Saved Atheist

[shunyadragon]

It is really nice to see apophatic theology being used so well by skeptics, atheists, and others. Gives me a warm feeling in my heart. God bless you all!

The Baha'is believe in an apophatic theology, but I believe your over stating the atheist/agnostic perspective. I share their view that there is ultimately only one reality regardless of the diversity of human ways to imagine what this ultimate reality is.

[robrecht]

The Baha'is believe in an apophatic theology, but I believe your over stating the atheist/agnostic perspective. I share their view that there is ultimately only one reality regardless of the diversity of human ways to imagine what this ultimate reality is.

As do I. Surely you do not mean to imply that an agnostic (or even an atheist) cannot use apophatic theology well? That's all I'm saying, cousin.

[Carrikature]

Yes. Reality is everything that exists.

And yet few people fully agree on what that encompasses.

[whag]

And yet few people fully agree on what that encompasses.

and there's good reason to distinguish the reality that religion argues for, which is external to time, invisible, and cannot be sensed by anyone. that sounds like a separate reality to me.

[OingoBoingo]

and there's good reason to distinguish the reality that religion argues for, which is external to time, invisible, and cannot be sensed by anyone. that sounds like a separate reality to me.

The other day you were slamming Christians for holding to something called "Holy Spirit epistemology". Today you're slamming the religious for believing in a reality that cannot be sensed. Damned if they do, damned if they don't I guess.

[Carrikature]

and there's good reason to distinguish the reality that religion argues for, which is external to time, invisible, and cannot be sensed by anyone. that sounds like a separate reality to me.

For what it's worth, I don't actually think non-theists necessarily have a better grasp of reality. Perhaps a few of them do, working at the extreme edges of theoretical physics. The rest of us? I'm not so sure. Is it still reality if you're very close but wrong? I don't know.

[shunyadragon]

For what it's worth, I don't actually think non-theists necessarily have a better grasp of reality. Perhaps a few of them do, working at the extreme edges of theoretical physics. The rest of us? I'm not so sure. Is it still reality if you're very close but wrong? I don't know.

Even though I am a theist, I disagree. Avoiding the extremes of hard atheism, I find atheists and agnostics more in touch with reality then 'traditional theists.' I consider their view to be more flexible when considering the changing and evolving knowledge of science. I consider the agnostics to be more open then atheists. They are not anchored in an ancient paradigm with an agenda of presuppositions of doctrine and dogma.

[Carrikature]

Even though I am a theist, I disagree. Avoiding the extremes of hard atheism, I find atheists and agnostics more in touch with reality then 'traditional theists.' I consider their view to be more flexible when considering the changing and evolving knowledge of science. I consider the agnostics to be more open then atheists. They are not anchored in an ancient paradigm with an agenda of presuppositions of doctrine and dogma.

You've missed my point. Yes, they may be more flexible and therefore regarded as 'more in touch with reality', whatever that means. That makes them closer, not necessarily right.

[shunyadragon]

You've missed my point. Yes, they may be more flexible and therefore regarded as 'more in touch with reality', whatever that means. That makes them closer, not necessarily right.

I will leave the issue of being 'right' off the table. I can easily conclude it is most likely that nobody is right. If you listen to Guth, Vilenkin, and Carroll, they say they 'do not know,' is the bottom line.

[firstfloor]

[whag]

The other day you were slamming Christians for holding to something called "Holy Spirit epistemology". Today you're slamming the religious for believing in a reality that cannot be sensed. Damned if they do, damned if they don't I guess.

go back and get the context for that. you just want to make an argument out of anything.

if you believe heaven can be sensed, i have no argument with you in this context. it's still different enough to be a separate reality is all I was saying. voicing doubt about a certain apologetic is not "slamming" you.

[shunyadragon]

I agree with this from an agnostic theist perspective. The claims of 'traditional theists' for an objective reality for the unseen is highly problematic since there is a wide range of conflicting beliefs that make this claim with no true objective standard for making this claim. One rather nebulous vague example is the claim of an 'objective morality.' The use of 'objective' in this context refers to the unseen 'Source' some call god(s) necessary for human morals and ethics. Those that make this claim have never been able to provide a set of 'objective morals and ethics' that are not highly 'subjective' in reality.

To have a consistent view of a 'Source' some call god(s), our objective world, Methodological Naturalism, must be in harmony with the unseen reality of theism. At present the 'traditional theist' worldviews present a paradox of conflicts with the reality of our 'objective' world based on ancient limited world views.

[OingoBoingo]

go back and get the context for that. you just want to make an argument out of anything.

if you believe heaven can be sensed, i have no argument with you in this context. it's still different enough to be a separate reality is all I was saying. voicing doubt about a certain apologetic is not "slamming" you.

You don't voice doubt. You're purposefully antagonistic.

[37818]

. . . However, we all know that there is only one reality. . . .

If you mean that there is really only one reality, I agree. But if you mean by "all" everyone believing everybody's reality is one and the same for everyone. It is my understand there are some who do not.

Now I'm a professing Christian [theist, trinitarian]. Now if in fact there is no God, what does it matter? When I'm dead, how will I even know I was wrong? And why should it matter?

Now Christianity, there are over 30,000 sects/divisions. Many of those sects I would regard being made up of genuine Christians. And most of the other sects teaching false/counterfeit gospels (2 Corinthians 11:3,4).

Now my question for you, how do you think one becomes a Christian? What is your thinking on this?

[firstfloor]

If you mean that there is really only one reality, I agree. But if you mean by "all" everyone believing everybody's reality is one and the same for everyone. It is my understand there are some who do not.
Now I'm a professing Christian [theist, trinitarian]. Now if in fact there is no God, what does it matter? When I'm dead, how will I even know I was wrong? And why should it matter?
Now Christianity, there are over 30,000 sects/divisions. Many of those sects I would regard being made up of genuine Christians. And most of the other sects teaching false/counterfeit gospels (2 Corinthians 11:3,4).
Now my question for you, how do you think one becomes a Christian? What is your thinking on this?