There Is No God

[redqueen]

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5015557

He's a libertarian douche, but man, when he's right, he's right!

[RebelOne]

1. Yes, he is so, so right.

[no name no slogan]

2. Oh yes there is

and she has a helluva sense of humor. :hi:

[GirlinContempt]

3. I didn't know you were

in to extreme sports :D

[no name no slogan]

6. Only this one

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=105x5219236

[GirlinContempt]

7. Well get ready to join

a whole new league :D

[redqueen]

4. Did you read it though?

Interesting concept...

[no name no slogan]

9. It's a good piece, but I don't understand why it has to do with god

I'm not sure why not believing in god gives him the ability to appreciate different things and cultures. The logic is a bit skewed, IMHO. It's like saying that I don't believe the world is flat, therefore I can appreciate trees and oceans and blue skies better. What does one have to do at all with the other?

I think he's confusing god (the concept of a power greater than ourselves) with religion (a framework created by man/womankind for the worship of a greater power than ourselves). The two are different things, IMHO.

I didn't know he was a Cato Institute guy though.

[redqueen]

12. good point re: god vs. religion!

excellent, actually :)

and yeah, he's a ho

[Deep13]

27. Facts exist independent of belief.

Whether or not one follows a structured religion, the exisence of God suddenly renders everything subjective. For a tolerant person, facts become "true for you because I respect your beliefs" or just plain wrong for the intolerant. If I say the divinity of the universe speaks to me and guides my life, then the best case scenario is that it is true for me and those who accept that point of view. The simple fact is, however, is that the universe does not talk to people or guide their lives. Fundies do not believe that evolution is false for them, they say it is false period. Problem is, it happens to be true and was so before anyone knew about it.

[cosmik debris]

57. "not believing in god gives him the ability to appreciate different things

Here is my explanation. I hope it is helpful.

For those who don’t believe in an omnipotent god, when we see a tree, we take god out of the equation. We see the results of millions of years of evolutionary struggle.

Those who believe in an omnipotent god tell us that god can create a million trees in a million places with the blink of an eye. It devalues the tree when you know that it can be had so cheaply.

Or another example, we respect a person more if they pull themselves up by their own bootstraps (atheist) than we would if that same person had a rich daddy (god) who bought him a Harvard/Yale education and an oval office for him to play war games in.

In short, those who don’t believe in god have no one to blame or credit. We recognize the value of things because we know that they can’t be mass-produced by the god factory in the sky.

[Deja Q]

"believing there is no God gives me more room for belief in... sex..."

2 things:

1. He still spelt it with a capital "G". Oops.

2.
And he gets it?! Man, I must be doing something incredibly wrong!

[johnnie]

5. But God is many things to many people

Just by the fact that he is acknowledging the idea of God means he believes in God in some form or another. Being that as it is, he doesn't make any sense.

[redqueen]

13. yeah, i think like NNNS said above, he's more talking about religion

that would seem to make it more logical, anyway

[noonwitch]

22. Exactly-defining God as an old man who lives in the sky is not accurate

Most people think of God as some kind of separate being that lives in the sky and spies on us to keep notes on who sleeps with who.

I'm involved in the Unity movement-we believe that there is a divine spark in every human being that is both of us and of something greater. God is what connects all humans. You can call it whatever name you want to. The view is that God is kind of like the Force in the Star Wars' movies, except without the dark side.

I consider myself to be a liberal christian. My beliefs are a bit more traditional than most of Unity, but not inconsistent with them. Unity interprets everything in the Bible from a Metaphysical viewpoint, when I personally think some lessons, like the Sermon on the Mountain, are meant to be taken at face value. I have more of a literal belief in the crucifixion and resurrection, and I don't believe that Jesus died to save us from our sins, but to show us that death is not the end and we are more than our bodies.

I don't believe in the existence of Satan or hell, however, but I have never committed a monstrous enough deed to feel the need for a scapegoat. I do accept that evil exists and corrupts people, but not that it is personified.

I've always been one of those who didn't believe in the power of God, until I participated in a healing circle for a friend who was ill. I could feel the healing power go through me from other people and from above and below. I could feel it pass through me to the person we were praying for, and I could feel it tingling through my hands for a good couple of hours afterwards. I don't expect anyone to believe it unless they have exerienced it for themselves, but there really is something to christian healing techniques. I don't expect science to prove or disprove it, though.

[Bill McBlueState]

25. acknowledging the idea of God does not mean you believe in God

I agree with the subject of your post, that God is many things to many people. One of the obstacles to saying with absolute certainty that there are no gods is that you can talk to 100 different people and they'll give you 100 different definitions of God. That is a lot of different things to be sure about the nonexistence of!

But "acknowledging the idea of God" does not have to mean that you believe in God in some form or another. Is that true of other ideas? For example, I can acknowledge the idea that the Earth is 6000 years old. I can discuss that idea, the type of evidence that would support or refute that idea, and the implications of that idea if it were true. But in the end, I do not have to believe that the Earth is 6000 years old in order to acknolwedge that other people believe it is.

Same deal for Penn. He acknowledges that some people believe in one or more gods, and says that he does not share that belief. It's pretty simple.

[Deep13]

28. So it's real because he can imagine it?

His whole point is that reality exists independently from our beliefs. If God is real then God is real for everyone and would continue to be real without anyone. Further, God would be the same for everyone regardless of what they might believe. That means all people may be and most people must be completely dead wrong in their faith.

I hope you excuse me for putting it this way but, the idea that acknowleging the idea of God means that God exists is pretty twisted reasoning. If I talk about dragons, are they real for me? If so, where are they? I would like to get a photo.

[MsAnthropy]

8. Nice essay

I wish I could write like this--simple, straightforward, elegant. I never would have guessed it of him, watching his act.

[redqueen]

15. his writing is somethin else

all over the place...

[edwin]

10. Anyone here watch B.S.?

Was just doing the last episodes of season 1 last night. They're great!

[redqueen]

16. Yes!

Some episodes I really don't like, but some I love. :)

Did you see the one about the "family unit"? Prostitution?

Those were awesome!

[edwin]

17. Only

parts of prostitution and death penalty on tv, which is when i first discovered the program. Just got season 1 on dvd, am going for season 2 next. Haven't seen one I didn't like so far.

[madinmaryland]

11. There is so a DOG!!!!

Skinner has one in his avatar!!

[Rambis]

14. Fiddlesticks my names fred and I'm a man same as you

sorrry couldn't resist-

[asthmaticeog]

18. Sometimes he really pisses me off, but you're right...

...when he nails it, he nails it. Like on the "Bullshit" show he does, trashing on environmentalists and the only thing he offers as evidence is the word of some bought-off douchewhistle from the Cato Institute, but then the next week he'll put the screws to some real nasty shit. About half the time I want to dump him in a tank of lampreys, and the other half of the time I want to bake him a cake.

[redqueen]

20. same here

definitely a love/hate thing going on with penn

love his engraved bill of rights that he takes with him on flights :)

[jonnyblitz]

41. he was in one of the two anti- michael moore films i watched

i do believe it was "Michael Moore Hates America" and he ((((trashed))) Michael Moore. I have never seen his show.

[Ohio Joe]

19. hmmm

"Some would ask, how could a perfect God create a universe filled with so much that is evil. They have missed a greater conundrum: why would a perfect God create a universe at all? "

Sister Miriam Godwinson
"But for the Grace of God"
Alph Centauri

[hfojvt]

21. Hobbes: Do you believe in God?

Calvin: Well, SOMEBODY's out to get me.

[giant_robot]

23. Thanks for posting that!

Did you happen to read that interview on Salon yesterday about the British nun-turned athiest TV religous correspondent-turned religous author? (I wish I could post more info, but Salon's loading at a snail's pace for me today.) She had some very interesting opinions on god, religion, and egotism. It's worth a read, if you're so inclined. :hi:

On edit: Her name is Karen Armstrong and the article is titled, "Going Beyond God".

[redqueen]

31. No, I didn't...

Thanks for the info, I'll check that out! :hi:

[redqueen]

35. Wow... nice! Thanks again!

"You're saying these ancient sages really didn't care about big metaphysical systems. They didn't care about theology."

"No, none of them did. And neither did Jesus. Jesus did not spend a great deal of time discoursing about the trinity or original sin or the incarnation, which have preoccupied later Christians. He went around doing good and being compassionate. In the Quran, metaphysical speculation is regarded as self-indulgent guesswork. And it makes people, the Quran says, quarrelsome and stupidly sectarian. You can't prove these things one way or the other, so why quarrel about it? The Taoists said this kind of speculation where people pompously hold forth about their opinions was egotism. And when you're faced with the ineffable and the indescribable, they would say it's belittling to cut it down to size. Sometimes, I think the way monotheists talk about God is unreligious."

[HEyHEY]

24. This completely ignores the existence of one Wayne GRetzky

[Bill McBlueState]

26. thanks, redqueen

This meshes really well with what I believe. There are a lot of good parts, but here's my favorite:

I have love, blue skies, rainbows and Hallmark cards, and that has to be enough. It has to be enough, but it's everything in the world and everything in the world is plenty for me.

...well, I guess I don't get *that* excited about a particular brand of greeting card. :yoiks:

But this is why I study astronomy. The world -- and by that I mean the entire universe -- is far more interesting, beautiful, and surprising than anything people could ever invent. And to me, any concept of gods is just a human invention to help us cope with our insignificance in the grand scheme of it all.

[redqueen]

32. glad you liked it...

i like that part too... and the "long winded way of saying shut up" :7

[kwassa]

29. Logically, the piece is pretty weak, IMHO.

not much too the thought process there.

[Deep13]

30. It's a one minute segment on NPR.

There's not enough time to explore the reasons in detail. Anyway, no one ever asks Christians etc. to lay a foundation when they say some religious expression.

[Goblinmonger]

40. OK, since you were the one to lay down that gauntlet

show me the logic behind believing in god. Show me the logic that leads to the faith in your god.

This should be good.

[SidDithers]

43. Crickets...

wonder if you're being ignored by that poster too? :evilgrin:

Sid

[TallahasseeGrannie]

46. My advice to him/her is to...

back away very slowly.....turn around and run like hell.

You do NOT want to get into a logic discussion with GoblinM.

[kwassa]

50. Nah, Goblin is easy.

[kwassa]

51. Simple.

There is something greater than us in this universe. There are truths and realities beyond our understandings.

That which is greater than us I call God. I don't attempt to narrow God down, as He/She is greater than our ability to comprehend all but limited information of He/She. I also don't perceive God as a being, as that would limit understanding of God.

There are also modes of perception and experience of that God-ness that are extra-rational, or supra-rational. These modes of experience are true, and yet are not rational in the traditional sense. They are valid as a source of information about ourselves and our place in the universe as rationality is.

I think all approaches to God lead to mysticism, which is universally found in the world's religions. This is a direct experience of union with God. I have felt such union, and feel such union on a regular basis.

[Goblinmonger]

52. Perhaps you miss understood, I said LOGICAL proof.

1. Define greater.
2. Your major premise begs the questions. You can't use something that isn't proven for your major premise. You state as the major premise, "There is something greater than us in this universe." That begs the questions. You can't say that there is something greater than us and then say there is a god because there is something greater than us and that something greater is god. CIRCULAR REASONING.
3. "That which is greater than us I call God." You can redefine shit all you want. That which has four legs and comes up on my deck each morning and begs for treats I call God. Therefore God is Maddie, my neighbor's dog. Same exact logic, same exact stupid conclusion.
4. When I said logical proof (which was YOUR standard btw, not mine) I WAS NOT talking about discussion of "extra-rational, or supra-rational." That is just jibberjabber for making the irrational seem rational. Mysticism is not rational and you can't make it so by calling it "supra-rational."
5. "I think all approaches to God lead to mysticism." So atheists become mystics? If ALL approaches lead to God do so, non-belief in god would, too, since that is an approach. If you are going to have a logical discussion of something, make sure you pay attention to your wording.

[kwassa]

53. Since you want to be nasty ...

I don't see a point in responding to your answer.

[Goblinmonger]

54. Oh, please

You run around telling me that people distrust me just because I am an atheist, and that I have no moral standard to follow just because I am an atheist, and I make one offhand comment that is a little snarky and you run away crying to mother? If you are going to toss around bigoted statements like that about me PERSONALLY (yes, you did say that I HAD PROBLEMS WITH HAVING NO MORAL STANDARD), then you better get a little thicker skin than that.

Plus, I don't think you have an answer, anyway, and that is why you won't respond. So there. (Since we are acting like we are in grade school, again.)

[kwassa]

55. I never said any of the things you claim I did

Are you thinking of someone else? Not only is it something I haven't said, it is something I don't believe.

Either provide quotes or I suggest you withdraw your charge. Particularly the part about bigotry.

I am interested in talking theology to people who are actually interested in talking about it. I feel no need to justify my spiritual beliefs to non-believers, it is not interesting to do, and often a huge waste of time.

[Goblinmonger]

56. OK, my bad on the bigotry

I am in the middle of two different conversations and grading papers right now. Obviously too much for me on a Friday. My apologies.

But, give me a break. I made a comment that was about a 1 on the snarkiness rating. I really don't think your comment was even close to logical proof of god. I was a little sarcastic in my response. If that is going to chase you off, then, fine, I'll treat you with kid gloves from now on.

[beam me up scottie]

58. He wasn't up to your challenge.

That's why he won't answer you.

I feel no need to justify my spiritual beliefs to non-believers, it is not interesting to do, and often a huge waste of time.

Translation: kwassa picked up the gauntlet and it was too heavy for him.



:rofl:

[Ron Green]

33. This is the perfect example of a guy who's smart but not wise.

Lots of those in the Cato and the AEI, I would guess.

[redqueen]

34. Anything to say about what he's written here? n/t

[Ron Green]

36. Yes. His concept of God approximates that of many people who

imagine a "Boss God" who causes things or grants favors, or who must be the subject of unwavering and unquestioning faith. By establishing his "This I Believe" position (I don't really understand how he goes "beyond atheism" as he claims), he assigns to all the joys of life a kind of feel-good quality that he doesn't name, but I would call God, or at least manifestations of God. He names them and waxes enthusiastic in such a compelling way that one would almost think he is talking about God.

I'm not sure how if one wants to find truth outside oneself, as he says, one must begin with no belief in God and then look for "objective evidence." WTF? Objective evidence is not in the realm of spiritual reality.

Anyway, he's a smart cookie - and like too many other smart and slightly nerdy guys (I think of James Lileks, for example), he's become a right-wing guy as well.

[redqueen]

37. Heh, not "become", he's been libertarian for ages...

but yeah, I see your point about his definition of "god" being an issue with his statements.

Did you read that Salon interview? Going Beyond God? Really good stuff...

[TallahasseeGrannie]

47. These were my thoughts as well

I can offer my subjective reasons for believing, and they are many and they are "logical" to me, to my inner life. But they are not objective and never will be.

I have read some other things he's written and he's no friend of progressives, in my opinion. He's very full of himself.

[NMMNG]

38. Hmm

I believe that there is no God. I'm beyond atheism. Atheism is not believing in God.

If only he could get that through the heads of some people who just don't get that (or don't seem to want to).

[Bill McBlueState]

39. kick...

[Zebedeo]

42. So there's one atheist who

admits that his atheism is a "belief."

[SidDithers]

44. No, he admits that his belief goes beyond atheism...

It's right there in the first paragraph. It's really easy to see. Here, let me repost that part for you:

I believe that there is no God. I'm beyond atheism.

Did you even read the article?

Sid

[TallahasseeGrannie]

48. So then defining atheism

as the "default" mode, then?

But oh gosh, I hope we don't get into a massive definition war here.

[SidDithers]

49. Never with you, Grannie. The poster I replied to, however...

I would call it the "null" mode rather than the "default" mode. To me, "null" is more like emptiness, which may not apply to everyone. Default implies that everyone was an atheist at one point and then learned their belief, and while I agree with that position, I know many others don't. I'm hoping that "null" is a more neutral term, without any baggage that "default" might carry.

I think Penn is taking atheism and then adding disbelief to it.

:)

Sid

[TallahasseeGrannie]

45. I've read much better explanations

by atheists right here. I don't care for his smug attitude in general...never have liked him.

He reminds me of my high school algebra teacher.

[TreasonousBastard]

59. OK, but he doesn't...

make the case for no God, just talks about how he's comfortable with no God.

The series is "This I Believe" and he admits he's stretching to find something to "believe in." I don't think he stretched enough. Turning the negative "I don't believe in God" into "I believe there's no God" doesn't cut it.

I don't really think he should have tried to make the case for no God since that's as fruitless as making the case for God, but isn't there something that he believes in to replace what most of us use God for? We all like rainbows, families, and warm fuzzy stuff, no matter where they came from or who may or may not have made them.

(Hallmark cards, though... They may be proof Satan exists.)