reasons for your theistic mind set?

[loganonekenobi]

One of the main arguments for a theistic world view that I have heard many times is the idea that our reality had to be created by something/one.
It seems logical as the patterns that we see in our reality do point to the idea that it all had a beginning. From what we observe things that have a start usually have a cause.
Unfortunately we cannot know for sure on the subject of the start of our universe. Also, sadly, the answer "we don't know" does not sit well with the common person.
Thus comes in the Theist to save the day and give us the comfort of believing we are important to the universe.
All this aside, one must come to the conclusion that this argument by itself is a deistic position strictly speaking. As I have said before, I have no conflict with the deist.
Now comes the plot of this thread.
Even if I, as an atheist, concede that it is possible maybe even probable that the universe had a "creator" the theist still must provide good sound reasoning as to why his/her's particular faith is correct and all the other wrong. Not all religions tout the idea that their story is true and all others are just stories.
however, it is easy to point to the monotheistic, Mesionic, Abrahamic faiths as clearly in the category of exclusive claims to truth.
Of great importance in this discussion is the fact that the common person is 80% likely to take on the faith of the culture they were raised in.
You would be surprised at how many people adamantly reject the idea that they are a product of their community and geography when it comes to faith.
I point out this fact because what I want are answers from those that truly considered their faith position apart from the way they were raised in as much as possible.
So please give me your reasons that you believe that your faith is correct and all others are false.
If this does not describe you then please tell me how you are able to be inclusive of other faiths.

 

[Axe Elf]

Although at the individual level, Xians can get caught up in the "We're right and you're wrong" trap, I don't believe that Xianity, as a theology, is exclusionist by nature.

Jesus said, "And I have other sheep [beside these] that are not of this fold. I must bring and impel those also; and they will listen to My voice and heed My call, and so there will be [they will become] one flock under one Shepherd." --John 10:16 (Amplified Bible)

I think some of the confusion may spring from the verse where "Jesus said to him, I am the Way and the Truth and the Life; no one comes to the Father except by (through) Me" (John 14:6, Amplified Bible), so Xians think they have cornered the market on salvation.

I tend to think that it is entirely possible that Jesus' sacrifice IS the only way that human beings have been allowed to enter into the presence of God again--even if people don't recognize that Jesus is the bridge. In other words, it may be true that no man is able to enter into the presence of God except by way of Jesus' sacrifice, but it may NOT be true that you have to be a Xian to do so.

Jesus also said, "Keep on asking and it will be given you; keep on seeking and you will find; keep on knocking [reverently] and [the door] will be opened to you. For everyone who keeps on asking receives; and he who keeps on seeking finds; and to him who keeps on knocking, [the door] will be opened." --Matthew 7:7-8 (Amplified Bible)

So it seems like God is promising that anyone who honestly seeks Him will find Him--by whatever name they call Him.

 

[Earthling]

One of the main arguments for a theistic world view that I have heard many times is the idea that our reality had to be created by something/one.

It isn't a very good one, in my opinion.

It seems logical as the patterns that we see in our reality do point to the idea that it all had a beginning. From what we observe things that have a start usually have a cause.

From what we observe how much of the time does that cause turn out to be accident? What we observe is limited, our knowledge of creation infantile.

Unfortunately we cannot know for sure on the subject of the start of our universe. Also, sadly, the answer "we don't know" does not sit well with the common person.

This is the reason we are wrong so much of the time.

Thus comes in the Theist to save the day and give us the comfort of believing we are important to the universe.

Show me a theist who believes we are important to the universe and I'll show you a green dog.

All this aside, one must come to the conclusion that this argument by itself is a deistic position strictly speaking. As I have said before, I have no conflict with the deist.
Now comes the plot of this thread.
Even if I, as an atheist, concede that it is possible maybe even probable that the universe had a "creator" the theist still must provide good sound reasoning as to why his/her's particular faith is correct and all the other wrong. Not all religions tout the idea that their story is true and all others are just stories.

Though there are a few claims of divine inspiration and references to creation in some religious texts, they are all vague and insubstantial with the exception of the Bible.

Buddha rejected the concept of a God and his possible interference with man. Confucius referred to a vague heavenly way, or nature, which also didn't interfere with man but is comparable to human nature. Lao Tzu, who formed Taoism, made a similar claim. The sacred texts of Shintoism make no divine claim, though they do include creation myths, they aren't historical and the text can't be, in fact weren't meant to be corroborated with actual evidence.

Some of the Vedas of Hinduism make vague unsubstantiated claims of celestial inspiration. Their creator god, Brahma was born of another deity, and Brahman is a metaphysical force rather than a divine being. Most Hindus don't believe in a creator, though that is left to the individual. Scientology also leaves the belief in a creator god up to the individual, and teach that the Theta willed themselves into existence generating the MEST, Matter, Energy, Space and Time into being. There is no way to corroborate these claims.

Mormons believe that the Bible is incomplete, That the heavens and earth were created by Jesus Christ under the direction of God the Father. The writings of Joseph Smith often contradict the Bible, though, and there is no evidence of his alleged historical references. Muslims believe the Genesis account to have been corrupted, Their position on creation and evolution vary over time and individual interpretation. References to a creation in the Quran are vague and unsubstantiated.

Christians believe in the Biblical creation account, though their interpretation of it varies. Some believe in an old earth and some believe in a young earth. The Christian Greek scriptures themselves are in complete harmony with the Hebrew Aramaic texts, which themselves foretold of an acceptance of the peoples of the nations once the Jewish people had rejected Jehovah God and his covenant with them. Both texts have a great deal of corroborating evidence in their support.

Ancient mythology consists of myths which were not meant to be taken as literal or historical texts. They have a great deal less manuscripts than the Bible to compare and very little if any corroborating evidence to support them.

Science can only speculate on the possible forming of the universe and planet earth. The current hypothesis is that the matter that formed the universe randomly and spontaneously appeared of it's own accord. The Bible, is, by far, the most likely authority on the subject. Creation Claims Conclusion | Gods And Men

however, it is easy to point to the monotheistic, Mesionic, Abrahamic faiths as clearly in the category of exclusive claims to truth.

First of all, I would say henotheistic rather than monotheistic and secondly it may be easy to point to them but somewhat more difficult to evaluate the possible alternatives. Then you can easily point.

Of great importance in this discussion is the fact that the common person is 80% likely to take on the faith of the culture they were raised in.

This is true, but I don't see what relevance it is, say, to an atheist born in Christendom . . . the Bible belt, for example. Atheist are always saying to me "If you were born in _______ 1,000 year ago you would be _______!" To which I say, so what? So would you.

You would be surprised at how many people adamantly reject the idea that they are a product of their community and geography when it comes to faith.

There is very little that people do that surprises me.

I point out this fact because what I want are answers from those that truly considered their faith position apart from the way they were raised in as much as possible.

My father came from an irreligious home. He has always been atheist. My mother was dragged from Christian congregation to congregation where she quickly realized that they were all hypocrites and it was all nonsense. She became a believer in her 50's maybe? Somewhere around that time. I was raised an unbeliever and became a believer at 27 when I began an intense study of the Bible.

So please give me your reasons that you believe that your faith is correct and all others are false.
If this does not describe you then please tell me how you are able to be inclusive of other faiths.

To say that my beliefs are true and any others are false would be foolish, irresponsible and incorrect. As I mentioned above one would only have to consider the primary Abrahamic branches in order to establish an authority on the creation. Islam and Mormonism are incompatible with what we now call "Judaism" and Christianity though those latter two are compatible with one another.

Of course, one must investigate and acknowledge the outside influences both of those have had over the centuries. Greek philosophy, for example, in Jewish thinking from Alexander since the summer of 332 B.C.E. and Constantine in 325 C.E. with Christianity.

 

[David T]

One of the main arguments for a theistic world view that I have heard many times is the idea that our reality had to be created by something/one.
It seems logical as the patterns that we see in our reality do point to the idea that it all had a beginning. From what we observe things that have a start usually have a cause.
Unfortunately we cannot know for sure on the subject of the start of our universe. Also, sadly, the answer "we don't know" does not sit well with the common person.
Thus comes in the Theist to save the day and give us the comfort of believing we are important to the universe.
All this aside, one must come to the conclusion that this argument by itself is a deistic position strictly speaking. As I have said before, I have no conflict with the deist.
Now comes the plot of this thread.
Even if I, as an atheist, concede that it is possible maybe even probable that the universe had a "creator" the theist still must provide good sound reasoning as to why his/her's particular faith is correct and all the other wrong. Not all religions tout the idea that their story is true and all others are just stories.
however, it is easy to point to the monotheistic, Mesionic, Abrahamic faiths as clearly in the category of exclusive claims to truth.
Of great importance in this discussion is the fact that the common person is 80% likely to take on the faith of the culture they were raised in.
You would be surprised at how many people adamantly reject the idea that they are a product of their community and geography when it comes to faith.
I point out this fact because what I want are answers from those that truly considered their faith position apart from the way they were raised in as much as possible.
So please give me your reasons that you believe that your faith is correct and all others are false.
If this does not describe you then please tell me how you are able to be inclusive of other faiths.

Thank you father diego de landa or your very updated updated version from the 1500s. You were simply "a theist" glad you got rid of the gap since being an "atheist" is so profoundly different. You dont evolve very quickly do you, but eventually you simple become an extinctatheist. Like a lumbering dinasaur. What you think and what i think for that matter, is irelevant.

 

[sun rise]

So please give me your reasons that you believe that your faith is correct and all others are false.
If this does not describe you then please tell me how you are able to be inclusive of other faiths.

The teaching story, The Blind Men and the Elephant, is my "go to" answer to your inclusion question. The fundamental postulate is that the human intellect is insufficient to understand the Divine. Thus the best we can do is to construct an incomplete picture which may be intellectually satisfying.

Another way of looking at it is contained in Hazrat Inayat Khan's "salat" prayer. Here's a relevant excerpt:

Thou art the first cause and the last effect,
The Divine Light and the Spirit of Guidance,
Alpha and Omega.
Thy light is in all forms,
Thy love in all beings,
In a loving mother, in a kind father,
In an innocent child, in a helpful friend,
In an inspiring teacher.
Allow us to recognize Thee In all Thy holy names and forms;
As Rama, as Krishna, as Shiva, as Buddha;
Let us know Thee as Abraham, as Solomon, as Zarathustra, as Moses, as Jesus, as Mohammad,
And in many other names and forms,
Known and unknown to the world.

 

[George-ananda]

Well, I have a non-dual position meaning God and creation are not-two. This is best expressed in the Hindu Advaita Vedanta philosophy.

I have come to this view from the insights of those I have come to believe have experienced and delved deepest into the nature of reality. I find these types as basically all on the same page.

 

[Jumi]

One of the main arguments for a theistic world view that I have heard many times is the idea that our reality had to be created by something/one.

For some types of theistic world views, yeah.

It seems logical as the patterns that we see in our reality do point to the idea that it all had a beginning. From what we observe things that have a start usually have a cause.
Unfortunately we cannot know for sure on the subject of the start of our universe. Also, sadly, the answer "we don't know" does not sit well with the common person.
Thus comes in the Theist to save the day and give us the comfort of believing we are important to the universe.
All this aside, one must come to the conclusion that this argument by itself is a deistic position strictly speaking. As I have said before, I have no conflict with the deist.
Now comes the plot of this thread.

Could be that everything just exists like it always has, just changes over time like a village you haven't been to a long time becomes a city, then after we die the whole places is destroyed and only traces remain.

Of great importance in this discussion is the fact that the common person is 80% likely to take on the faith of the culture they were raised in.
You would be surprised at how many people adamantly reject the idea that they are a product of their community and geography when it comes to faith.
I point out this fact because what I want are answers from those that truly considered their faith position apart from the way they were raised in as much as possible.

Yeah a lot of people don't think religious questions are important enough to make their own inquiry into them. Doesn't seem like much of an argument either way, what the majority in some place believes to be true. As we know from history there are quite insane views that were held as traditional in places. Our time is not likely to be that much different, though our collective hubris is less than before the modern physics revolution...

So please give me your reasons that you believe that your faith is correct and all others are false.
If this does not describe you then please tell me how you are able to be inclusive of other faiths.

Why would everything else be false if I'm correct? Why couldn't groups of people all have pieces of the puzzle neatly in place...

 

[Jumi]

I'd like to add that I don't consider myself having a theistic (or atheistic for that matter) mind set.

 

[Shantanu]

One of the main arguments for a theistic world view that I have heard many times is the idea that our reality had to be created by something/one.
It seems logical as the patterns that we see in our reality do point to the idea that it all had a beginning. From what we observe things that have a start usually have a cause.
Unfortunately we cannot know for sure on the subject of the start of our universe. Also, sadly, the answer "we don't know" does not sit well with the common person.
Thus comes in the Theist to save the day and give us the comfort of believing we are important to the universe.
All this aside, one must come to the conclusion that this argument by itself is a deistic position strictly speaking. As I have said before, I have no conflict with the deist.
Now comes the plot of this thread.
Even if I, as an atheist, concede that it is possible maybe even probable that the universe had a "creator" the theist still must provide good sound reasoning as to why his/her's particular faith is correct and all the other wrong. Not all religions tout the idea that their story is true and all others are just stories.
however, it is easy to point to the monotheistic, Mesionic, Abrahamic faiths as clearly in the category of exclusive claims to truth.
Of great importance in this discussion is the fact that the common person is 80% likely to take on the faith of the culture they were raised in.
You would be surprised at how many people adamantly reject the idea that they are a product of their community and geography when it comes to faith.
I point out this fact because what I want are answers from those that truly considered their faith position apart from the way they were raised in as much as possible.
So please give me your reasons that you believe that your faith is correct and all others are false.
If this does not describe you then please tell me how you are able to be inclusive of other faiths.

Would it not be better to be neither an atheist nor a theist until there is concrete proof one way or the other?

 

[PureX]

The reason that people are theistic, atheistic, agnostic, and/or indifferent is that they feel it works for them in their life experience.

It's really just that simple.

All this BS about our interest in "truth" and "evidence" and "reasoning" and such is just our egos justifying our bias regardless of what we believe and why we believe it.

 

[LuisDantas]

Would it not be better to be neither an atheist nor a theist until there is concrete proof one way or the other?

Not really.

Both stances have their advantages, and it may not even be possible to avoid both.

Besides, neither should be taken too seriously to begin with, and therefore it is just not worth the trouble to attempt to avoid either.

 

[Shantanu]

Not really.

Both stances have their advantages, and it may not even be possible to avoid both.

Is truth a desirable trait?

 

[LuisDantas]

Is truth a desirable trait?

Of course it is.

Why do you ask?

 

[Shantanu]

Of course it is.

Why do you ask?

Because it appears to be a never-ending preoccupation with me.

 

[LuisDantas]

Because it appears to be a never-ending preoccupation with me.

But why did you ask at that specific time?

 

[Shantanu]

But why did you ask at that specific time?

I was searching for the truth.

 

[LuisDantas]

I was searching for the truth.

Sorry, but that does not clarify.

Why would certainty about theism or atheism have anything to do with truth as a value?

 

[loganonekenobi]

Although at the individual level, Xians can get caught up in the "We're right and you're wrong" trap, I don't believe that Xianity, as a theology, is exclusionist by nature.

Jesus said, "And I have other sheep [beside these] that are not of this fold. I must bring and impel those also; and they will listen to My voice and heed My call, and so there will be [they will become] one flock under one Shepherd." --John 10:16 (Amplified Bible)

I think some of the confusion may spring from the verse where "Jesus said to him, I am the Way and the Truth and the Life; no one comes to the Father except by (through) Me" (John 14:6, Amplified Bible), so Xians think they have cornered the market on salvation.

I tend to think that it is entirely possible that Jesus' sacrifice IS the only way that human beings have been allowed to enter into the presence of God again--even if people don't recognize that Jesus is the bridge. In other words, it may be true that no man is able to enter into the presence of God except by way of Jesus' sacrifice, but it may NOT be true that you have to be a Xian to do so.

Jesus also said, "Keep on asking and it will be given you; keep on seeking and you will find; keep on knocking [reverently] and [the door] will be opened to you. For everyone who keeps on asking receives; and he who keeps on seeking finds; and to him who keeps on knocking, [the door] will be opened." --Matthew 7:7-8 (Amplified Bible)

So it seems like God is promising that anyone who honestly seeks Him will find Him--by whatever name they call Him.

I do like your interpretation of christianity. unfortunately it does appear to be the the majority view and from what i can study it does not seem to be the theological view of the core faith.

{Jesus said, “I am the truth, the way, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but through Me” (John 14:6) and “For unless you believe that I am He, you shall die in your sins” (John 8:24). The Apostle Peter echoed these words when he said, “Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved” (Acts 4:12, KJV).
St. Paul concurred, “There is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus …” (1 Timothy 2:5, KJV). In fact, it is the united testimony of the New Testament that no one can know God the Father except through the person of Jesus Christ.}

This is taken from a web site called "bethinking" I could give you many others but the modern consensus is that one must believe in the death and resurection of Jesus in order to be saved from our God given damnation. The bridge must be recognized or no deal.
Again I like your outlook on christianity I just dont think it's true . The idea that Jesus was the only way is backed up by the historical facts as well. In the formation of christianity the majority of the people were pagan. Pagans had no problem with worshiping various gods for various needs. They may have had there favorites but monotheism was just strange to them.
Now comes along the greek writers of the letters that would become the new testaments (well some of them anyway). In the face of this pagan idea they had to convince people to abandon polytheism. After they gained power they soon made worship of other gods illegal. Had they believed the way you do that might not have happened.
As much as i like a faith that can accept other views I dont feel that christianity , theologicly or historically, is one of them.

 

[Shantanu]

Sorry, but that does not clarify.

I need to know whether truth genuinely produces liberation or not or whether I should take up @Amanaki's advice and try Buddhism from the New Year: can you help me with this because I an seeking counselling for my persistent delusional disorder that the UK Mental Health authorities require me to take 'risperidone' and 'sertraline' medications for and they are unable to provide me with this form of counselling until at least March 2019.

I hope I have now clarified.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Would it not be better to be neither an atheist nor a theist until there is concrete proof one way or the other?

I don't think either way really matters in the grand scheme of things by which all of it remains empty. During my time as a theist, I never dreamed that id ever be an atheist, even though I knew that's how life started as being without gods. Given the dynamics and potential throughout what I view as a continuum , I suspect no one will ever be able to escape designations such as atheism and theism in any permanent way.