What do atheists think that "to know God" means?

Discussion in 'Religion Archives' started by wynn, Feb 4, 2012.

  1. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
    To be perfectly clear, and all kidding aside, none of us (me, arauca, aaqucnaona or spidergoat) would be theists.

    There is evidence of the sun that each of us, independently, repeatably and under laboratory-controlled conditions can gather as much as we want and analyze it at our leisure.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. arauca Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,564
    The title of the post.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
    I see what you did there.

    If you worshipped the sun as God, we could indeed all "know" your God.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. river

    Messages:
    17,307
    means that " to know god " is to look into the past to find where god popped his head

    and that means looking into the past back to the Sumerians and Akkadians of which neither called these being gods

    the akkadians called them " ILu-lofty ones " from which the Hebrew , biblical EL stems
     
  8. lightgigantic Banned Banned

    Messages:
    16,330
    it is realy difficult to get an atheist to give a concise definition of reality or god yet they expect their criticisms that pivot on such terms to be taken seriously
     
  9. river

    Messages:
    17,307
    really my post # 64
     
  10. lightgigantic Banned Banned

    Messages:
    16,330
    the point of this discussion is lost on you if you think the lowest form of wit evades key issues of literacy that demand value be assigned to terms
     
  11. lightgigantic Banned Banned

    Messages:
    16,330
    the fact that there are professional bodies engaged in weeding out fabrications made in the name of science (as opposed to mere laymen going along with whatever their limited powers of investigation grant them on the subject) and that in many fields there is aconflicting array on exactly what a specific set of data is required in order to solve ( or even what the data signifies ) a specific problems indicates you are simply talking about what you are imagining science to be.

    But even then you are calling upon clear definitions for terms in order to air your imaginatons

    :shrug:
     
  12. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
    You still have it bass-ackwards. This is just not rational thinking.

    I refer you back to the Institutionalized Paranoid Schizophrenic. By your logic, you can not address his issues without having a good knowledge of how tinfoil interferes with the propagation of government mind-rays.

    Do you think that? Do you think that no one can address IPS's illness without a good understanding tinfoil and mind-rays? Or do you accept that perhaps IPS's premise of his illness is flawed?


    P.S. What makes you think atheists don't have a good understanding of what theists call God? Atheists are probably quite well-versed in many aspect os theism. They are assaulted by it all the time. And most of them grew up with it.
     
  13. lightgigantic Banned Banned

    Messages:
    16,330
    you are evading the question of the op

    just like a call on the reason something is existing requires a working definition, so does the call on the criticism of the validity of the reasons (and as anyone who has come within ten feet of comparing the clash between theist and atheist ideologies can tell you, this schism begins at the point of differing definitions to the problem )

    iow there is no way one can breach issues of ontology with an absence of value laden terms anymore then there is no way that one can breach a rock face with a nonexistant drill
     
  14. river

    Messages:
    17,307
    I reiterate

    means that " to know god " is to look into the past to find where god popped his head

    and that means looking into the past back to the Sumerians and Akkadians of which neither called these being gods

    the akkadians called them " ILu-lofty ones " from which the Hebrew , biblical EL stems
     
  15. AlexG Like nailing Jello to a tree Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,304

    Now we start with UFOs, aliens, and woo-woos?
     
  16. river

    Messages:
    17,307



    actually no it doesn't

    what the problem is , is the lack of Ancient History

    Ancient History will breach this problem once and for all , if we would just read

    about our past

    all religion starts from the Sumerians and Akkadians , 6000yrs ago , if we just had the will to learn about this past
     
  17. lightgigantic Banned Banned

    Messages:
    16,330
    on the contrary, a good understanding of tin foil, energies emitted by the mind, systems of ideology propagation, values and powers pursuant with government systems and the unique challenges facing an ips provide a uniform framework through which to contextualize the scenario.

    iow far from providing an example where one proceeds in an absence of definitions in order to contextualize an issue, I think you might now be beginning to understand that it is impossible to do so
    at this point of the discussion we are not looking at which definitions are better than others - we are looking at whether it is posible to venture an ontological claim (regardless whether it is a for or against ) in the absence of any definitions
     
  18. river

    Messages:
    17,307
    lightgigantic

    you are missing knowledge of the Ancient past ( 6000yrs ago )
     
  19. lightgigantic Banned Banned

    Messages:
    16,330
    no

    but conceeding this I think you now have a problem if you want to start going on about such studies completely bypassed any working models for the term god in order to render their criticisms valid
     
  20. AlexG Like nailing Jello to a tree Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,304
    I filled out the form on the back of the comic book and my copy of the missing knowledge of the Ancients should arrive any day now in a plain brown wrapper.
     
  21. Grumpy Curmudgeon of Lucidity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,876
    DaveC426913

    So arauca is using the word "god" to describe a big gasbag of great energy but vanishingly low IQ? Isn't that defining god into irrelivence? Does that make Rush Limbaugh a god?

    lightgigantic

    Your point? Scientists have never claimed to know "The Truth(tm)", unlike almost every theist I have ever known(including those here). Where there is conflict it is public(else how do you know of it), where there is uncertainty and insufficient knowledge the scientists admit such and suppressing pseudoscience calling itself science, good on them. I need no imagination to know these things, I have experience and study. It works much better at gaining knowledge than faith. You are using a computer, aren't you?

    Grumpy

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  22. lightgigantic Banned Banned

    Messages:
    16,330
    whatever study and experience you have I am sure it is not sufficient to span the length and breadth of science without calling upon some trade marked truth and I am sure whatever criticisms you have on religion operate out of defining god in order to appear plausible to your mind .......
     
  23. river

    Messages:
    17,307

    there is no missing knowledge of the Ancient past Alex , its just that you and many , many others are missing this knowledge

    it will open your eyes and thinking
     

Share This Page