From: Jim Choate <ravage@einstein.ssz.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 1998 18:23:17 +0800
To: cypherpunks@einstein.ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer)
Subject: Re: atheism (was: RE: Democracy... (fwd)) (fwd)
Message-ID: <199809212348.SAA19564@einstein.ssz.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text



Forwarded message:

> Date: Mon, 21 Sep 1998 15:18:28 +0000 (GMT)
> From: attila <attila@hun.org>
> Subject: Re: atheism (was: RE: Democracy... (fwd)) (fwd)

>       father:	  so... you "deny" God's existence since their is no
>       		  "proof" of His existence. did you ever consider that in
>       		  order to "deny" anything, you must have defined that
>       		  concept?  in other words, to deny God, you must have
>       		  determined that I or someone else has defined God in
>       		  order for you to be able to "deny" God?

So, what has the issue of defining something got to do with its existance?
Is this bozo really claiming that God can only exist unless somebody thinks
him up? Sounds like religous hubris to me...

God was shinning on this asshole that he never had to argue face to face
with me at that age...

>       counselor:  is there a difference between belief and faith?

The spelling.

>       father:	  aethism is a concept which is almost impossible to
>       		  define as it is a denial that if it could it doesnt.
>       		  it is much easier to defend "agnosticism" where you
>       		  admit you do not believe, or have faith, because you
>       		  lack sufficient scientific proof. aethism is not
>      		  doubting, it is denying, even in the face of proof.

Agnosticism has *nothing* to do with scientific proof. It existed eons
before anyone even thought of the scientific method. Skepticism is a part of
human nature, not philosophy, beliefs, or science.

Atheism is saying that while God could exist he doesn't. In other words it
is the belief that God doesn't exist and can't be proven contrary. There is
a fundamental belief that all proofs are flawed.

Agnosticism is the inability to believe one way or the other. It could be
characterized by a total lack of faith in anything (assuming one doesn't
want to argue about the meaning of 'total' and 'anything'). What keeps
agnosticism appart from nearly all other beliefs is that it is really trying
to answer two question and not one (Does God exist?), they are:

1.	Does God exist?

2.	Do I believe the proof in 1.?

It is the embodyment of skeptiscism. The fact that most religions that
accept 1. accept 2. as a given is why they are hubric.

> 		  suppose you die, and despite your lack of belief or
> 		  faith, you find yourself before the throne of God.

My own personal suspicion is he's going to ask you whether you lived your
beliefs even in the face of overwhelming opposition. As long as you say
"Yes" he's going to be a happy camper.

To borrow a Christian icon, he's going to want to know if you worshiped
false idols.

>     they believe as truth, is futile. I will accept, without trying to
>     change, anyone's "religious" beliefs as their beliefs; I only ask 
>     they extend the same tolerance to me.

Ditto.

Since this doesn't particular avenue has little more to be said I'm going to
drop it.


    ____________________________________________________________________

                            The seeker is a finder.

                                     Ancient Persian Proverb

       The Armadillo Group       ,::////;::-.          James Choate
       Austin, Tx               /:'///// ``::>/|/      ravage@ssz.com
       www.ssz.com            .',  ||||    `/( e\      512-451-7087
                           -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
    --------------------------------------------------------------------