Why does faith deserve respect?

[mamooth]

Let's see. Beliefs I take on "faith" ...

1. The universe exists, and it exists independently of my existence and my perceptions. Rejection of solipsism, that is.

2. My senses give me a fairly accurate view of the universe. I'm not in TheMatrix.

3. The logical and physical laws that govern my local universe are essentially constant. If a given action produces a given result today, it will do so tomorrow.

4. Results that cause me to not be dead are usually more desirable than other results.

I can't prove any of the above. However, organisms that don't accept all of those beliefs tend to die quickly, hence nearly every conscious being believes them. Those that don't are classified as "insane".

Other than that, no "faith" involved. Other beliefs all descend from those core beliefs. I see the evidence, and make classifications based on the belief that the rules of the universe won't change. Unless "Not being insane" is defined as a religion, that's nothing like religious beliefs.

 

[the_human_being]

Most of the atheists on here are complete novices. Hollie, on the other hand, can levitate her body two feet off the ground and can curse God in ancient Arabic and in Palogen Hebrew.

Most of the atheists on here are complete novices. Hollie, on the other hand, can levitate her body two feet off the ground and can curse God in ancient Arabic and in Palogen Hebrew.

A novice atheist?

How does that make sense? Even by your standards of pointlesness, how does that make sense?

When you first start out as an atheist, you know there isn't a God. As you go up the ranks of atheism, you really really really know there is no God.

And then there's the secret handshake, prime parking, low interest house loans, exclusive washrooms, endless mimosas at brunch, and no cover charge to get in the Champagne Room at the gentleman's club.

I thought you automatically qualified for SNAP.

 

[Justin Davis]

It doesn't

Atheism is utterly devoid of reason. It's based on nothing but blind faith. On the other hand, the idea of God cannot be logically ruled out, and the denial of God's existence violates the organic laws of thought.

 

[Hollie]

It doesn't

Atheism is utterly devoid of reason. It's based on nothing but blind faith. On the other hand, the idea of God cannot be logically ruled out, and the denial of God's existence violates the organic laws of thought.

You're a product of the Rawling madrassah.

 

[emilynghiem]

It doesn't

Atheism is utterly devoid of reason. It's based on nothing but blind faith. On the other hand, the idea of God cannot be logically ruled out, and the denial of God's existence violates the organic laws of thought.

^ That's why I suggest to stick to "nontheism" which is neutral.
There is nothing wrong with being secular Gentile under natural laws.

God creates secular Gentiles for a reason, as a check on the believers under sacred laws. We are supposed to help one another, not act as a stumbling block to prevent entrance into the Kingdom of God and heavenly peace.
We need both folds of the same flock to check and balance each other:
faith with reason, laws of science with spiritual laws, secular laws of the state with
sacred laws of the church, natural laws of man with divine laws of God on the collective level.
We need AGREEMENT with both to find and focus on the "narrow gate of righteousness"
where these paths AGREE in Christ Jesus to establish Universal Truth that sets us free from error, division, and strife.

Justin Davis, the more you embrace and INCLUDE our "nontheist" secular neighbors
as the second fold of the one flock, where Jesus governs BOTH the Jews and Gentiles but under separate laws,
the more they will INCLUDE you and quit rejecting as well!
What we reap, we sow.
If we reject, we invite rejection; but as we accept correction, we invite more corrections!

If both sides keep rejecting each other, as you reject Atheists,
you divide the flock that Jesus unites. So you are not on the side of Christ
but acting as Antichrist controlled by fear instead of governed by love. Jesus does come to distinguish the two folds,
but Jesus fulfills BOTH the natural laws of the secular/nontheists
and the sacred laws of the churched believers, so the spirit of truth UNITES the branches,
setting us free from false division and fear.

What atheists, nontheists and Buddhist OPPOSE about Christianity
is the "spirit of ANTICHRIST" that defeats the meaning and message by contradicting itself.

So that is what we must uproot and remove, not reject each other.

Justin I think what you also oppose is the spirit of rebellion and rejection.
So please do not invite or practice this spirit yourself.

The true way to kick out rebellion is to enforce the laws of God through Christ that
embrace, include and unite. You can better "squeeze out" the negative forces
and influences that are the enemy, by EMBRACING and INCLUDING your neighbors as one of the flock.

or else, if we do the opposite by dividing and rejecting,
that's where the devil plays one side against the other and takes advantage of fear and division.

A house divided against itself cannot stand.
In Christ all things are made new, we are made one: Jews and Gentiles

Let us receive the wisdom and truth in Christ that makes the flock whole,a
and brings TOGETHER both the secular gentiles under natural laws
with the churched believers under scriptural laws, as Jesus governs and fulfills both paths as one.
There is no division that we cannot overcome in Christ Jesus who gives us strength.

Thank you, Justin
In Jesus name may God's Justice and Mercy
be received to bring healing and unity to all
as one family one humanity one church or body of people
May all hearts be healed, all minds opened, all souls rejoice
and be freed from strife, fear and anything not of God,
that we be made perfect, even as our Heavenly Father is perfect. Amen!

 

[emilynghiem]

Dear mamooth:

Let's see. Beliefs I take on "faith" ...

1. The universe exists, and it exists independently of my existence and my perceptions. Rejection of solipsism, that is.

2. My senses give me a fairly accurate view of the universe. I'm not in TheMatrix.

3. The logical and physical laws that govern my local universe are essentially constant. If a given action produces a given result today, it will do so tomorrow.

4. Results that cause me to not be dead are usually more desirable than other results.

I can't prove any of the above. However, organisms that don't accept all of those beliefs tend to die quickly, hence nearly every conscious being believes them. Those that don't are classified as "insane".

Other than that, no "faith" involved. Other beliefs all descend from those core beliefs. I see the evidence, and make classifications based on the belief that the rules of the universe won't change. Unless "Not being insane" is defined as a religion, that's nothing like religious beliefs.

Dear mamooth:
A. I like your 4 points above. The Christians also summarize their teachings into 4 Spiritual Laws, and the Buddhists have 4 noble truths.

I think your 4 points are easier to follow than the points Hollie posted under the Syllogistic thread.
Can we start a team around a secular equivalent of what M.D. and Justin back as the basic points of theism?

If they have their starting point, I think it is fair to have the secular equivalent, and work it out from there
how these laws are universal and align with each other, whether someone frames them in a nontheistic or a theistic way.

B. Are you open to the idea of applying science to the study and process of Spiritual Healing?
and how the factor of "forgiveness and faith" (or unforgiveness and fear) is the key to whether people/relations are healed or if conflicts go unresolved?

I believe this is one area where the two approaches of science/religion can agree, and show there is a natural process going on that meets both the steps in science and the criteria taught in religious practices. So the science explains the spiritual process in measurable terms, and the religion explains the process in spiritual terms of collective impact on humanity as connected by conscience, from individual to collective level.

I brought this up in the other thread, on Syllogistic proof of God.
Instead of merely arguing about definitions and logic based on those,
I suggested we add a scientific study on Spiritual Healing for those who want a more tangible approach applicable to real life.

if you are open to this, I would like to form a team around the nontheistic
approach, to give a focus for those who aren't responding or relating to M.D. Rawlings and Justin Davis TAG approach.

Please advise, any thoughts or suggestions on this?
Some sources I recommend for medical research studies and development:
freespiritualhealing Resources for Healing and Forgiveness Therapy

Thank you, mamooth!
Yours truly,
Emily

 

[HUGGY]

She's already stated that she does not have different standards for either religious, or non religious people. You are actually just pestering her now.

She stated that she holds people to whatever their stated beliefs are, atheists don't have 'beliefs'. Not to mention that you will never see her criticizing an atheist for how they treat Christians, but she certainly takes time to call Christians out on their behavior. And I'm hardly pestering her, I'm commenting on her comments, which is what a message board is designed for. If you don't want people responding to your posts, then don't make any. Besides, she has me on ignore. lol

What do you mean by atheists have no beliefs? I'm an atheist, and I have beliefs.

And what are your beliefs rooted in, or based on?

That all depends on the belief.

I believe in good and evil. I've certainly witnessed both.

But can you prove you have beliefs?

If you can't prove your beleifs you are no better than those that believe in God and Jesus therefore they must have and still do exist.

There is nothing divine. There is no evil. It is all made up by men and women out of amazement and fear.

I get it that some of what we witness seems more than could be possible by chance. That isn't a proof that it isn't just that. When you choose to put on glasses with religious lenses everything looks like it is of religion. The fail is that every religion has it's own prescription glasses making all it's followers see is a part of that religion.

Your beliefs though strong are no stronger than any devoutes beliefs in any religion. In effect they cancel each other out leaving the only truth no beliefs at all.

 

[Carla_Danger]

She's already stated that she does not have different standards for either religious, or non religious people. You are actually just pestering her now.

She stated that she holds people to whatever their stated beliefs are, atheists don't have 'beliefs'. Not to mention that you will never see her criticizing an atheist for how they treat Christians, but she certainly takes time to call Christians out on their behavior. And I'm hardly pestering her, I'm commenting on her comments, which is what a message board is designed for. If you don't want people responding to your posts, then don't make any. Besides, she has me on ignore. lol

What do you mean by atheists have no beliefs? I'm an atheist, and I have beliefs.

And what are your beliefs rooted in, or based on?

That all depends on the belief.

I believe in good and evil. I've certainly witnessed both.

But can you prove you have beliefs?

If you can't prove your beleifs you are no better than those that believe in God and Jesus therefore they must have and still do exist.

Huh....whaaa?

I believe in gravity. Surely I don't need to gather proof of gravity.

 

[emilynghiem]

There is nothing divine. There is no evil. It is all made up by men and women out of amazement and fear.

Hi Huggy: Yikes!

Before you dismiss all evil as made up, I recommend you interview people plagued with demonic voices
and compare with the cases of people CURED of these evil impulses, voices and personalities.

It is too late to interview Eugene Watts who was plagued with demonic obsessions but died in prison,
but you can interview Andrea Yates about the voices in her head that pushed her to kill her kids while they were innocent,
and you can read David Berkowitz testimony after he was cured of demonic voices that took over his will with evil obsessions:
David Berkowitz s former Son of Sam Testimony Translations
He lived to see recovery so he can tell you the difference between living with evil in your head and being freed of it.

Huggy this is a REAL sickness, and the people who cure this type of condition
can tell you the causes are REAL and are not imaginary or delusional.

People with "incureable schizophrenia" have been cured of these demonic voices.
One of my friends with demonic rages was cured of these, and he's an ATHEIST and the healing still worked!

If you want resources:
Dr. Scott Peck a licensed professional doctor in psychiatry used to think this evil was imaginary delusions
until he studied two schizophrenic patients, before and after treatment, and changed his mind and started
using these same methods in his practice to help more patients that didn't respond to just medications alone.

He wrote two books on his discoveries about the nature of evil and how this intertwines with human will:
* Glimpses of the Devil
* People of the Lie
Like with cancer, people make bad choices like smoking or drinking to allow cancer to take over,
but the cancer is a real condition and not something they can just will away because they imagined it to be.

Huggy it is NOT FAIR to keep DENYING treatment to people like Andrea Yates and others
where lives could have been saved if their sickness were caught and cured in time.

how CRUEL is it to have people practicing the cure, yet go around
"telling everyone it isn't real" so people don't get this free help?

Denying the problem is like saying Cancer doesn't exist and is just hyped up.
That's not fair to deny early diagnosis and cure to those who could be saved from death.

Same with criminal illness, Huggy, this is serious. It is real.
And there are people who can tell you they were cured of it.

Please research and look into it, as deeply as Dr. Peck did when he changed his mind,
BEFORE you go around declaring it is all made up. That's not fair to people who need help!

 

[HUGGY]

She stated that she holds people to whatever their stated beliefs are, atheists don't have 'beliefs'. Not to mention that you will never see her criticizing an atheist for how they treat Christians, but she certainly takes time to call Christians out on their behavior. And I'm hardly pestering her, I'm commenting on her comments, which is what a message board is designed for. If you don't want people responding to your posts, then don't make any. Besides, she has me on ignore. lol

What do you mean by atheists have no beliefs? I'm an atheist, and I have beliefs.

And what are your beliefs rooted in, or based on?

That all depends on the belief.

I believe in good and evil. I've certainly witnessed both.

But can you prove you have beliefs?

If you can't prove your beleifs you are no better than those that believe in God and Jesus therefore they must have and still do exist.

Huh....whaaa?

I believe in gravity. Surely I don't need to gather proof of gravity.

Sometimes in the game of baseball a wild pitch is just that. Sometimes it is an attempt to make the batter step back off the plate. Sometimes nonsense is just that...nonsense.

Love ya madly...need ya badly...

 

[emilynghiem]

But can you prove you have beliefs?

If you can't prove your beleifs you are no better than those that believe in God and Jesus therefore they must have and still do exist.

Huh....whaaa?

I believe in gravity. Surely I don't need to gather proof of gravity.

Hi Carla_Danger:
One thing I think we can "demonstrate" and prove is that Spiritual Healing
is natural and does not depend on someone's denomination; it works by
Forgiveness which is a universal process for all people to receive healing.

Since Spiritual Healing is as natural and equally accessible as gravity,
I would say that one day people will treat it as casual common knowledge
the same way we take gravity for granted.

I believe that is what this proof process is leading to -- just understanding
that the natural forces in life are universal and that's what is symbolized in religion.

 

[HUGGY]

I believe in real sicknesses. I do not believe in real magical entities.

When the brain is infected or injured or a cist or a clump of cancer has damaged our normal proccesses what comes out of the victim's mouths can be pretty grusome. It could also be something appearing beautiful and incitefull. The truly scary pronouncements and sometimes actions associated with these ailments draw us to want to make more of it than it is. The fear reaction is real. That doesn't make the scary stuff evil entities. When people are wearing those darned glasses with the religious lenses ...everything they see has a religious component.

I prescribe you take off those silly glasses and step on them.

 

[Newby]

I prescribe you take off those silly glasses and step on them.

Sounds like preaching to me..

 

[HUGGY]

I prescribe you take off those silly glasses and step on them.

Sounds like preaching to me..

I'm working on being a nicer atheist. The post wasn't directed to you as much as it was a reply to someone else. If the member I was talking to feels I was out of line I'll take it under advisement.

Sorry the "reply" wasn't obvious. The original post I replied to didn't show up and I just continued with my reply. It happens once in a while...not sure why.

 

[Mojo2]

It doesn't

It does if that religion provides a standard for behavior and for living which makes the people better examples of the Human Race.

Christianity does.

Judaism does.

Islam ultimately, doesn't.

It is inherently imperial.

 

[indiajo]

Let's see. Beliefs I take on "faith" ...
2. My senses give me a fairly accurate view of the universe. I'm not in TheMatrix.

Acually, they don't. They don't even give you a fairly acccurate vuew of your direct surroundings.
Ask a fly, or a bat, for reference.

3. The logical and physical laws that govern my local universe are essentially constant. If a given action produces a given result today, it will do so tomorrow.

They aren't. The deviations are admittedly in a range that does not influence your perception.