Users Online Now:
Donate To GLP
Back to Forum
Back to Thread
REPLY TO THREAD
Thread for Atheists & Christians - STFU
Ms Sans Serif
In accordance with industry accepted best practices we ask that users limit their copy / paste of copyrighted material to the relevant portions of the article you wish to discuss and no more than 50% of the source material, provide a link back to the original article and provide your original comments / criticism in your post with the article.
[quote:Don'tBeAfraid:MV8yMTI2NzkzXzM1OTIyNDA3XzkzNzY2QTc2] Kierkegaard's arguement for God explained: http://www.kemstone.com/Nonfiction/Philosophy/Reflections/kierkegaardgod.htm "When we brush up against the Unknown, Kierkegaard asserts, the Reason may choose at its pleasure what to place beyond this limit. In most cases, this is God—or whatever conception of God the Reason can conceive. Yet it is impossible to accept this as proof of God’s existence, as on some level we must always be aware that this God is merely a conception of our minds, which we have chosen quite arbitrarily to put in place of the Unknown. Kierkegaard offers another analogy, conceiving of a man like any other man who is also God. He cannot know this man is God because in order to know this he would have to understand the nature of the difference between God and man, which is impossible because “the Reason has reduced it to likeness with that from which it was unlike. Thus God becomes the most terrible of deceivers, because the Reason has deceived itself. The Reason has brought God as near as possible, and yet he is as far away as ever” (94). The heart of Kierkegaard’s argument actually comes several paragraphs earlier, in which he points out the only way to arrive at God across this gap which Reason can not bridge is to make a leap of faith. God’s existence can not be proven because His existence is uncertain as long as I am engaged in proving it. “But when I let go, the existence is there. But this act of letting go is surely also something; it is indeed a contribution of mine. Must not this also be taken into the account, this little moment, brief as it may be—it need not be long, for it is a leap” (93). Thus God’s existence is founded in our minds not on the basis of logic or reason, but purely on faith, and what is meant by faith in Kierkegaard’s mind is to let go of the proof and merely believe in God’s existence. One need not have proof of God’s existence to believe in it—it would in fact be absurd to believe that God will not exist until we have proof. Most people who believe in God understand that His existence can not be proven, and many theologians would assert that this is in fact deliberate on the part of God; faith itself would have no value if belief in God did not require faith but merely an understanding of the logic by which God’s existence can be conclusively established. I believe that if all religious people understood their own faith in the sense in which Kierkegaard paints it, it would do much to eliminate many of the evils that come out of religion. It is not belief in God from which most of the atrocities committed by the “faithful” over the centuries has sprung, but rather the certainty that they have believed themselves to have as to the doctrines of their own religion. If they understood that the tenets of their religion are not established on firm logical grounds but are merely founded in faith—by their own willingness to believe in spite of the lack of any proof or certainty—they will perhaps be less quick to judge non-believers or people of other faiths as wrong or worthy of punishment. So although I have not chosen with Kierkegaard to make this leap of faith, I believe that an understanding of the nature of a leap of faith is very important and ought to be more widely recognised. As for the inability of God’s existence to be proven on rational grounds, I agree completely, and credit Kierkegaard with some of the most forceful reasoning I have encountered to establish this point." [/quote]
Let's get right to it.
No one can prove that "God" or any variation thereof the concept is real.
No one can prove that "God" or any variation thereof the concept is NOT real.
All arguments are moot without assuming a "given".
How can I say all this with certainty?
BECAUSE NO ONE CAN PROVE THAT THEY'RE NOT DREAMING RIGHT NOW, with fabricated memories and all.
No matter what, FAITH is required just to participate in whatever you think is reality.
Both atheists and God-believers base their beliefs on FAITH in experiential data.
A true atheist "lacks a belief" and that is a perfectly honest position to hold. However, the rabid atheists who argue endlessly that "there is no God" are taking the same leap of faith that the proselytizing Christians are.
SO--is there a GOD?
My experiential data (a near-death experience that was seemingly as "real" as anything else I've experienced) says YES.
That's why I believe in God.
But I'd be a liar if I said that my NDE provides "proof"--even to myself. After all, my dreams are as "real" as anything even when I'm walking on the ceiling and lightsaber fighting and flying a MIG--all with a head full of outlandish memories.
So...all of you know-it-alls arguing FOR or AGAINST the concept of "God" need to
because your arguments ARE DEMONSTRABLY FLAWED.
Pictures (click to insert)
Big Round Smilies
Aliens and Space
Friendship & Love
Misc Small Smilies
View All Categories
Next Page >>
Disclaimer / Copyright Info
with questions or comments about this site.
"Godlike Productions" & "GLP" are registered trademarks of Zero Point Ltd. Godlike™
Website Design Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Godlikeproductions.com
Page generated in 0.009s (5 queries)