The Real God

[midniterider]

 

I am not looking for an alternative religion. Strangely, it seems that many of you are. I see many of your profiles carry beliefs in alternatives such as philosophy and mythology.

 

So if I like something, I must want to devote my life to it? No.

 

And of course, your atheism is a religion in itself, which you defend with a zeal as fierce as any medieval Christian's.

 

Well, if atheism is a religion it's a much better religion than Christianity. There's no fear, guilt or shame involved in atheism. No imaginary Jesuses or Dionysyses looking over my shoulder that I have to please. No tithing or collection plates in atheism. And no big book of scriptual bullshit to read in atheism. Yay for the religion of atheism!!!

 

Where have atheists banded together to kill people in the name of atheism? The Crusades? No, that was Christians. The Inquisition? No, that was the Christians. Sorry, atheists just aren't as fierce as medieval Christians. Any examples?

[midniterider]

I want you to debate with me, but it seems you haven't got the brains for it.

 

 

Let's see, you want to show us that your Gods Jesus and Dionysys are real but these beings never appear or speak to us. Well, except in your imagination.

 

And then you accuse us of not having the brains for debate? Please have one of your imaginary beings appear to us (you know, in reality, not your imagination) and there will be no need for debate.

[Astreja]

Paul, I do not find you to be a credible witness for the existence of a divine being.  Kindly ask your hypothetical deity to come visit Me in person, as I am no longer accepting representations from mortals.

[Fweethawt]

Paul, I do not find you to be a credible witness for the existence of a divine being. Kindly ask your hypothetical deity to come visit Me in person, as I am no longer accepting representations from mortals.

This should be every Ex-C's auto - reply here and in real life.

[duderonomy]

Paul, I do not find you to be a credible witness for the existence of a divine being.  Kindly ask your hypothetical deity to come visit Me in person, as I am no longer accepting representations from mortals.

 

Is there a quote of the week/month/year award here on Ex C?  If not, let's have one. I nominate Astreja's as the first one. 

[Fweethawt]

 

Paul, I do not find you to be a credible witness for the existence of a divine being. Kindly ask your hypothetical deity to come visit Me in person, as I am no longer accepting representations from mortals.

Is there a quote of the week/month/year award here on Ex C? If not, let's have one. I nominate Astreja's as the first one.

I second!

[Paul]

Good morning atheists, apostasizers and all who have allowed their ego to triumph over their true self.

 

I should point out that from now on I shall only entertain measured, calm discourse and shall be ignoring negative hysterics, particularly of the one-line variety.

 

Before I answer your question, I would like an answer to mine. The question is simply: "am I mad?" If the answer is affirmative, please bring your evidence. (Evidence, by your yardstick, does not include words previously seen in a book or, in this case, on the internet.) Please do not use the words 'go see a shrink'. These are akin to 'God works in mysterious ways', and are like saying, in effect: "look over there!" and then running away. I do hope you won't run away.

 

If you will answer my simple question I will gladly answer all of yours.

 

Best wishes,

Paul.

[raoul]

Is that your only contribution to this discussion?

 

Come on, I thought atheists had brains. Tell me why I'm mad. I can't just be mad because I disagree with your worldview, surely?. Explain in scientific terms why I am mad.

 

Best wishes,

Paul.

[/quote

I've seen your kind of dishonest behavior so many times before in other places. You (plural) come along trying to sound intelligent and/or reasonable and make blanket assertions. When challenged by my colleagues, your real persona comes out. Boring to say the least and no different than the early believers who met the same opposition. More egregiously, your dreary sermon offers not ONE shred of proof for any god, nothing!

[Paul]

Lol! Like I said before, this is too easy.

 

Well said Mr Hitchens. He proves my point. None of you can say I am mad! :):)

 

Answer my question and I will answer yours.

 

Best wishes,

Paul.

[TheOutsider]

Lol! Like I said before, this is too easy.

 

Well said Mr Hitchens. He proves my point. None of you can say I am mad!

 

Answer my question and I will answer yours.

 

Best wishes,

Paul.

 

None of us are going to assert your madness, we cannot know from such limited interaction if you're mentally ill or not, I personally, in my unprofessional opinion, think you might be off in the deep end somewhere, but that's hardly a diagnosis. You won't get one of those here.

 

Now drag your feeble deity out into the light for us to question and test personally, or stop asserting that it's anything more than a figment of your imagination. You have an entire world to prove something significant to, if you can, do it. We're waiting.

[Paul]

You haven't answered the question. If you can't prove I am mad, I need not prove my 'feeble deity'.

 

Incidentally, thanks to a previous poster for pointing out the mistake in my profile. The word 'Infinite' shouldn't have been in there, breaking as it does the 1st Law of Thermodynamics. My mistake!

 

Best wishes,

Paul.

[TheOutsider]

... Did you not read my first paragraph? Like, at all? Do you not understand that you're the one claiming you're crazy, and asking us to prove it? I have no way of knowing one way or the other anything about your mental heath, call me an a-Paulisamadman-ist and move on.

 

Now, where is your god? It has a lot to prove.

[TheOutsider]

You haven't answered the question. If you can't prove I am mad, I need not prove my 'feeble deity'.

 

Incidentally, thanks to a previous poster for pointing out the mistake in my profile. The word 'Infinite' shouldn't have been in there, breaking as it does the 1st Law of Thermodynamics. My mistake!

 

Best wishes,

Paul.

 

Also, what exactly does your mental health have to do with anything? What clever point are you trying to make exactly? Some sort of clumsy logical trap you thought was foolproof? I don't care if you're mad, at all, it has no bearing on any facts, it doesn't change anything, if what you claim is true, it's true regardless of your mental health.

 

Why do you need us to try to prove that you're crazy? So you can deny it? So you can feel persecuted and therefor justified? What?

 

Now, prove what you assert is true, or stop asserting that it's anything beyond a figment of your imagination. If you have undeniable proof, submit it for peer review and win a Nobel prize, I imagine the reward money would be obscene, do with it what you will. Or are you on some level aware that your assertions are pure bullshit?

[disillusioned]

Good morning atheists, apostasizers and all who have allowed their ego to triumph over their true self.

 

I should point out that from now on I shall only entertain measured, calm discourse and shall be ignoring negative hysterics, particularly of the one-line variety.

 

Before I answer your question, I would like an answer to mine. The question is simply: "am I mad?" If the answer is affirmative, please bring your evidence. (Evidence, by your yardstick, does not include words previously seen in a book or, in this case, on the internet.) Please do not use the words 'go see a shrink'. These are akin to 'God works in mysterious ways', and are like saying, in effect: "look over there!" and then running away. I do hope you won't run away.

 

If you will answer my simple question I will gladly answer all of yours.

 

Best wishes,

Paul.

 

Paul,

 

I would like to point out that my first post in this thread was both measured and calm, and yet it seems you have not considered it. Please do so.

 

In that post, I asked you a very important question, which still requires an answer. If you would like me to debate with you about the existence or non-existence of your God, then I first require that you precisely define what you mean when you say "God". Unless you do this, further discussion on this topic will prove fruitless.

 

This is important, in part because your opening few posts seem to express conflicting views of God. You start by saying that God is Dionysus, and that only the ancient Greeks (and apparently you) understood Him, but you then go on to say that you are a Christian. Moreover, in another thread you have said that the Bible is "all true". These seem to be contradictory statements. Your position does not seem to be coherent. This makes it difficult to discuss. I'm only asking you for clarification.

 

You are also insisting that we decide immediately whether you are mad or sane. I am not qualified to answer this question. First, this is because I am neither a psychiatrist nor a psychologist, but it is also because I just don't have enough information. Your position is not clear. If you require an answer right now, then I will simply say that you seem confused, but I would not call you altogether mad. Deluded, perhaps, but again I can't really say, as it is possible that I do not fully understand your position.

 

Please clearly define what you mean by God. Then we can proceed.

[florduh]

[mymistake]

Good morning atheists, apostasizers and all who have allowed their ego to triumph over their true self.

 

I should point out that from now on I shall only entertain measured, calm discourse and shall be ignoring negative hysterics, particularly of the one-line variety.

 

Before I answer your question, I would like an answer to mine. The question is simply: "am I mad?" If the answer is affirmative, please bring your evidence. (Evidence, by your yardstick, does not include words previously seen in a book or, in this case, on the internet.) Please do not use the words 'go see a shrink'. These are akin to 'God works in mysterious ways', and are like saying, in effect: "look over there!" and then running away. I do hope you won't run away.

 

If you will answer my simple question I will gladly answer all of yours.

 

Best wishes,

Paul.

 

Are you mad?  Only a properly trained psychologist can answer that question and only after examining you

 

off line and in person.  This is not running away.  I don't have the training to answer your question but if I did

 

I would not diagnose you based on forum posting or e-mails.  I would like you to note the fact that have I

 

never accused you of being mad.  As for you answering my questions well you are the one who made bold

 

claims about gods.  It has been almost 48 hours and you have elected to not back up those claims.  This

 

does not look good for your credibility.  

 

 

 

Lol! Like I said before, this is too easy.

 

Well said Mr Hitchens. He proves my point. None of you can say I am mad!

 

Answer my question and I will answer yours.

 

Best wishes,

Paul.

 

I don't think any of us have said that you are mad.  But you are correct none of us are in the position

 

to diagnose you with anything.  However we are perfectly positioned to judge if you are credible and

 

so far you have failed to impress.

 

You haven't answered the question. If you can't prove I am mad, I need not prove my 'feeble deity'.

 

Incidentally, thanks to a previous poster for pointing out the mistake in my profile. The word 'Infinite' shouldn't have been in there, breaking as it does the 1st Law of Thermodynamics. My mistake!

 

Best wishes,

Paul.

 

I cannot prove you are mad (nor have I tried).  This does not release you from the burden of evidence

 

regarding your bold claims regarding God.  However you seem to not understand the laws of 

 

Thermodynamics as they would be broken by any creator deity.  It doesn't bother me if you let your

 

claims about God die from a lack of supporting evidence.  I didn't make those claims so I feel no

 

obligation to defend them.  It is strange that you seem to feel no obligation to them as well?

[Paul]

At last, someone who can offer something approaching a decent critique and discourse.

 

With regards to the question of madness, it was our American friend 'florduh' who first introduced it into the conversation. I was thus bound to deal with it. You see my friend, you instantly see belief as a form of delusion/madness. I am merely pointing out that you have no means or evidence to prove that I am mad. Anything I say you will immediately denounce as a delusion/madness, for this defends your position. You cannot and will not countenance any shifting from this position. However, as you are completely unable to prove with evidence that I am mad, I need not proffer any evidence for my 'feeble deity'. Therefore, I believe we have reached an impasse.

 

I believe it is you who does not understand the 1st law of thermodynamics. Would you like me to educate you about it?

 

Am I not credible? How is it that a 'deluded' Christian can run rings round a bunch of 'intelligent' atheists? You admit that only a psychiatrist can diagnose me or any other 'mad Christian', yet these labels are in regular use on this forum. You let your claims of delusion and madness die from a lack of supporting evidence.

 

Best wishes,

Paul

[raoul]

At last, someone who can offer something approaching a decent critique and discourse.

 

With regards to the question of madness, it was our American friend 'florduh' who first introduced it into the conversation. I was thus bound to deal with it. You see my friend, you instantly see belief as a form of delusion/madness. I am merely pointing out that you have no means or evidence to prove that I am mad. Anything I say you will immediately denounce as a delusion/madness, for this defends your position. You cannot and will not countenance any shifting from this position. However, as you are completely unable to prove with evidence that I am mad, I need not proffer any evidence for my 'feeble deity'. Therefore, I believe we have reached an impasse.

 

I believe it is you who does not understand the 1st law of thermodynamics. Would you like me to educate you about it?

 

Am I not credible? How is it that a 'deluded' Christian can run rings round a bunch of 'intelligent' atheists? You admit that only a psychiatrist can diagnose me or any other 'mad Christian', yet these labels are in regular use on this forum. You let your claims of delusion and madness die from a lack of supporting evidence.

 

Best wishes,

Paul

I'll weigh in if I may. As Dr. Dawkins stated numerous times both in his book and in debates - all of you are delusional. When I was in your cult I was delusional as well. There are varying degrees of the delusion but it does control theistic beliefs. Otherwise, how does one explain in the 21st century remnants of a Bronze age mythology that has been exposed so many times for what it is - nothing more than myths and fables?

 

And please stop with the Thermodynamic nonsense. That is not relevant to what you first wrote about however it does show an important aspect of your delusion - the incredible moving of goal posts by your cult. Bait and switch or card tricks are other terms for it.

[florduh]

Am I not credible? How is it that a 'deluded' Christian can run rings round a bunch of 'intelligent' atheists?

 

The mere fact that you believe you are "running rings round a bunch of 'intelligent' atheists" attests to the fact that you are indeed deluded.

 

You have made an extraordinary assertion of fact but have not presented a shred of evidence. We must assume you have none else you'd be eager to present it to the unwashed masses. 

 

We need not bother with proof you are mad or deluded. You're doing fine with that task.

[mymistake]

At last, someone who can offer something approaching a decent critique and discourse.

 

With regards to the question of madness, it was our American friend 'florduh' who first introduced it into the conversation. I was thus bound to deal with it. 

 

 

You brought up madness when you introduced yourself in your first post.  That is what started this

 

conversation.

 

 

 

You see my friend, you instantly see belief as a form of delusion/madness. I am merely pointing out that you have no means or evidence to prove that I am mad. Anything I say you will immediately denounce as a delusion/madness, for this defends your position. You cannot and will not countenance any shifting from this position.

 

You use the Straw Man fallacy.  I am not impressed.

 

 

 

However, as you are completely unable to prove with evidence that I am mad, I need not proffer any evidence for my 'feeble deity'. Therefore, I believe we have reached an impasse.

 

Your claims regarding God (whom I have not called "feeble") are what require that you provide evidence.

 

Unless, of course, you want to be known as the kind of person who makes incredible claims that have no

 

evidence.  It's not my reputation on the line so do whatever you want.

 

 

 

I believe it is you who does not understand the 1st law of thermodynamics. Would you like me to educate you about it?

 

Yes, please.

 

 

Am I not credible?

 

The way things are going it looks like you are not credible.  It has been almost 48 hours since you first

 

made claims about God and all you do is make excuses for not offering any evidence.  I doubt you will

 

ever bring evidence of God to the table.  Of course nobody does ever so this isn't much of a surprise.

 

Is that what you were getting at with your "madness" questions - that Christian believe fantastic and

 

unjustified nonsense?

 

 

 

 

How is it that a 'deluded' Christian can run rings round a bunch of 'intelligent' atheists? You admit that only a psychiatrist can diagnose me or any other 'mad Christian', yet these labels are in regular use on this forum. You let your claims of delusion and madness die from a lack of supporting evidence.

 

 

I've never seen a Christian run rings around atheists.  I suppose theoretically it could happen if the atheist

 

was completely unprepared but it would be a rare thing simply due to the available evidence.

 

 

 

What claims have I made regarding delusion and madness?  Show me the specific claim I have made and

 

I will either support it or withdraw it.  I care about my reputation.

[disillusioned]

At last, someone who can offer something approaching a decent critique and discourse.

Who are you referring to, Paul? MM? Me? florduh? Someone else? This is going to be easier if you make it clear who you are replying to.

 

With regards to the question of madness, it was our American friend 'florduh' who first introduced it into the conversation. I was thus bound to deal with it. You see my friend, you instantly see belief as a form of delusion/madness. I am merely pointing out that you have no means or evidence to prove that I am mad. Anything I say you will immediately denounce as a delusion/madness, for this defends your position. You cannot and will not countenance any shifting from this position. However, as you are completely unable to prove with evidence that I am mad, I need not proffer any evidence for my 'feeble deity'. Therefore, I believe we have reached an impasse.

The bolded is not true. We all believe lots of things. The content and justification of our beliefs determines whether they are mad or not. Thus, I ask again that you please explain clearly what it is that you believe. Once that has been done, we can move on to why you believe it.

 

I believe it is you who does not understand the 1st law of thermodynamics. Would you like me to educate you about it?

I don't require such education having, as I do, a degree in Physics and Math. But it might prove interesting. Proceed if you like.

 

Am I not credible? How is it that a 'deluded' Christian can run rings round a bunch of 'intelligent' atheists? You admit that only a psychiatrist can diagnose me or any other 'mad Christian', yet these labels are in regular use on this forum. You let your claims of delusion and madness die from a lack of supporting evidence.

 

How are you running rings around us? I said that you might be deluded, and I stand by it, but my words were heavily qualified. I don't know what you believe. What you have said so far leads me to think that your beliefs are not coherent; hence my statement about delusion. But I have repeatedly invited you to elaborate on your beliefs. It remains possible that what you believe is coherent and justified, and if this is the case then I will retract my statement that you seem deluded.

 

Also, to be deluded about one particular thing does not entail that you are not intelligent. Nor does atheism (which not all of us claim, by the way) entail that you are intelligent. No one here has claimed any such thing.

[TheOutsider]

<Snip>

 

Can you understand all this? I can't. But it is happening to me. Am I mad? Look at my post. In all honesty, does it look like the words of a madman? I am not trying to peddle Christianity or re-convert you. I am offering a third way if you like, between materialism and organised religion. I suppose I am offering hope to you all. God is more like us than we realise. Life is not about getting saved, it is about learning. We are all already a part of God, we don't need saving. I can see that organised religion has caused unnecessary pain and guilt to people using artifice and repression and instead of being 'a part of God', we are now 'apart from God'. In doing this, organised religion has sown the seeds of its own downfall. I still partake in organised religion, and perhaps always will do, but I can see that the image it portrays of God is different from the reality.

 

Best wishes,

Paul.

 

 

At last, someone who can offer something approaching a decent critique and discourse.

 

With regards to the question of madness, it was our American friend 'florduh' who first introduced it into the conversation. I was thus bound to deal with it. You see my friend, you instantly see belief as a form of delusion/madness. I am merely pointing out that you have no means or evidence to prove that I am mad. Anything I say you will immediately denounce as a delusion/madness, for this defends your position. You cannot and will not countenance any shifting from this position. However, as you are completely unable to prove with evidence that I am mad, I need not proffer any evidence for my 'feeble deity'. Therefore, I believe we have reached an impasse.

 

I believe it is you who does not understand the 1st law of thermodynamics. Would you like me to educate you about it?

 

Am I not credible? How is it that a 'deluded' Christian can run rings round a bunch of 'intelligent' atheists? You admit that only a psychiatrist can diagnose me or any other 'mad Christian', yet these labels are in regular use on this forum. You let your claims of delusion and madness die from a lack of supporting evidence.

 

Best wishes,

Paul

I seem to have found evidence that you where the one to bring up madness, right in your opening post, bold and underscored, plain as day...

 

You brought up the question of madness, do you really expect no one to address it?

 

While I do hold the opinion that religion is to some degree delusional, you assume that I would dismiss anything you say as delusional. Sure, maybe, but I'm really not interested in any arguments you might make to convince someone that your god is real.

I'm way beyond that point, you have to bring hard evidence, nothing less than your god in front of me, doing everything it can to prove what it is, and that it's actually real, will make me reconsider my position. Every possible variable would have to be accounted for, and I'd need conformation from the rest of earths population, before I'd be convinced.

 

But even if you manage to arrange that, I still won't have any reason to worship it.

 

On the subject of belief equating delusion, more accurately I consider belief in the supernatural/divine as a sign of ignorance. Specifically a sign of ignorance regarding reality/nature and what we humans have figured out about it in spite of religious pressure to ignore everything outside of scripture. Remember, the sky used to be a solid dome that you could reach with a tall enough ladder, but we figured out avionics and it raised a little, then we figured out rocket science and it became even bigger. Or, the ignorant men that came up with the stories in your bible got it wrong. What's more likely?

[raoul]

And then there's the issue regarding cognitive dissonance and its negative effects on the various theists. This is getting more and more steam at various places including the debating arena. A few of many readings on this:

 

http://www.thereligiouscondition.com/e1.html

 

http://scienceblogs.com/thescian/2009/05/27/religion-creationism-and-cogni/

 

http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2007/11/introducing-cognitive-dissonance.html

 

And a host of other sites if you simply google 'cognitive dissonance & religion'

 

Wiki has a general explanation of it: In psychology, cognitive dissonance is the mental stress or discomfort experienced by an individual who holds two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values at the same time, or is confronted by new information that conflicts with existing beliefs, ideas, or values.[1][2]

 

Leon Festinger's theory of cognitive dissonance focuses on how humans strive for internal consistency. An individual who experiences inconsistency (dissonance) tends to become psychologically uncomfortable, and is motivated to try to reduce this dissonance—as well as actively avoid situations and information likely to increase it

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance

 

I have witnessed this identical behavior with theists especially those attempting to play the apologetic game with us. We try to steer them to humongous amounts of sources, evidence, data, debates, etc. only to have them refuse to check any of our counter sources/arguments out. When confronted with something that can shake up their non reality based bubble, they simply close their eyes, hold their ears, and run away. Those who don't flee attempt to change the subject (moving the goal posts) or taking a sentence or two totally out of context and running with that.

 

When Dr. Dawkins called them delusional, he was actually being nice.

[florduh]

Bring forth your evidence for your god, Paul. Your madness and delusion are irrelevant if you have evidence. Do you?

[Astreja]

Am I not credible?

 

Nope.  Not in the slightest.

 

Paul, you may not be clinically insane in a DSM-5 sense, but I do think you're a rather silly and arrogant little poseur who's talked himself into believing idiotic things and now claims to have The Secret That Everyone Else Somehow Missed.

 

I'm not buying it.  All you have is a dubious claim unsubstantiated by evidence.  That's of no value to us.

 

Even if you are sane, you are not credible to Me.

 

Even if you are sane, we don't have to take you seriously.

 

Even if you are sane, we don't have to like you.