Before us...

[the Ogre]

Originally Posted by Koizito

And even though atheists and theists have some very different world views, should we stop care about religious people and also stop communicate with them? Call me crazy but I think not...

Nope, in fact there are other atheists on this board. They communicate on all sorts of subjects including atheism. There have even been a few LDS atheists. My question for you is: why do people who have written off G-d, care if other people still do?

It's an interesting question because so many atheists believe erroneously that a belief in G-d precludes reason, logic, and compassion. There are some who feel every religious person is an much an extremist as the abortion-doctor assassin.

[Koizito]

The religion itself may encourage reason and logic, but in one thing it will always exclude them: the existence of god... There are not objective proofs for the existence of god... So yeah, a religious person may never say he or she is totally in favor of logic and reason, even if his or her religion tells him or her to do so...

[Hemidakota]

It did with Eve when she was very curious of gaining further instruction without the aid of those assigned to them in the Garden of Eden. However, it can also be our downfall.

In a few years, atheists will not exist anyway...so why bother in listening?

[Islander]

Originally Posted by Koizito

The religion itself may encourage reason and logic, but in one thing it will always exclude them: the existence of god... There are not objective proofs for the existence of god... So yeah, a religious person may never say he or she is totally in favor of logic and reason, even if his or her religion tells him or her to do so...

That reasoning does not hold water. Science has gone on for 2000 years based on assumptions and theories for which it had no evidence whatsoever. Some of the most elegant and popular theories of the day are based on theoretical/mathematical models!!

And yes, as a man of God and a scientist, I can stretch my mind to work based on theory and build whatever model it helps me solve everyday problems and create applications/solutions. So, if you negate the existence of God as a starting point, then you will never find if this is the case since the proposition of your thesis holds an intrinsic bias that completely invalidates the experiment.

[Koizito]

Then as a scientist, you should know these theories you speak of are actually hipothesys...
And isn't math one way to prove some things?
And about your last paragraph, by that logic you, as a religious person, could never make theories without taking in account the existence of god, as an atheist can't make theories accounting with god...

[Islander]

Originally Posted by Koizito

Then as a scientist, you should know these theories you speak of are actually hipothesys...
And isn't math one way to prove some things?
And about your last paragraph, by that logic you, as a religious person, could never make theories without taking in account the existence of god, as an atheist can't make theories accounting with god...

It seems you have taken a position where religion and science are mutually exclusive when that is simply not the case. I point to the millions of Latter-day Saints that are men and women of science in diverse disciplines. Hypothesis are necessary to formulate frameworks to further inquiry, knowledge and understanding. We are not divorced from scientific inquiry. All I say is that, as a scientist, I operate under a theories/hypothesis "as if" it were a valid assumption. But it may not be. It serves its purpose, however. At times the premise is proven accurate at times false, but it had a roll to play.

Science relates to and can ONLY explain a portion of the human existence/experience. We believe that the essence of God of truth and light, intelligence and thus ALL knowledge belongs to Him as it was set in motion by Him. We do not "discover" anything but merely become aware of truth which already existed, facts hidden from view and awareness but nevertheless real and tangible just not yet accessible to our understanding.

This could become a never-ending argument. Suffice to say that I have access to the same information, reason and science that you hold dear and the foundation of your belief in the absence of God. I have additional information, irrefutable facts, unequivocal and unbending personal revelation and evidence that indeed God is real, that He lives, that He cares and answers my prayers.

Since you and I, both, made up our minds on the matter; we should split the difference here and agree to disagree.

[bmy-]

Originally Posted by Islander

Why do you have to cut the other trees around you to feel the talest in the forest, so to speak?

Why do you have to promote "reason and science over religion"? Teach what you will, you do not have to compare it or juxtapose it to religion. We preach and teach the Gospel of Christ without regard for other religions, atheists and the like. I suggest that your exercise is less that genuine. Atheists, openly and consistently oppose religion as a critical component of your agenda. The WHOLE essence of atheist philosophy is the denial of deity. In fact, it is the Christian God the one that your design is centered against.

It is also telling that atheists come to a religious forum and spend so much time trying to share their agenda when the purpose and intent of the forum is completely the opposite. Just interesting.

I don't cut anyone down. I'm a convert to this church. Some atheists openly oppose religion.. but your comments are similar to one saying that all Christians do the same. They don't. There are evangelicals who attempt to force their agendas on people.. and atheists who do not as well.

Atheist philosophy is not the denial of deity.. it's the lack of a belief in deity. Ever been to 'atheist' forums before? Christians pop in there as well.. to discuss, debate, and hone intellectual skills.

Everyone should recognize the rules of logic.. that is my stance. This is why I want people of all religions to admit that (logically speaking) atheism is more likely to be correct. Just because something is more likely does not make it fact. In fact.. my stance would be classed as atheism.. I do not believe in the supernatural one bit. I do not believe in a supernatural deity. I simply claim belief in a father.

Originally Posted by Islander

I have additional information, irrefutable facts, unequivocal and unbending personal revelation and evidence that indeed God is real, that He lives, that He cares and answers my prayers.

In all fairness.. they are not falsifiable (as you said irrefutable, which means nothing here). They cannot be measured or predicted. It's proof enough for you.. but if it were that easy we would all believe the same thing. I think the typical response to that type of statement is.. so did the pagans, wiccans, and scientologists.

I'm glad you have a testimony like this. It's excellent.. and it can definitely serve a positive purpose.

[Islander]

Originally Posted by bmy-

I don't cut anyone down. I'm a conver to this church. Some atheists openly oppose religion.. but your comments are similar to one saying that all Christians do the same. They don't. There are evangelicals who attempt to force their agendas on people.. and atheists who do not as well.

Atheist philosophy is not the denial of deity.. it's the lack of a belief in deity. Ever been to 'atheist' forums before? Christians pop in there as well.. to discuss, debate, and hone intellectual skills.

I'm glad you have a testimony like this. It's excellent.. and it can definitely serve a positive purpose.

I think we got the wiring crossed. I was responding and quoted Koizito in my response.
But in general, that s why the exchange with atheists as well as certain evangelicals is a royal waste. They arrive (to forums like thins one, mind you) their mind made up and argument ready without an ounce of deference for the opposing view.

They (some atheist)e) may say that they just do not believe in deity. If that is all they did it would be fine. But they actively oppose and antagonize with Christians constantly. Agreed, not all but the opposition (legal and otherwise) is consistent and tangible. Have you ever seen the ACLU or atheist groups protesting the curriculum at Islamic private schools in Michigan, for example? Or religious celebrations of any other kind except Christian's? Perhaps I failed to make my point explicit. It may not be all, it may be even a minority but the impact is the same.

They ascribe to a belief system divergent from mine. That is fine. To argue and oppose mine with no other evidence than the absence of evidence is just as intangible as my own evidence is to them to the contrary. So that is why I agreed to disagree.

[bmy-]

Originally Posted by Islander

I think we got the wiring crossed. I was responding and quoted Koizito in my response.
But in general, that s why the exchange with atheists as well as certain evangelicals is a royal waste. They arrive (to forums like thins one, mind you) their mind made up and argument ready without an ounce of deference for the opposing view.

They (some atheist)e) may say that they just do not believe in deity. If that is all they did it would be fine. But they actively oppose and antagonize with Christians constantly. Agreed, not all but the opposition (legal and otherwise) is consistent and tangible. Have you ever seen the ACLU or atheist groups protesting the curriculum at Islamic private schools in Michigan, for example? Or religious celebrations of any other kind except Christian's? Perhaps I failed to make my point explicit. It may not be all, it may be even a minority but the impact is the same.

They ascribe to a belief system divergent from mine. That is fine. To argue and oppose mine with no other evidence than the absence of evidence is just as intangible as my own evidence is to them to the contrary. So that is why I agreed to disagree.

Crystal clear now

[Misshalfway]

Originally Posted by bmy-

This is my view as well. It's why I struggle to 'have faith'. This does not mean that faith is bad.. simply that reason is better.

This is an interesting statement. And I respect your position, but I think it shows lack of understanding.

Reason doesn't turn water to wine or help a human walk on water. Reason doesn't help one discover new truth. Faith on the other hand is a principle of power. Faith without forward motion, is simply and flatly belief -- something that is inherently stagnant.

I find that atheist's often misunderstand faith and therefore dismiss it as a weaker position than reason or logic. I find that this perspective, while compelling and easy to sympathize with, is rather short sighted.

Exercizing faith does not suspend ones use of human faculties. It, in fact, balances all of them in the most powerful of configurations. I find, on the other hand, that relying ONLY upon one or two of our human abilities is rather limiting.......and produces good but limited results.

I think that your statement shows that you only know how to stay on the spiritual safe side. Peter never would have gotten anywhere, or gained valuable knowledge had he stayed in the boat!