Theists... (reject, Creator, Earth, soul, evolution)

[PureX]

Originally Posted by crystalonyx

Actually, you only have to look around the earth to come to this conclusion, at least you don't have a selfish homo-sapiens centered view of religion.

One of the problems with religions is that they tend to anthropomorphize "God" instead of allowing God to remain a great mystery. They turn God into a human-like personality which in turn begs a lot of otherwise silly questions. And the main problem with atheism, then, is that it has nothing to contribute except as an opposition to such anthropomorphic conceptions of "God". So the debate between these two never really address the nature or existence of "God" so much as they argue about the anthropomorphic religious imagery. At least that's been my observation.

[fantôme profane]

Originally Posted by PureX

And the main problem with atheism, then, is that it has nothing to contribute except as an opposition to such anthropomorphic conceptions of "God".

Isn’t that enough?

[agent_smith]

Originally Posted by PureX

One of the problems with religions is that they tend to anthropomorphize "God" instead of allowing God to remain a great mystery. They turn God into a human-like personality which in turn begs a lot of otherwise silly questions. And the main problem with atheism, then, is that it has nothing to contribute except as an opposition to such anthropomorphic conceptions of "God". So the debate between these two never really address the nature or existence of "God" so much as they argue about the anthropomorphic religious imagery. At least that's been my observation.

If your only argument for God is a God of the gaps ("Goddidit") or "God is mysterious; it is impossible to define him" then what is the point in even discussing it in the first place, and why the heck are children being TOLD this mysterious-being exists when there is no evidence to support it?!

[Willamena]

Originally Posted by agent_smith

If your only argument for God is a God of the gaps ("Goddidit") or "God is mysterious; it is impossible to define him" then what is the point in even discussing it in the first place, and why the heck are children being TOLD this mysterious-being exists when there is no evidence to support it?!

The God that is the mystery doesn't fill ANY gaps, that's the thing; the imaged "God" does.

[agent_smith]

Originally Posted by Willamena

The God that is the mystery doesn't fill ANY gaps, that's the thing; the imaged "God" does.

Yes it does...

The "mysterious" God I am talking about here is the "exists outside of time and space, formless, omnimax, eternal... thing".
Where did the universe come from? Goddidit.
How did life start? Goddidit.
What happens when we die? We live forever, not die. Goddidit.
Why are we hear? "God is mysterious/unknown" (That's meant to be the "answer" to the question)

Goddidit fills every gap in the universe with a meaningless response, that supposedly also gives "evidence" for God's existence. How, exactly, I have no idea.

[stephenw]

Originally Posted by agent_smith

Yes it does...

The "mysterious" God I am talking about here is the "exists outside of time and space, formless, omnimax, eternal... thing".
Where did the universe come from? Goddidit.
How did life start? Goddidit.
What happens when we die? We live forever, not die. Goddidit.
Why are we hear? "God is mysterious/unknown" (That's meant to be the "answer" to the question)

Goddidit fills every gap in the universe with a meaningless response, that supposedly also gives "evidence" for God's existence. How, exactly, I have no idea.

You're missing the point Willamena made.

[PureX]

Originally Posted by stephenw

You're missing the point Willamena made.

Yes. It seems to me that atheists are often as blind and tunnel-visioned as the theists they rail against. Once we remove the religionist's depictions of God as the 'god of the gaps', they have no argument left, and no more a way of conceptualizing the mystery than the religionists do. Neither one of them are capable of grasping, accepting, or living within the reality of a 'divine mystery', it seems to me. The religionists need the atheist's skepticism to transcend the 'god of the gaps' trap, while the atheists need the religionist's respect for the unknown and unknowable to transcend their own pointlessness.

True faith is agnostic.

[crystalonyx]

Originally Posted by PureX

Yes. It seems to me that atheists are often as blind and tunnel-visioned as the theists they rail against. Once we remove the religionist's depictions of God as the 'god of the gaps', they have no argument left, and no more a way of conceptualizing the mystery than the religionists do. Neither one of them are capable of grasping, accepting, or living within the reality of a 'divine mystery', it seems to me. The religionists need the atheist's skepticism to transcend the 'god of the gaps' trap, while the atheists need the religionist's respect for the unknown and unknowable to transcend their own pointlessness.

True faith is agnostic.

There is no divine mystery, there is no reality. Life is an illusion.