributed it to my age. While I know age doesn't make a difference, I did also have a lot more issues with attention/focus when I was younger, so just assumed that was what contributed to a lower score. My last two were both much closer together, hitting 139 and 142 (and 135 with my first, when I was young).
Out of curiosity, since you seem to know a lot more about this than I do: what would make an IQ test inaccurate? If they are professionally administered, shouldn't they all essentially be the same test (just swapping out variables in the same questions or something to ensure you don't take the same test over and over?)
yes, if they were professionally administered they should all be accurate, and that would make you one heck of an anomaly!
There are other factors that can affect your test, like if you had an emotional trauma or were extremely sick that day or whatever. I'd go with my top two, if they were all 100% legit tests. The reason for that is that there are reasons why you may test out low (divorce and death and stuff), but there isnt any reason why on one particular test you would test out high on accident. If it were me, I'd say it's "around 140" and be done with it.
Besides, as someone who tests in the top one percentile, you know like I do that the higher you get on the scale, the less discernable difference there is in your ability to perform and relate. I find that people with an IQ of over maybe 125-130, there's rarely a whole lot of PRACTICAL difference. Functionally theres a pretty big diff between 100 and 120, but way less-so if youre comparing someone with a 140 to someone with a 160. Smart is smart.
Congrats on your score BTW, not too shabby my fren.
The Donald . Win increases IQ! 🧠
Over here on DONALD.win
We don’t give you bigger PP like those Pea brains on Reddit! We give you a MASSIVE IQ!
ow man... have you noticed how the people that never had an interest in Science, completely suck at maths, are the most crazy about fixing "Climate Change", I know many Engineers and people with a Science background that have seriously looked at climate change are like "What the fuck, those climate models suck ass, they basically input the warming into them, how is this even called science. Fucking yet another governmental institution IPCC screwing things up".
It gives us superhuman
vitalityintelligenceI'm just imagining being in the middle of sex and whispering "I learned this on thedonald.win"
Picturing my wife being into it lol. She redpilled me on trump when I was a silly lolbertarian.
searches pornhub for td.win
You may be saying it jokingly, but it actually does. and a lot. so it's no joking matter
I'm no doctor, but it looks like your IQ just got 10 feet taller!
You can create a super high iq 4 your year old by teaching then to read and basic math. That kid would crush other 4 year olds. But the older kids get the more difficult it becomes to give a child an edge with teaching techniques. When the brain fully developes at age 24 any previous edges from teaching techniques or living situations get wiped out completely.
The uncomfortable truth is the most significant factor in what someone's IQ will be are the IQs of their parents.
"The uncomfortable truth is the most significant factor in what someone's IQ will be are the IQs of their parents."
This. This is part of the thesis of Charles Murray and Richard Herrnstein's book 'The Bell Curve.' The other part is summed up by smart people marry and have children with other smart people, average people marry and procreate with other average people, likewise those on the left side of the curve. Not sure how this came to be known as a 'racist' theory. I am familiar with the town Murray grew up in; there is no doubt he observed this in his pre-college days. Funny thing, you can not get most of his works, especially 'The Bell Curve' from his hometown library.
Innate IQ doesn't change, but applied IQ can. Some of the smartest people I've met have been complete dipshits who harness only the tiniest kernel of what they could use. Other times, I meet people who have very low limits, but who constantly stay as high as they can fly through effort and vigilance.
Like, Steven Hawking could have just rode his ass through life cheating at gambling and been a stupid asshole.
I've gone through similar phases, but I still can't accept the idea that god, as religion defines, exists. However I have fully accepted that god, as christianity defines at least, is not only good for civilization, but necessary for a safe development of the human race. But I just don't think any of it as explained in religious text is true. I wish I could though, religion provides so many benefits, from structure to community to mental health. Like I see it all, but, I dunno.
One thing I know to be true though, a universe doesn't just exist out of nowhere.
“One thing I know to be true though, a universe doesn't just exist out of nowhere.”
That’s a good start! Grasping the concept, nature etc of God is impossible for us to do fully. Just as the concepts of infinity in the future or infinity of the past are impossible to understand.
We will never fully comprehend God, but we can still see His existence every day around us.
Even some the greatest saints had major doubts all the time. That’s good - means you’re actively questioning & learning.
A big hiccup I've had lately is the hands-on God versus the creator who set it in motion and took a hands off approach. It just seems logical to me that it was created but I have a hard time with complete control. Not saying it's beyond the power, obviously it wouldn't be. I guess I'm not really sure why I'm stuck on this.
But if I were to fully believe in a creator who set it in motion and left it alone, that would make me a sinner going to hell.
"But if I were to fully believe in a creator who set it in motion and left it alone, that would make me a sinner going to hell."
Who says that would make you a sinner going to hell?
I think God does not have complete control because God allows for us to have our free will. We are fully allowed to succeed or fail, of our own agency and decisions.
I'm not a Christian, but I'm almost certain that believing that God isn't nit-picking through everyone's lives isn't a mortal sin in any denomination. They actually have a list of what sins qualify as hell-worthy, and it's pretty short and clear.
It really only brings up an issue with Christ specifically, because in Christian thought that was God himself showing up to nit-pick through everyone's life.
Basically, it puts you with the modalists and deists and groups like that: generally classed as heretics by mainstream Christianity (especially Catholicism) but all-in-all not really a "going to hell" sin.
God becomes much easier to understand when you realize that most people trying to explain God to you are just giving you their best educated guess. You can see that Christianity is good for the world because it is true, despite there being a whole lot of fake Christian's giving us a bad name. If you have been on this board long enough you damn sure know that radical, spiritual evil exists. That puts you ahead of most people. Other than that, seek God and he will find you. Look for books on what Christian's and Hebrews believed around the time of Christ. Some of the teachings were different and offer interesting perspective that can help. Other than that enjoy the journey. Seeking God and your place in creation is the great adventure that we all share.
A lot of religious text is setting standards for human decency, especially in the Old Testament. Take Noah's flood for example.
God could have literally flooded the world, but it is difficult to scientifically explain the entire planet under water. I don't know if he did, or if there was just a significant flood for a region that someone with no perspective of "the world" beyond their sight couldn't comprehend the situation.
Instead, if the story is taken more figuratively, it demonstrates the rewards for being faithful and the punishment for those who mock the faithful.
The eyewitness accounts of Jesus' actions are not figurative. Those parts of the Bible contain a lot of wisdom for living, just like the lessons in the Old Testament.
The Flood is quite fascinating from a literal perspective. I'm no expert, but one of the more interesting historical backings of the flood is the fact that many many early civilizations have a great flood in their histories. Additionally, Christian scientists speculate that not only was the Earth covered in water, the immense force of the water literally cracked the crust of the Earth and created the tectonic plates. The lifespan of humans also diminished rapidly post-flood, leading them to believe that the pre-flood atmosphere contributed to the centuries long lives biblical figures had.
There's some arguments about fossilized trees found standing up straight, and how they couldn't have occurred slowly over hundreds or thousands of years, whatever "the science" claims.
All I know is that the idea the universe started from a dot is beyond stupid.
Edit- the point of the fossilized trees is that they probably had to be covered very suddenly, like perhaps a big flood.
Even when considering the dot, how the heck did the dot get there? What was there before the dot? It always takes me back to God as the answer
He loves you and wants love in return. Only with free will can this mean anything.
DEUS VULT
What are the odds that Christianity just so happened to get the unspoken rules of sustainable society correct without being divinely inspired?
yes! Nice proposition!
1000 monkeys typing for a 1000 years coming up with a Shakespearean play would be more likely!
Same here, God is great
Same I actually came back to Christ recently after finding an amazing woman going through the same journey I am. We were Christians and stopped going because we thought we found answers that transcended the bible through science.
We now do devotionals every day, watch streaming Sunday service, and have Him as the cornerstone of our relationship. We like to think that God brought us together so that we could come back under his wing.
"Once you take a sip of science you lose God, when you reach the end of the glass you find him again"
God is Good
Fantastic quote.
From left to right: Islam, atheism, Christianity.
Skepticism sparking investigation will lead you straight to the right.
Totally.
The way I see it, there are only 2 types of leftists: the ones who know nothing but just follow the loudest voices on tv, and the few ones who really do understand the policies and are pretty evil.
The more you learn, the more right you lean.
Skepticism is why I abandoned religion, and why I abandoned liberalism.
Skepticism will lead to you to the right politically and away from theistic beliefs.
Have a red pill: Islam is religious socialism. Think about it. The hold the same ideals; conquer, subjugation, lies (to infidels), infiltration, subversion.... Pedophilia (Aisha, 9 yo).... These similarities are not accidents.
Islam is not a religion.
I think Moslems would beg to differ.
Moslems taqqiya'd you into believing they'd beg to differ.
Final Form: MAGA
More like Islam...................................................................................then all the rest.
you win
Atheists will seethe at this and truthfully I went through this phase as a teenager. Muh how can the bible be true if evolution is true. Muh nukes wouldn't work if the world wasn't millions of years old.
The thing is, God is above logic. We're all smoothbrains to Him. Do you really think the creator of the fucking universe is not capable of manipulating the flow of time? Really?
It is hilarious and I will fight with you side by side. The commies are proof of de-evolution and DNA entropy...Can we just agree on that?
For them to be called progressives is an oxymoron
They are masters at marketing and PR. The shittiest policies on earth, but have a way with words & slogans, to cover just how shitty they are
“Black Lives Matter”. Perfect example. Sure, black lives matter, yes. But Black Lives Matter is a bunch of crap wrapped in a label that rings true.
Progressing towards starvation.
Commies are the real smooth brains. Fuck em
Welcome to the party!
I think there should be more atheists that appreciate Christians. Too many left wing hatemongers out there.
There’s two types of atheist. The type that just doesn’t believe in any religion and leaves it at that. Then there’s the type that has to shove it down your throat as snuggly as possible that they don’t believe in any religion.
Atheist pede here, definitely disagree with the post and your comment but not "seething" about it, nobody should be "seething" over a meme lol. People can peacefully disagree.
Where there is respect, there can be disagreement without anger.
Atheist as well- this meme makes me laugh because I do disagree with it, but am perfectly willing to let people believe whatever they like if it improves their lives at no one elses expense.
Exactly. If we spent all day getting offended, we'd be leftists.
We got the best atheists folks. Big league
Kek
I don't remember moging you.
People can peacefully disagree.... But why would we want to? Die Heretic! :P .
I consider myself very devout in my faith. I also believe that most atheists are either too intellectually lazy to attempt to understand theological doctrine or they have done the intellectual legwork but are too emotionally invested in their atheism for them to admit the validity of thousands of years of theological thought from great thinkers like Pascal, Aquinas, and Descartes. BUT I don't think that you guys are stupid. Misled perhaps. But far from stupid. You ask good questions that need to be asked. I just wish that we could have a discussion without either side attempting to use rhetorical slight of hand in order to belittle and berate the other side.
Let me throw in my two cents here. I was raised by democrats who say they're "athiest/agnostic" and of course I fell into the same line of thinking respectively growing up. I also do not judge every athiest the same. Some are anarchists, some just spent an hour thinking about it and made up their mind in a way they believe. That's how it was for me. Very smart individuals as we can see by how many fellow atheist and agnostic pedes we have. A lot of atheists are brainwashed leftists of course. I personally believe I was saved and if you asked me if I believed in a god existing in some kind of form or fashion 4 years ago I probably would have laughed at you lol. I dont assume atheists are stupid but I do assume they think differently than me on those issues. I have my own opinions on whether they are right or wrong considering I was a pretty full blown athiest/agnostic type myself. That doesnt mean you're not allowed to freely think imo. You're allowed to be an athiest but I will accept them back when they are done with their demo trip to hell.
The main problem I see is when I was an athiest, I turned into a socialist among other things. It seems to me when people remove god they just replace it with something else and it seems to always be worse for some reason. I frankly enjoyed talking to people who believed in god when I was an athiest and in equally as interested today to have those conversations from the other side.
The thing that turned me away from atheism was when I first started to realise that the Democrats were lying to me with many republicans as well. I decided to figure out how much they were lying about and it turned out nearly everything I suspected was a lie so I asked myself "well is there anything they haven't lied about?" Which lead me to thinking about the bible because I had never even opened one to read it before that moment. I grew up thinking it was just some religious fairytale book. So rather than just reading the book with all my judgments I instead spent some time thinking about what mindset I should have been in when I first read it. I decided to go in as open minded as possible and judge it for exactly what the book is. No more, no less. Big surprise to me, it had a better recount of history than any history class or historian I've ever seen. That was interesting to me. I'm not the best reader of complex deep books and I normally never read books at all. Yet I spent months making little progress every few days or weeks just reading a little bit every time to actually understand what it was saying rather than just reading through it fast. I seriously read the beggining of genesis maybe 7 times before I even moved forward. It's now my favorite book.
I love all my athiest pedes and I have one thing I would like to say. I'm not going to try to convince you away from what you believe in. As a previous full blown athiest agnostic type I understand where you're coming from. All I want to to is encourage you to read the bible even if you dont believe it yet because it's quite the book just historically. I personally think it's worth orders of MAGNITUDE more than something like the mona lisa yet you can go buy one off the internet or download an app for free to read it.
I could put all the details in about how I was saved and people would agree and disagree that it was the work of god but that's a whole other story for a different comment. If I'm ever in an argument with any of you athiest pedes just know I love you 😂 just know I dont want to tell you how to think. I just want to help as many people to know how to use their god given free will to think for themselves. ❤ it's great to see these posts where atheists and religious people are talking about how shit the radical communist left is getting. They are trying to decide us and it's not working lol. We're all one big family and its great
Definitely agree with you here. Someone I like to listen to always says 'We don't always serve God, but we all serve someone', and I think I know what he means. We can disagree and debate about important theological questions. I welcome that. But we do need to lock arms as brothers and sisters when the deceiver comes knocking. I think that's what the Lord teaches us; love your neighbor and do not judge him, because he too is a child of God.
Why were you an atheist?
I’m an atheist for one reason...I believe I’m best served to have the most accurate view of reality possible.
The process to achieve this accuracy is to only accept propositions that can be demonstrated through evidence.
The greater the scope of the proposition, the greater amount/reliability of evidence is required to prove the claim.
If someone were to propose Bigfoot is real, I would require evidence sufficient to support the claim.
If someone were to propose a god with certain attributes exists, I would require sufficient evidence to support the claim.
I don’t believe most of you are any different EXCEPT in the acceptance of the Christian god.
If I were to ask Christians why they do not believe in Scientology, many would require the same level of evidence to prove the claims of Scientology as I require from Christianity...in both cases that evidence does not exist. If evidence sufficient to prove the claims of Christianity existed, it would not be a “faith”.
There was many reasons back then why I would say I was an athiest. To me back then it was the best logical reasoning I could come to at the time. That along with the family and circle of friends I was around. I for sure 110% believed atheism was right growing up even until the end of high school about 3 years ago maybe. Convincing me to be an athiest was easy. Convincing me to believe in God was extremely unlikely. So unlikely that the fact I turned into a believer still seems pretty wild to me. I wouldnt say I was convinced to be an athiest as much as I was raised and lived around people so much to a point it seemed obvious that being was seemed "right" even if my town I grew up in had more believers than not, I was still around the nonbelievers most of the time I was out of the house and none of my family believed at home.
We sound very similar but I'd say a good difference between you and me is that you say it helps you get a good view of reality and I believe viewing reality through a sense of atheism gives you a bias view of reality as I dont think you should nessessarily view reality as a "Christian" either. To me reality is reality and no matter what word fits me better be it athiest, agnostic, christian, capitalist, whatever words I've said describe me over time. Reality is reality and if I look at reality though a word like atheism or Christian then I get a bias view of reality which is just reality. You should view reality just as it is imo for the best results at seeing reality accurately. The universe probably doesnt care if you're athiest or christian you know?
There was a point one time only maybe 2 or so years ago where I really sat down and thought. I thought about atheism. I didnt even really know what a real Christian was. I didnt know so many Christians werent real Christians or any of that stuff. I thought about how the big bang doesnt disprove if god exists or not although thats what I was explained by all the atheists I was friends with and educated by growing up.
I have a hard time for some reason following along with complex books eventhough I'm a really good reader I'd say imo. It wasnt until I started thinking about how the year we keep track of time with starts when jesus walked the earth. I figured, something absolutely crazy must have happened surrounding jesus, the circumstances of world events and people who knew him for me not to have been taught about jesus in school just off a historical point of view. The fact we all follow a year following certain events that isnt taught in school is a BIG clue that there is more than meets the eye concerning the events with jesus. Not even including if god exists or not. So I went on to learn about jesus and that was the first time I actually got to see what a real Christian was and the results of such a real Christians actions. I do not follow the teachings of "Christians." I really enjoy the teachings of jesus who I believe was the best Christian that's existed. That doesnt prove god exists but that's also not what got me to believe god exists either. I convinced myself a god existed with an entirely different situation, opinion and point of view at the world individual to me. Sadly itll probably take me 10 hours fo describe the events that happened that actually lead me to be a believer. Including me being saved. I dont really talk about that because it's a long story and it's kinda weird to talk to people about stuff you might not nessessarily want to talk about. In totally comfortable talking about it if I'm given the time to accurately explain what I believe and why.
I'm not a regular Christian I'd say compared to many of the Christians I see in churches today. Most people I believe dont fully understand what it means to be a real Christian. I'm not the type of guy to use christianity to try to disprove science but rather I like to use science to prove how I became a believer. Or I like to show how me actually being a believer doesnt actually break any of the laws of science as we know them. Of course, that in itself is also another 3 hour long conversation we could go into. One day maybe I'll start a youtube or write a book explaining what I've experienced. Maybe that'll help people understand how my head works lol. To put how I became a believer simply, it was a happening of events so unlikely that I'd probably have a better chance at winning the lottery twice in a row than to experience what I experienced in my honest opinion as far as I know. It happened when I was at my most vulnerable. Depressed and helpless. When I was an athiest more than I ever was.
Another thing I tell people that is interesting to me is they cant prove if god does or doesnt exist as you understand because you greatly described the situation surrounding how it's all "faith" but we know for sure that at the center of where the big bang happened the laws of physicists seem to break down themselves. So we know for a fact that the laws of physics dont apply equally across the entire universe If we know one specific place where some other "set of rules" completely different and nothing like our own seem to apply to a point we probably wont, or ever be able to figure out exactly what seems to be happening. A lot of my fear for god came from me not knowing god existed, but suddenly experiencing and witnessing actual battles between good and evil. The way I tell nonreligious people to think about it is to think about god as an archetype for good and satan is the archetype of evil. If you only have good, that is the embodiment of god, and if you only have evil, that is the embodiment of the devil. I know for a fact evil exists, and so that means good must exist as well and they must be opposing but equal forces. I had learned just how whicked and actually soulcrushingly horrifying evil was, which to me was a clear sign that if evil is that bad, then whatever is at the far end of what is good, must be really really good. so it was easy to chose to follow god even if it means being treated like an idiot or like I'm stupid by everyone who follows satan and dont even know it. Or do know it and joke about being a satanist just to try to feel better than the "believers"
I would encourage you even if your a nonbeliever to download the bible app and read some of the beggining of genesis, the first book of the bible. Read it like it matters and try to understand what it says even if it takes you 10 tries to understand it. Genesis has such a good explanation of good and evil with this magical tree of life. It's not going to convince you god exists nessessarily but it's kind of this fairytale feeling lesson on the battle between good and evil that I was searching for forever when I was an athiest. It was right there smack at the front of the bible the entire time and I didnt know it because I never picked up a bible to read it until just about 2 years ago. It describes this tree as "the tree of life of good and evil" it's this amazing metaphorical writing written god only knows exactly how long ago about how if you climb the tree of life and grab onto the evil apples, you'll probably fall out of the tree and lose all your progress if your even lucky enough to survive. And evil makes those apples sooooooooooooo hard not to grab onto and take a bite out of. That's not what it says directly but that's what I believe the tree segment of genesis to be referring to. The battle of good and evil. Absolutely amazing writing and absolutely hate reading books 😂
And if they were writing these things way way way way before any kinds of civilization like weve built today, then the people of the past were a lot smarter than people give them credit for in my humble opinion. I love that book so much 😂
I actually started reading the quaran before read the bible. Two very interesting books to read side by side. It's clear to me which book Is good and which one is evil. Only in the usa are you probably allowed to read both side by side. Thank God. Would suck to live somewhere where you only had access to the quaran but not the bible.
I'm only 21 and I've been friends with atheists, anarchists, believers and nonbelievers of all kinds already so I'm happy to be friends and talk to all of the people I can. I just want people to think as freely as they can and it's become clear to me over the years that most athiests and most Christians even dont nessessarily think freely eventhough they might believe that they are although if seems we have a big population of those kinds of folks right here on thedonald which is good for us all imo.
Anyway your comment was just such a great comment I got a little carried away. I hope me expanding on my situation and beliefs helps clarify anything for you. Dont think I'm just some crazy religious nut. In some ways I am in ways I wasnt only a couple years but I think that's more because seeing man in a fallen state kills me a little inside more than I'd like to admit sometimes. Great comment though for real. I used to be this regular visitor to r/atheism on reddit lol. Weird how things turn out.
I would like to ask you just this. You say you're an athiest for one reason and that's to because you believe it helps you get a more accurate view on reality. I'm going to assume maybe when you first found atheism it actually did seem accurate. If you found out there were other perspectives to get a more accurate view on reality, would you still be an athiest? I say this for the same reason I'm not a feminist. I simply do not believe I have to identify as a feminist to actually really care about the wellbeing of a women. The difference between me and many other Christians like maybe a lot of the Christians here on td.win is that we dont want to force you to deny what you believe and submit to god eventhough we are more than willing to ourselves considering our knowledge of good and evil, we simply want to make sure that you're thinking about what you believe in and not actually believing in anything that you might want to rethink and consider. For example myself, I left atheism before I found God, it wasn't god that got me to leave atheism, it was the abundant evil. As soon as I was all alone and a cast away for not being apart of the tribe of the left, I had time to think about the circumstances around my life that lead me to not being an athiest, and that was the very very very beginning of me being able to consider that just maybe a god in some form or fashion might exist out there considering the probability of what happened to me was greater than any lottery I've ever seen.
Anyway. Farewell and safe travels. Keep on doubting everything and you'll do just fine in my opinion. Remember. Real actual fear of God is the beggining of wisdom they say and from my experience it's pretty accurate. Dont let the devil get you down. That's what he wants. If you fear god and not satan, you're on the right path. Of course your a non believer like I was so that part might not matter to you but if you believe in good and evil the concept is the same. Dont let the bad things get you down. The good things more than make up for it. Every day is a gift. You could die tomorrow. Dont forget that either.
Edit: I'm going to add that I'm not going to explain the time period, situations and happenings surrounding jesus because that's a whole adventure for everyone to go through on their own if they want. Truely facisnating stuff. It would be better if anyone reading this is curious to go look into yourself rather than have me tell you. You won't regret it. So much history untold in the schools. Dont forget rome fell right before they staked up jesus and jesus said it would fall and instead of blaming the people for killing them he looked to the sky and said something along the lines of "forgive them father, for they do not know what they are doing" absolutely wild that he said that at a massive turning point in the history of man
I’m not going to agree to this but for the sake of this one discussion...
If this were true and it proved there is a supernatural power, why would you think it’s the Christian god and not one of the 100,000+ other gods man has invented? What evidence would you base that choice on?
You should understand that’s it’s human nature to need an explanation to the unexplained. The most recent example of this phenomenon is the JohnFrum religion and other cargo cults.
The most difficult answer for humans to unsolved phenomena is the accurate answer “we don’t yet know”. Unfortunately the default answer throughout human history is “a god did it” until we discover the correct answer.
I would say that I never said god was a christian. I believe god is god just like reality is reality.
Just like how I believe a lot of Christian's are liars even if they dont think they are.
I also dont believe the laws of physics breaking down at the big bang is proof god exists either. I'm just saying it's not proof god doesnt exist as well. It is proof that the laws of physics dont work equally across 100% of the universe and if it doesnt follow the laws of physics itself then there has to be something interesting happening the likes of which is above our understanding. That doesnt prove god exists but it is also very God-like nonetheless. Evidence that something bigger than physics is happening that is.
I'm also open to the idea that just because it goes against the laws of physics doesnt nessessarily mean the laws of physics could just be unknown and apply differently at the center of the big bang. Maybe it does follow the laws of physics and we just dont have the tools to make it concrete science yet. That being said, if something like the ingredients to the universe being required to trigger a big bang then how did those things come into existence?
The problem for me is that no matter where we draw the line, before during or after the big bang, none of that proves whether a god does or doesnt exist. So to me, athiests are equally if not actually more religious than Christian's. That's of course just my opinion as an ex athiest agnostic type, turned to god in the last couple years. I hope that helps your question. Good question btw.
https://youtu.be/ISdBAf-ysI0
This YouTube link is an hour long video breaking down the history of quantum physics from the past to today and towards the end it talks about what we believe to know as the ingredients to the universe that can be used to create everything as we know it in the visible universe. If a god existed and wanted to summon a universe into existence, the very very end of that video right there would probably be the handful of ingredients nessessary to pop a whole universe into existence. Very interesting stuff. God existing or not imo. Figuratively speaking if you were a god in charge of creating a universe, you really wouldn't need much to do it, and youd probably be able to do it fairly quickly and easily tbh. The bible makes it more of a fairytale "he created the oceans and the sun and the cows and the birds" I myself dont believe he popped a bird into existence. I believe he put the simple ingredients to a universe in place that allows for life to prosper, thus through nature and the universe evolving as we know it, life comes and goes. At least that's my opinion right now at this very moment. Tomorrow It could be different. I'm always changing my mind. Constantly. Many things change, many things downt. Doesnt really seem up to me but kinda seems more up to God in a way. Sometimes I change my mind on things I never expect. Sometimes you cant be friends with the people you want. You cant control reality, reality controls you.
I did not say that...
I said, I believe I’m better served with an accurate view of reality. I require evidence to ensure the accuracy of claims presented. I do not have a belief in a god (atheist) because sufficient evidence has not been presented to support the accuracy of the claim a god exists.
My point here is that you're not actually doing what you just said. If you require evidence to believe god exists then you should require evidence to prove god doesnt exist to justify being an athiest rather than hypocritically not believing in god and then using the same thing you just said you cant do to suddenly become an athiest with no evidence god doesnt exist. See what I'm trying to say here? You're doing the same thing you say your not doing, one sentence after saying you cant do just that.
That's my point. You say you "believe" it gives you a more accurate view on reality but what if I told you what you believed was wrong? Just because you believe something doesnt mean you're right nessessarily. Myself included. If you needed evidence to prove god existed then you should have evidence to prove he doesnt in order to justify being an athiest. So by your own standards you shouldnt be an athiest or a believer. Yet you do not follow your own standards in the very same comment were you proclaim needing evidence.
If you have to put a word front of what you believe in order to better see reality, you are not seeing reality. You are seeing your own reality which is not what reality actually is. Reality is reality. If you used your own standards you just explained, you wouldnt be an athiest or a believer. Instead you need evidence to prove God exists but you ignore and dont seem to want evidence to justify being an athiest other than the seeming lack of evidence of god existing.
I just dont understand why a lack of evidence is enough for you to ignore your own standards. You do not believe in god but do not be fooled you are still a believer, just not in god. You are equally as religious as me. You are equally as religious as me because your own standards for being an athiest are based on the same faith that mind are for being a believer In God.
I want to be clear I'm not arguing here. You're bringing up great points. I'm just trying to get you to see what I'm seeing as the problem in your argument is exactly what drove me to not being an athiest anymore. If you need evidence that god exists to believe in god then you should have evidence proving he doesnt exist in order to be an athiest. That's not what you're doing though. What you're doing is hypocritical. I'm not being mean when I say that just so you know so you can fix it and have a better point of view you can work with in your argument knowledge. Great comment though. I appreciate your conversation ❤
What do you think “atheist” means?
Someone who lacks belief in god.
If someone who believes in god needs to have evidence to convince you he exists then how come athiests dont have any real evidence God doesnt exist?
Atheists are as religious if not more religious than people who believe in god if that's the hypocritical standard they are using.
It's like me saying "I drive trucks because all the people I see driving sports cars cant explain to me how they're better" it's just a bad argument when you could say "trucks are better because x example" when you should just be driving whichever one works for you rather than making decisions because it's not the decision the people you disagree with made. Just because you think someone else is wrong doesnt mean you're right. That's why I ask athiests for evidence god doesnt exist. None of them have ever given me any proof. Meaning they are equally as religious as I am.
Amazing question by the way. I'm glad you asked me that. You ask good questions
Great comment! Every human being is an individual, so it always amazes me why everyone wants/needs to belong to some group. I guess the group behavior is so deeply engraved in us.
And to me personally, God is a spiritual energy that I can access thru meditation. Most people don't call it God, but that doesn't mean it's not the same essence/energy/entity.
Jordan peterson has an interesting explanation of god youd probably enjoy listening to. He says it's hard for him to talk about whether he believes god exists because it's hard to even tell if two separate people are thinking about god in the same way. Interesting point of view imo
Like a 6th sense lol.
Literally. That's kinda what waking up from the democrat plantation felt like. Felt like gaining mind reading powers or something wild haha
Plus, can we really blame the atheists? Have you seen some of the people on television pretending to be Christian leaders? Reading their books and never coming across Aquinas would really twist a person up.
That is a fantastic point. Prosperity gospel makes me want to face palm so hard.
Sorry but Aquinas is about as convincing as CS Lewis and Pascal...as in not convincing to anyone who understands the arguments they are making.
I think you're getting at an interesting point here. We can debate about 'purpose' and what what means, but I doubt I'll get anywhere like that. Instead, let me ask you a sincere question that I'm curious about.
On a practical level, do you think that atheists are more vulnerable to cults and extremist indoctrination than Christians? After all, if you are fully free to make your own purpose, then any choice you make is just as correct and valid as anyone else's choice. If not, then you're being inconsistent. For example, if a fellow atheist decides that the 'purpose' they want to make in their life is to - for example - become a terrorist and murder innocents until they achieve their political objectives. Or become a drug addict. Or become a gold digger. Then do you claim to have any moral authority to say that their choice was the wrong one? If you do, then what moral authority can you claim that they can not also claim? If not, then doesn't that imply that atheism is an evolutionary dead end (e.g. atheists will simply slowly self destruct over many generations until all that remain are people who are naturally inclined to be spiritual)?
Of course, none of this is a theological argument or affirms the validity of my own beliefs. But I am still curious to hear your answer.
No, because a Christian can likewise be convinced that God wants them to be a terrorist, as has happened in the past, including on a large scale in the case of religious wars. Actually the opposite is probably true as you can convince a good person to do bad things by convincing them that “God wills it” and bad people will do bad things regardless, religion or lack thereof does not stop them. There are plenty of Christian murderers and rapists, the BTK killer was caught because he used his Church PC to write his digital letter to the press. Bad people will do bad things. That said, atheists that did not reach their position themselves and were just raised or peer pressured into it are more vulnerable to political quasi-religions like socialism.
As to your point about an absolute moral authority, that is a very complex question with a complex answer, but the short answer is that a legal system can exist outside of religious rules and be based on personal rights and the limitation of the ability to infringe on the rights of others which is necessary for a functioning society. An abstract absolute moral code does not stop sociopaths anyhow, it only really works for good people that wouldn’t kill or steal or rape anyhow, just as I have somehow managed to avoid doing any of those things despite not believing in God. Finally, just because something is socially convenient does not mean that it is true. In other words, just because Christianity makes for a good and easy to follow social foundation flowing from its absolute moral code does not make it true, just useful.
By the way, I am pro-Christian in the sense that while I do not believe in God, or that Jesus resurrected or anything else supernatural, I readily admit that as most people seem to need religion, I would much rather live in a Christian nation than one driven by political religion.
"An abstract absolute moral code does not stop sociopaths anyhow, it only really works for good people that wouldn’t kill or steal or rape anyhow, just as I have somehow managed to avoid doing any of those things despite not believing in God."
You're sort of missing my point here. I'm very glad that you have decided to be a good person and not do those things. But shouldn't you have? Surely if you had stolen things then you would be wealthier. If you had done drugs and slept around you would have had more fun. If you murdered someone inconvenient then you would be better off. Sure, you might not do it because you fear the law... but what if you could get away with it? If you were Mao or Stalin or Clinton then no one would dare accuse to you. What does it even mean to be 'good' if you surrender all moral authority to say that any particular action is evil?
As for your discussion about some Christians being bad and that convenience does not imply truth - you are correct, of course. I do not challenge those assertions. I am simply making the observation that atheism as an idea is not capable of long term survival in the battle of ideas. By the way - I hope you don't interpret anything I'm saying as overly aggressive or insulting! I'm just very curious to see how the other side thinks about such things.
But I don’t want to rape or steal or kill, that’s the whole point. I respect other people’s right to their bodies and property, and I suspect most people innately do as well, as humans evolved as a social species. Those that do not largely end up in prison, segregated away from the rest of society, except for some very well connected people like Murder Gramma. To turn it around, would you rape, steal and kill but for your fear of going to hell or otherwise acting counter to God’s authority? I would hope not. Edit: also, if you became convinced that God told you to commit murder, would you? If all morality flows from God, then it is infinitely malleable, he need but change his mind or make an exception.
As to the meaning of “good” outside of an objective moral system, that’s a long answer but suffice it to say that it’s something that can be deduced from some basic principles of personal autonomy. But yes, it requires some axioms to be taken, but again, religion being “easier” as a moral foundation does not make it correct as to its supernatural claims.
Thank you for your collected response. If it was the other way around I would have been frustrated. We must MAGA together!!
People can. Leftists can't. Ergo, Leftists aren't people?
I'm not really religious, but recently I started to believe in God's existence. A lot of things in my life outside of my control went right, and a lot of things went wrong before and it made me a better person. God's tough love has never been more apparent.
God is sovereign over the good times in our lives and also the bad times.
Seek a personal relationship with God. Not being religious will benefit you like crazy. How many churches had pastors jumping up and down every Sunday about how much they love Jesus, but shut down and abandoned their parishioners during covid? Finding a good church can be like hunting for buried treasure. Definitely look for one, but seek Christ in your home and in your life until you find that special community that will be your home.
I'm Agnostic as a very conscious choice, and my life is pretty great. Nothing bothers me, and my credo is, "Don't work or wish for someone else's detriment and things will just work out," and they always do.
Can it be credited to sidestepping a lot of controversy by saying, "I have no horse in this race"?
I'm not saying that.
I'm also not not saying that.
"God is above logic." So deep.
well it's true
If He is the God of Logic than he controls all informal logic too. Muhahahaha
"And the elder said to the younger Our father is old, and there is no man left on the earth, to come in unto us after the manner of the whole earth. Come, let us make him drunk with wine, and let us lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our father. And they made their father drink wine that night: and the elder went in and lay with her father: but he perceived not neither when his daughter lay down, nor when she rose up. And the next day the elder said to the younger: Behold I lay last night with my father, let us make him drink wine also to night, and thou shalt lie with him, that we may save seed of our father. They made their father drink wine that night also, and the younger daughter went in, and lay with him: and neither then did he perceive when she lay down, nor when she rose up. So the two daughters of Lot were with child by their father." [Genesis 19:31-36]
"When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again." Exodus 21: 7-8
"Slaves, be subject to your masters with all reverence, not only to those who are good and equitable but also to those who are perverse." (1 Peter 2:18)
"She lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses." Ezekiel 23:20
Incest, slavery, selling your daughter, and quite the description of someone's genitals and blown load size. Quite the logical book
Don't throw all us atheists in with the SJW retards just yet.
I do not believe but will defend you and your beliefs, now Islam on the other hand, fuck that shit.
To any muslims out there, sorry not sorry, your team is fucked in the head when it comes to violence so you all lose. Life is not fair suck it up.
“The first gulp from the glass of natural sciences will turn you into an atheist, but at the bottom of the glass God is waiting for you.”
― Werner Heisenberg
What does movements of celestial bodies mean?
It's like the intricate workings of a watch. If you find a watch in the middle of the forest, you don't assume it came into existence naturally. You know that someone designed and created it. Same is true for the universe.
Time.
I once had a Physics professor in college who spent a good fifteen minutes talking about how some mathematical formula did something with planets and atoms and other stuff (it was way above my head.) He said, "You can believe what you want but I look at this and think, 'This is God's doing.'"
Primo. This is the grandfather of this meme.
Science is just the slow realization of God's creation.
My grandmother’s brother had degrees in mathematics and physics. He wrote several books on various subjects that are still relevant today. He worked as a scientist at Lawrence Livermore Lab and retired from there.
He was a devout Christian. He was a fervent anti-communist.
I am an astrophysicist. Just got baptized at the beginning of this year after a lifetime of being atheist/agnostic.
Thank you! I'd give more information, but I do not want to dox myself.
Well, we have three pieces of data from which we can triangulate your identity:
Working backwards from there, we can reliably conclude you are:
...
...
Awesome.
Congrats on the baptism, brother (or sister)!
Haha thank you! Doing my best to love God, my wife, and my neighbor.
But I am just a white male, so I am a racist Nazi.
It was my marriage and a lifetime of learning that brought me here. My wife is Christian and she introduced me to God via her actions and I wanted that, whatever it was (I had no idea what it truly meant at the time). I study mysterious things about the universe that just make more sense in a universe created by Him. Hard to put into words.
There was no "ah-ha!" moment. It was a slow realization that Jesus Christ is my Lord and Savior and that God became flesh to save us all from our sins.
I went from atheist/agnostic (most of my life), to a kind of pantheism (for a few years I guess), to Christian (past few years). When the Truth is so obvious, it finds its way into your heart.
The Holy Spirit worked hard to get me where I am today. Still feels like I am living in some weird dichotomy, but I am coming to know God more every day and I know everything good came from Him.
That's so awesome.
In the same way, you wives must accept the authority of your husbands. Then, even if some refuse to obey the Good News, your godly lives will speak to them without any words. They will be won over by observing your pure and reverent lives. 1 Peter 3:1-2
My wife and I make a great couple. We've been going through some rough times (two miscarriages this year -- the last one was very recent). Trying to focus on God and I know He is bringing me through this. I am much stronger after the first one happened, so now I can be present for my wife and lift her up. I lost my mind after the first one.
Soon, Jesus will come back and He will wipe away every tear.
Thanks, I'll check it out.
Congrats! I bet the wondrous things you see in your work will have an extra special wonder to them now. 🤩
Yes, they do! Many of the great astronomers were Christian. I am part of a super-elite group of fellow autists.
💫🪐✨ so awesome 😎
Hey, congrats and welcome to the faith. How was your faith journey through science? What brought you to Christianity?
Thank you!
I was atheist my whole life. Never went to church because my family didn't -- though we were conservative in every other sense. A few years back, thanks to my wife, I started reading the Bible and going to church.
I don't really talk to my colleagues about my faith, except a few of my friends who are also astrophysicists and also Christians. It just never comes up.
People in astrophysics generally don't care what you are, as long as you are doing interesting things and publishing lots of papers. Most of the people in the field are autistic (like me) and generally just love solving interesting problems. I had a problem in my life -- I had no hope. I had no reason for things. I wasn't nihilistic (thank God); I thought everything mattered equally (a strange problem to have).
God solves all of it and brings me joy, and I hope I do a good job representing Him.
I study black holes (excuse me, holes of color), cosmology, general relativity, gamma-ray bursts, etc. Knowing God created the universe makes these studies so much more meaningful. Otherwise, I am just a robot calculating away for no good reason other than to "advance knowledge."
Contractors feel the same way. Framing another house just to "advance the housing market" gets old after the fist 10 years. Deeper meaning is so key to fulfillment.
I'm sure growing in faith has brought you and your wife closer together as well
I grew up in faith, lost it getting a hard science degree, then found my way back with a few fits and starts.
For me I found 1. As a scientist I believed in truth and enlightenment and knowledge, and God is basically that personified. 2. My life just works better when I believe (like you said, God solves all of it)
God has changed the way I look at life, and therefore all of my human relationships. He has been the biggest source of joy in my whole life.
I love Psalm 19:1. I always go back to it when I am stuck on my research and feeling like I will never figure anything out.
That verse coming from an astrophysicst is so legit I can't find the words
It's coming from God, so you don't have to :)
I'm a scientist (physics/Elec. Eng.) that worked at Sandia Natl. Lab, and did my post-doc at MIT. I have met Christians everywhere, being one myself, of course. My group at MIT was also heavily Jewish, and really exceptional people.
Life and this world are complex. Their are some midwits who think they have achieved some higher level of mental capacity, that supercedes a religious capacity, but I've met some truly brilliant people over the years that were Christians, or at the very least religious.
For a fun read, check out my personal favorite super-genuis (maybe more so than even Einstein), Christian, super-anti-communist, John von Neumann.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_von_Neumann
He was not able to accept the proximity of his own demise, and the shadow of impending death instilled great fear in him.[208] He invited a Catholic priest, Father Anselm Strittmatter, O.S.B., to visit him for consultation.[18][207] Von Neumann reportedly said, "So long as there is the possibility of eternal damnation for nonbelievers it is more logical to be a believer at the end," referring to Pascal's wager. He had earlier confided to his mother, "There probably has to be a God. Many things are easier to explain if there is than if there isn't."[209][210][211] Father Strittmatter administered the last rites to him.[18] Some of von Neumann's friends (such as Abraham Pais and Oskar Morgenstern) said they had always believed him to be "completely agnostic".[210][212] Of this deathbed conversion, Morgenstern told Heims, "He was of course completely agnostic all his life, and then he suddenly turned Catholic—it doesn't agree with anything whatsoever in his attitude, outlook and thinking when he was healthy."[213] Father Strittmatter recalled that even after his conversion, von Neumann did not receive much peace or comfort from it, as he still remained terrified of death.
If someone says that religion is real, then I would say that it is only a cultural thing instead of the truth.
For the question on the existence of something which may or may not exist, it is impossible to disprove the non existence of any deity or a higher power. So, it is more logical to be agnostic rather than a believer or an atheist.
Von Neumann didn't believe in the same. It was out of fear, that he did try to use Pascal's wager to justify his belief in his final days.
Pascal's wager is too simplistic of an argument to make. Something similar on the other side would be the atheist's wager.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheist%27s_Wager
I don't totally disagree with you, but he was baptized into Catholicism in 1930, way before his death. Of course you could argue that it was so that he could marry Marietta.
"Prior to his marriage to Marietta, von Neumann was baptized a Catholic in 1930."
So, it would seem that there were at the very least, some Christian inclinations, in addition to Pascal's Wager. Christianity also teaches that even an 11th hour Christian is still a Christian, as well. You don't necessarily have to agree with that point, but that is the position of scripture.
So, in total, motivations aside, the guy was baptized in 1930, years before his illness, seemed to teeter on the side of Christianity, and did take a Christian stance on his deathbed. Yeah, I'll call that a Christian, but will acknowledge that it's subject to debate.
https://www.pewforum.org/2009/11/05/scientists-and-belief/
Interesting link, what conclusions do you draw from that?
The most obvious conclusion would be that despite anecdotal evidence, this study shows that scientists are less religious in general.
A bolder claim from this would be that scientists, whom I would say are more intelligent on average, become more irreligious, because they study things more methodically, apart from religions being at odds with science.
Something interesting, which I found counterintuitive was that younger scientists are more religious than older ones. I think a probable reason for that may be because they might not have completely formed their views and may be reflective of the beliefs of their family and friends.
Another interesting thing I found is that the younger people seem to be more decisive of their views. Only 3 percent are shown to not know or didn't share.
While on the other hand, physicists are shown to be the most undecided or not their claim to not know. It isn't surprising to be honest. Their field of study does involve a lot of about matter and how things exist/how processes happen. So, it makes sense that they could claim to not know because it is a very difficult question.
Also, chemists seem to believe in gods more than most groups. I think a reason for that could be that they abstract out chemistry and keep it separate from religion. On the other hand, biologists seem to believe lesser. It is intuitive as well, because they do study about cells, organisms, the possible mechanisms about how things in organisms work.
So, while physicists and biologists believe in gods to a lesser extent, their perspectives are shaped by the questions they ask themselves. Such as the nature of life and the way matter/energy/waves exist and interact and interact. Chemists on the other hand would have a different perspective though.
I would really want to know what the percentages for psychologists and historians are.
Seemingly at odds but not necessarily. Depends on your theology. Whether God exists in the gaps of science or God exists for a higher purpose than this.
It's a shame, really, that many churches still teach evolution exclusionism. It's such weak theological grounds
I used to HATE christianity. Now I'm ready to go deus vult on some fools
These motherfuckers need Jesus.
We truly don’t even know so many things in our universe. Are there other universes? Is there other life? What’s at the end of the universe? I could go on and on. We can’t answer these questions, but people want to be so arrogant as to say there for sure is not a god. It’s ignorant at best. Of course these things don’t prove the existence of a god, but to be so arrogant and demeaning to others is dumb.
Gnostic Atheism is dumb.
I'm an agnostic, and the reason is simple: for me, the data doesn't necessarily indicate divine existence. And the thing is, I get that theists look at miracles and other data points and come to the conclusion that God does exist. And even if I don't yet share that view, that doesn't invalidate their interptetation of the data points.. Actually, stick a pin in that one, maybe it's the fact that I can acknowledge I might be wrong? Considering how much millennial atheist culture is about rejecting any version of reality other than your own, extending beyond the question of divinity and going into politics, economics, etc., suddenly their fervency makes a whole lot more sense. Huh.
But it is the pinnacle of arrogance and stupidity to be a gnostic atheist. We can not possibly execute the breadth and depth of experimentation to disprove God's existence. To do so, you would have to, yourself, be omniscient and omnipresent.
Jesus loves you!
If you answer anything about their than “yes” to the question “do you believe in god”, you’re an atheist. You can identify however you want but I don’t think there’s a justification for casting aspersions.
Nnnope, I disagree. I'm not "casting aspersions", at least not without a clean conscience.
The factual existence of God or not is independent of my recognition of the fact. If a child doesn't know nuclear fusion, that doesn't make the sun suddenly stop shining because his belief is what generates its existence.
Gnosticism/Agnosticism (the state of knowing/not knowing) is a binary state much like Theism/Atheism (the state of having belief in the existence of God/non-existence of God). You, presumably, are a gnostic theist, as are most adherents to a faith system, as it is the teachings of your religion that prove the point to you. You can also be an agnostic theist, having a general belief that there's some sort of higher power than humanity but lacking any sort of evidence for it, or feeling that current explanations or systems fail to capture the reality.
A gnostic atheist, i.e. a person who says there's "proof there's no god", is suggesting they have an infinite data set to prove their conclusion. By virtue of how tiny we are in the universe, this is literally impossible.
You opened up by saying atheism is dumb. Then you later acknowledge that atheism in general is distinct from gnostic atheism. Atheism, when used without qualifiers, means the absence of a positive belief in god. Gnosticism/ agnosticism pertains to knowledge as you know. You are an atheist if you lack a positive belief in god (or a god or gods). You can choose whatever label you want but it’s silly to call others dumb The way you have.
Then literally all you needed to say was "you should have opened with 'gnostic atheism is dumb'."
I feel like you're just taking potshots at semantics with no real purpose other than to try to dunk on the stupid agnostic guy. We all know that "atheism" is a byword with "gnostic" presumed to be in front of it. Otherwise, agnostic is used. I thought I had made that clear in the body of my post.
You're right, agnosticism is a position of ignorance, and the theistic position of the person who claims to be agnostic is more or less irrelevant. To me, though, the distinction is important.
If a physicist lays out string theory or something, and points to a bunch of data and equations and stuff showing it, then they have gnostic belief in that system. An agnostic may be a layperson who says "yeah, I don't know about all this quantum string stuff, it sounds like something beyond the scope of human perception, but hey, the physicist has his data indicating it." That's the agnostic atheist. The agnostic theist, on the other hand, enrolls in that physicist's lecture, because they are curious to find out more about the data that led the physicist to that conclusion. In other words, they don't doubt string theory may exist, but they are aware of their lack of knowledge on the concept.
The gnostic atheist is the rival physicist who says "no, fuck that, string theory can't be right". When you ask them for an alternative theory, they don't have one to present. They simply declare that we already have sufficient data to disprove string theory, despite the concept being beyond an level of spatial awareness a human is normally capable of.
You’re calling people dumb but you say I’m taking potshots for suggesting you don’t insult people?
Look brother (or sister), I’m just saying that there are lots of people, like me, that describe themselves as atheists and don’t claim to know for a fact that a god (or gods) doesn’t exist. Gnostic is not and should not be presumed when a person calls themselves atheist. I am an agnostic atheist but I call myself an atheist because to me that’s the important part; I don’t have a belief in a god.
That being said, we can logically reduce that certain supernatural entities don’t exist, including certain versions of god. The Invisible Pink Unicorn can’t exist because it is logically impossible to be both pink and invisible.
At the same end of the day, I’m just looking for understanding. You may have more allies than you think. And if you are insulting people, you may never discover that you are on the same side.
I always like to ask people of that mindset what happens after we die. Does our soul go to another plane of existence? They usually try to say something like that's it, there's nothing, just blackness, and in a "matter of fact" type manner, of course. Then I ask them how they know that, because as far as I can see, we've had scientists studying everything on this Earth for many, many years, millions upon millions of people have died for many millenniums, and as far as I know, not a single one of them can say definitively what happens to us after we die.
They usually just draw a blank after that.
Top kek!
Midwits
So coined.
Can you put a tiny little area all the way to the right that says ‘God does not exist’, and a brain the normal size with normal facial expression. Then you’ll be accurate. Belief in God is not required for good ethics and morality. Belief in God is pure mysticism. Bring on the downvotes. I support Trump based on reason, not mysticism.
Those who believe in god due to what you define as "mysticism" are the ones on the left side of the graph. Looks like you are in are falling somewhere in the middle 😆.
Why do the ones on the right believe in god?
The deeply educated belief has been silenced for some time (and not exactly taking great effort to communicate) so it's not an unfair question at all. There are some exceptional resources on youtube if you want to go all the way through the looking glass, but C.S. Lewis's books are an easy place to start.
If you need it now, in once sentence, the more you study the material world, the more clear it is a medium, not the source of reality. Ancient people discovered this, recorded it, mythologized it, ritualized it, and passed it down to us where many now blindly reject. Questions about the mechanisms of God's agency in this process is an open question from the modern era, potentially flawed in the framing.
The chart is misleading, not everyone in the middle intellectually is stupid enough to believe that the crowd-sourcing of natural theology into science is robust enough to make them their own gods. Most people don't even realize that is the garbage they are being fed in modernism and post-modernism, I know I didn't when I was younger.
Best comment here
far as im concerned, this was made to create division
Wouldn't what you want just be another, calmer one in the center? If you want it to be a "normal" brain after all.
Unless you're intentionally saying "oh man, normal atheists are smarter than any Christians" (which is what putting it one the right would indicate) in which case you still belong in the center, just for different reasons.
I grew up catholic. Church every Sunday all that. Around mid twenties started questioning everything. Became agnostic. As I got older I would give really deep thought to it all. Now. I am back to a man of God.
Me too. The worldly view has a strong pull on the young man
Just out of curiosity, does anyone care to explain to me how they know that god exists and it's just made up?
No one can know, anyone who claims otherwise is either lying or just an idiot. I prefer to refer to myself as a human, and neither atheist or agnostic, but if i had to choose one i would say agnostic. I've lived with Christians who openly lie and make up fairy tales about their religion to make it sound more convincing. Unfortunately for them i have done my research and am not easily fooled, however i don't claim to know whether god does or doesn't exist, i would be lying if i did. All this stuff going on these days has made me want to just say screw it and join their ranks regardless though, because i am convinced that a good portion of people do need religion in order to keep themselves in check. I just can't bring myself to say that the bible is anything more than it is, a collection of ancient stories.
I completely agree with your positions. And it depends on the definitions people have in their head when they think atheism. In a lot of Christian circles they define "atheist" as someone who hates god and wants to be their own...
Others use it to refer to people who assert the positive claim that god doesn't exist.
Most internet atheists will define it as the opposite of being a theist. So if you do have a positive belief that a god exists, then you're a theist. If you don't hold that belief you're an atheist. Sounds like you could fit into that definition, but I don't care what you call yourself.
For me, I've seen nothing to convince me there's any truth to the supernatural claims of any religion, And so that's why I don't believe. Like you said, it's a collection of ancient stories.
Yep i agree, the vast majority of atheists actually fall under the category of agnostic, but have either been pushed into the atheist category by the religious, or through opposition to religion itself as sort of a self defense against it. Mostly because they see the lies and hypocrisy and simply want to take a hard line stance against it. Cause for the most part the general populace knows nothing about either stance, they just choose one and go with it.
The difference as I understand it is subtle and mostly semantic.
gnostic / agnostic addresses what you claim you know.
theist / atheist address what you claim you believe.
Personally, I believe there's no god, but I won't claim to know it.
But I'm confident I can at least rule out the christian god of the bible as not existing based on the claims and characteristics described in the bible.
Logically cannot and factually cannot prove things which are matters of faith.
The best analogy is that right now our understanding of the universe is occluded by our current limitations however our ability to infer what maybe behind the complete truth of everything is an all mighty creator which personally loves each and everyone of us, and grants each of us the opportunity to succeed or fail spectacularly.
Your explanation was way better than mine. But it was what I was trying to say.
Well said!!
So if there's some things we don't understand, and some things we do understand, How does that tell us anything about whether or not there's a god?
Also, How do you define faith? Seems like the context in which you used it you mean believing in things in which there's no proof.
Do you think it's a good thing to believe other ideas without proof, because it's an act of faith? Like, Islam, Buddhism, new age, etc?? Or is there only one particular ideology that gets special consideration and a different standard of proof than all the others?
How does the lack of proof tells us anything about whether or not there is a God? It doesn't and if you frame things in such a manner, the only result will always be it doesn't.
God maybe humanity's long attempt to understand the nature of itself and the universe. This sort of argument necessarily implies that God is the collective creation of Man, rather than the other way around.
But God is not a natural force which bends to our wills upon demand.
I do not believe things without proof though the proofs only indirectly rather than directly proving the existence of God: the wonderful circumstance which has created the world I live in and the life I've been able to live. I believe that there seems to be a guiding hand behind where my destiny will lie, and defies or challenges all other social manipulation. I do not know the exact dimensions of this destiny but it seems to be one that is not probable given where I started. And this goes the same for you, and everyone.
Religion, imho, is a relationship between Man and God.
Islam, I find, is not a religion largely because of its origins and then its history: It has, and seems to always will be, not a personal relationship between God and Man but primarily a political movement and merely co-opted some of Eastern and Greek Christian traditions into itself with the capture of the Alexandria, Jerusalem and Antioch- the traditional hearts of Christianity.
Nor is Buddhism a religion because the primary beliefs, the eightfold paths and the five aggregates, sound like the early attempts at psychology and the internalization of civic morals. It does not seek a relationship between God and Man, but attempts to better oneself to save oneself but only oneself.
It is inaccurate to frame Christianity as merely an ideology for all the other faiths have similar ideologies and themes - bettering oneself, peace through domination, some manifestation of justice - but only one has the divine manifested itself and continues to manifest itself.
Christianity is special for it is the one where during the 2000 years of its existence, has its primary entity of veneration manifested itself (albeit capriciously but then again so does any living entity and much more so perhaps a divine one) to its followers.
Framing Christianity as an ideology seeks to prove that it is an ideology rather than a doctrine of faith. You've come up with a conclusion before making the argument.
So then what's the default position when there is no evidence and someone makes an extraordinary claim? Do you just automatically believe the claim until it's disproven? Or do you think it makes sense to wait until there's evidence before believing something?
You claim there have been manifestations of god, but that claim that comes right after you wrote out a bunch of text explaining why you don't need evidence to believe something.
See a problem there? Anyone can claim there have been manifestations of ANYTHING if evidence isn't part of the equation.
I’ll give it a try:
What if... God’s not made up?
What if... he/she/it/whatever always was, always existed, from the beginning of all time & will always be, always exist until the end of time?
Also, not sure if anyone can say they KNOW God exists, but can say we have FAITH that God exists. Maybe we see and feel the existence of God more than we see / feel the impossibility of the existence.
IMHO.
Which god? They can't all be real at the same time...
And if faith is the standard for believing in something, Can't I just say I have FAITH that there is no god, And now I've got equal weight to my position as you have yours, right?
Anyone can believe anything on faith if expecting proof or evidence is completely taken out of the equation.
Maybe there’s only one god? And different cultures expressed this God in their own way, but that in reality, it’s the same?
Your position has always had equal weight to mine - it’s a free world and you are fully allowed to believe any way you do.
The reason why faith comes into play for me (& for many) with regards to belief in God, is that the full existence & understanding of that existence, is bigger than what our brains can comprehend.
Can you fully know time? Not like hours and months etc... but as a concept. Eternity? Infinity? Always was, alway will be. What was at the very very beginning of the world?... before the spark or primordial ooze or whatever you believe, whatever you know... how did it get there? Think about it for a minute, 5 minutes... it’s literally unfathomable to our minds.
That’s how I feel about God. He’s there. I feel it. I see it. But I can never fully KNOW it. I just believe it. 🤷♂️
Well.... The way I see it is not all positions are equal, not all beliefs are equal.
There are doctors who believe the best way to treat an infected cut is with antibiotics, and there are shaman who think the best way to treat it is by pissing on it and stuffing it with goat shit.
Objectively, one of those group's beliefs are more correct....
Point I'm making is the way true ideas are separated from false ideas is with evidence and testing. We can test what happens to cuts stuffed with shit vs cuts treated with antibiotics, and our beliefs can be informed by this.
I'm not about to believe a bunch of supernatural claims that demand all kinds of actions and adherence from me, when the people making those claims have conveniently exempted them from needing any evidence.
For me, a question as large as the origins of mankind and the universe REQUIRES proof before I will say I know or believe.
I hear what you’re saying w regards to not all positions being equal, but really that’s not ALWAYS the case. There are positions that elicit an outcome, like those of medicine, which have a provable causality. One works. The other doesn’t.
But my belief in God and your doubt in it, are equal since neither can be fully proven. And if your belief requires proof first, then maybe your full disbelief should also require proof?
For me I don’t think it’s possible to have full proof either for OR against God.
Maybe, just maybe, your willingness to disbelieve without need for proof, has more to do with this: “ that demand all kinds of actions and adherence from me”
Right now, don’t think of God & religion as the same thing. Start with: is there a possibility that God exists... without automatically jumping to actions & adherences etc.
Does religion not also promise tangible outcomes? It promises you an afterlife and depending on who you listen to, also promises changes in your personality and life.
Religion promises a lot of stuff I don't see it delivering...
Let me ask you this... Do you have garlic hanging in your windows? I mean no one has ever provided proof that vampires don't exist.
Maybe your full disbelief in vampires should also require proof... If not perhaps you should hang the garlic up just to be safe.
And keep a gun loaded with a silver bullet for the werewolves... They too have not been disproven.
Same with zombies... Not disproven either.
Are you starting to see why, You shouldn't need proof to disbelieve something? The reason the person making the claim has the burden of proof is because anyone can claim anything and you can't prove a negative.
If to you, vampires & werewolves & God are worthy of the same understanding, then go ahead and feel that way. Make light of it & joke about God.
But to me there is no greater wonder in the world, than that of God. To me, the presence of God is is seen in so many things on this earth and in the celestial heavens.
How do you explain your id, the part of your consciousness that knows you are you & not someone else? How do you explain how the universe was formed & what was here before it existed? How do you explain near death experiences?
God is part of you, at all times, but especially when you love. You can feel Gods presence. God is in you & in me, whether you acknowledge that or not. It’s ok. God will still be there for you either way. God happily allows you to make your own choices in life.... including in the belief in God.
Edit to add: “ Religion promises a lot of stuff I don't see it delivering”. I mentioned earlier, if you take “religion” out of the equation right now, I bet you’ll be able to see Gods existence without so much internal push back. Maybe.
An afterlife literally isn't a tangible outcome. Death and thus the vague concept of what happens after life is an inevitability.
If you do good things, you will go to Heaven isn't scripture. Loving God will bring you to Heaven. Doing good things MIGHT be your manifestation of loving God. But you are not assured of your place in Heaven. There are no tangible outcomes with God.
We cannot directly prove God exists. Those of us who are Christian believe He exists. I do not believe vampires exist, which is why I do not hang garlic out.
You are not demanded to do anything when you go to church, you are invited.
Your arguments seem to keep ignoring the starting premise that you cannot directly prove the existence of God and to insist on it seems that you are uninterested in the concepts of faith. God is no beast or force of nature which acts on our whim or manipulation.
Of course not. Just as nobody can convince anyone that god doesn’t exist. I’ll tell you for me I did the whole teenager struggle with believing in god thing. But I always had that nagging gut feeling that god exists. Something I can’t explain. One day I was browsing through wikipedia of famous founding fathers of our country and the like. Some of the smartest people. I kept noticing something in common with almost all of them: deism. It all clicked after that. A god that set up and uses science and laws of nature. It didn’t have to be magic fairy tales or no god. There are other options.
Well.. Just because something can't be proven to not exist means nothing.
Leprechauns, Vampires, Werewolves, Zombies... No one can prove they DON'T exist. No one can prove they DO... By that standard god is on the same footing evidence wise.
Personally, I spend about as much time praying for the salvation of my soul as you do hanging up garlic in your windows to keep vampires out.
And the problem I have with deism is it seems like the halfway point to just realizing there's probably no god at all. I mean... The foundational idea of a monotheistic god comes from religion. Zoroastrianism, Judiasim, and later Christianity and Islam.
And in all of those belief systems it's very clear that god is not just a mere mindless force of nature, but rather a being with human like characteristics and supernatural involvement in human affairs.
So to just change the definition to mean some force or causal event that resulted in us being here... Great... But you're miles and miles away from where the concept of god started. At that point why not just recognize you are no longer talking about the same thing?
I'd be happy too. But first I'd ask if you ever considered the possibility that reality being purely determined by mechanical cause and effect isn't itself simply a "made up" perspective. Assuming of course that a modern secular mindset is the one you are coming from.
I'm not going to pretend to understand the inner most workings of reality... Are you?
So if there's somethings we don't understand, and some things we do understand, How does that tell us anything about whether or not there's a god?
Because the process of religion is not about "what we know" most of the time. Although I will concede that many practitioners falsely focus on that. The purpose of religion, at least my faith, is exactly the dilemma you present at the bottom. It provides us a process by which we are to map out the unknown. This is presented most clearly in the form of death.
So those parts of reality that we don't understand, the way to confront them is sacrificial love towards those around us. That is how the divine order (love) is brought to the unknown.
I recognize this is all abstract and possibly meaningless to you, but if you'd like me to go into greater detail on any of the claims, building them up in more systematic and secular manner I'd be happy to do so.
That's only if your curious tho, if your instinct is to argue I will say before hand that I have no interest in that. (Also not implying that you are argumentative)
Well here's my point. Faith is a TERRIBLE process for mapping out the unknown.
Think of all the things people used to not know anything about.... Germs, Gravity, Radio waves, electricity, the cosmos, chemistry, etc... Think of all the tangible benefits we have gained from understanding these previously unknown things.
Now let me ask you this.... Did we use faith to gain an understanding of germs? Did we use faith to discover and make use of radio waves?
Or is there perhaps a better method than faith for mapping out the unknown?
You are blind to what you are arguing against. The principles of the faith are the exact thing that brought those discoveries. In fact it is the only thing that even makes them meaningful at all. You betray a lack of curiosity in your counter point, however, as you didn't ask for explanation of the claims which you obviously misunderstood and I stead insisted on making a point that every 18 year old in his first year of college, myself included, thinks is a reasonable argument against the belief in a transcendent meaning providing structure to their life.
Can you explain how faith leads to a discovery?
Can you tell me any major discovery was made with faith?
Actually according to quantum mechanics, we know about states which aren't deterministic. Unless we have a non local deterministic theory, it is safe to assume that it is non-deterministic.
Assume a true random number generator made up of a qubit is used to decide upon a classical deterministic decision. The randomness of the previous random number generator will make sure that the further action cannot be predicted through deterministic mechanics.
So, reality needn't be deterministic. Yet, it can still be predicted to a certain degree. If anything, people can consider axioms which explain things the truth. We probably don't need a god for explaining that.
I'm still agnostic atheist, but I'm a Christian agnostic atheist. I grew up and live by Christian values. Really, what most people are mad about religion is the dogma, and not the underlying belief system.
Most atheists throw the baby out with the bath water and then someone comes and fills their bath up with shit.
Aye same muh dood. Both my parents are christian but my brother and I are agnostic athiests. Still a die hard conservative and always will be in most non religious aspects.
The first gulp from the glass of natural sciences will turn you into an atheist, but at the bottom of the glass God is waiting for you.
This meme is based on that fact that scientists through the ages mention that what they cant explain must be god's work. It was because they couldnt explain it. Like back in the time, religions were invented to explain things that couldn't.
It's not because some old clever guys couldnt explain some stuffs that beliving is god in somehow a mark of intelligence.
The logic behind this meme is 101 how leftism try to convince gulible people
This but IQ is years of my life
Mid-wits believe in God, you find them crying out for him at their darkest moments. Leftist Atheism is just another manifestation of hating their dads, authority figures, hierarchies, and the "cruel" order of universe they don't (want to) understand is necessary.
There is a force and order to all creation that is eternal and beyond us.
Evil exists, and with discernment we see it's presence where God's spirit is not.
We were given an example, in physical human form, of the miracles and of sacrifice we are unable to make, but if we believe the greatest sacrifice has already been made for our sins, we can repent and strive to rid ourselves of those sins to be closer with God and the higher order he wants for us.
For those pedes that are having a hard time with an intellectual argument for god i really enjoyed Jordan Petersons Biblical lectures. They were a great introduction to thinking of religion as a meta narrative.
Their is much more big brain religious stuff out there though, and it is worth steal manning the argument for God.
when I look at the Left's behavior
"I may be ab Atheist, but y'all need Jesus!"
For me it has so far been:
God Exists > God Does Not Exist > The Literal Existence of God Doesn't Matter and is Missing The Point
Based apatheist.
I'm in the minority but I dont believe in a god. I still vote red. I would never take religion away from anyone or tell anyone how to live!! I'm libertarian and I know I'm in the minority.. I see the joke and I get the just. KEK and freedom of religion is important!!!
100% these clowns dont even know what bathroom to use anymore!!!
Is being agnostic ok 🥺🥺
I'm pretty sure being agnostic doesn't put you in the God doesn't exist club.
You guys certainly aren't angsty or annoying like the fedora wearing atheist.
lol I am in a christian family so I act like one and I got the moral compass down. I find it funny that in a lot of ways I am more conservative than my conservative christian friends.
I would argue this is not accurate. Faith should and most likely does not have anything to do with IQ. It's just a decision someone makes to have faith or to not. There is nothing out there that proves God is real, therefore you have to have blind faith. You are trusting what others have told you
I dont believe in God but I do believe it is possible a God exists. I think it's fair to admit no one actually knows.
I like it here but I don't believe in God lol
I believe in balance. If there IS Evil in this world (and I have seen it).. there must be at least an equal and opposite force..
God is good, ever since Trump won i have been feeling like something special has happened and its brought me closer to God.
Psalm 14 1
I feel like this, with parental influence as a kid, I fully believed. 18-30 I think the cultural bombardment got the best of me, didn't believe at all. 30s now, fully believe and having a daughter that will be raised to believe.
Mediocrity is a statistical certainty, yet everyone becomes convinced that they are full of wisdom. Merely making a law that everyone will be above average (such as 'no child left behind') does not change the universe of human experience. We have a generation of young people who have been assured that their little thoughts are brilliant. This is mostly because this is a good way to get them to go into debt at universities full of cynical rent seekers and exploiters. Watch the student loan bubble - its gotta burst.
Damn midwits, always trying to showoff how much Neitzche they can misqoute from highschool
I dunno if its a function of intelligence but more so wisdom, but ya I went through this myself as well
as a kid I believed in god because my parents told me to
when i was a teenager/early 20s i became skeptical and tbh not atheist but agnostic (although I was always in favor of Christianity)
late 20s/early 30s i truly opened my mind and soul and im a believer again.
https://www.pewforum.org/2009/11/05/scientists-and-belief/
I've been a science lover since I was little, but the people who think science can work as a moral foundation, or that morality is self-evident to a rational mind, are incredibly confused. I've seen these people cite the "golden rule", not understanding that the very reason they think it's a good idea is because they've been raised within a religious framework that properly contextualizes such an idea to them.
I honestly was agnostic until I started listening to Jordan Peterson. Now, if anything, I truly appreciate the foundations Christianity has laid out for this country and modern civilization.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion...
Study involving atheism, magnetism, brain function and the posterior medial frontal cortex
"This has to be embarrassing . . . if you’re an atheist. A new study performed at the University of York used targeted magnetism to shut down part of the brain. The result: belief in God disappeared among more than 30 percent of participants. That in itself may not seem so embarrassing, but consider that the specific part of the brain they frazzled was the posterior medial frontal cortex —the part associated with detecting and solving problems, i.e., reasoning and logic. In other words, when you shut down the part of the brain most associated with logic and reasoning, greater levels of atheism result."
~University of York, Study: Magnetism and Brain Function.
Religious individuals and thicker cerebral cortices
"According to the Journal of the American Medical Association - Psychiatry, people who place a high importance of religion in their lives have thicker cerebral cortices and may be better able to fight depression. Thicker cerebral cortices in individuals is positively associated with higher intelligence."
Regular prayer/meditation and larger frontal lobes
According to Scientific American: “Several studies have revealed that people who practice meditation or have prayed for many years exhibit increased activity and have more brain tissue in their frontal lobes, regions associated with attention and reward, as compared with people who do not meditate or pray."
Atheists and dopamine levels in the brain
According to Scientific American: "Research also suggests that a religious brain exhibits higher levels of dopamine, a hormone associated with increased attention and motivation."
Irreligion and domestic violence
Research suggests that irreligiousity is a causal factor for domestic violence. The abstract for the 2007 article in the journal Violence Against Women entitled Race/Ethnicity, Religious Involvement, and Domestic Violence indicated:
“The authors explored the relationship between religious involvement and intimate partner violence by analyzing data from the first wave of the National Survey of Families and Households. They found that: (a) religious involvement is correlated with reduced levels of domestic violence; (b) levels of domestic violence vary by race/ethnicity; (c) the effects of religious involvement on domestic violence vary by race/ethnicity; and (d) religious involvement, specifically church attendance, protects against domestic violence, and this protective effect is stronger for African American men and women and for Hispanic men, groups that, for a variety of reasons, experience elevated risk for this type of violence.""
Atheism and belief in pseudoscience and the paranormal
“The reality is that the New Atheist campaign, by discouraging religion, won't create a new group of intelligent, skeptical, enlightened beings. Far from it: It might actually encourage new levels of mass superstition. And that's not a conclusion to take on faith -- it's what the empirical data tell us." -September 08, the Wall Street Journal
What Americans Really Believe," a comprehensive new study released by Baylor University, shows that traditional Christian religion greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of astrology. It also shows that the irreligious and the members of more liberal Protestant denominations, far from being resistant to superstition, tend to be much more likely to believe in the paranormal and in pseudoscience than evangelical Christians...."
Whether God exists or not is irrelevant. Most people cannot be trusted to do good unless they feel like accountability is inevitable. God's omnipotence provides that along with a clear moral path. Also, people have an innate need for God (some could argue this is evidence of existence) which if not nourished will just manifest itself in bizarre and degenerate non-deity based religious movements like the political Left. Last believing in God promotes humility because you are not the rulemaker of your own universe. Basically, believe in God if you can.
Ask C. S. Lewis.
Simulation guys are somewhere in the top end of "God does not exist"
It doesn't even matter if it's simulation, cause someone has to create it...
Depends on the tool, the science or the scientist.
This is me
Lmfao this is true.
I don't particularly agree with this. But I'm reading an interesting sci fi book on this subject.
Calculating God by Robert Sawyer
So great to see a Wojak representation for a concept that I have been telling people my whole life.