A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists

[Immanuel Can]

Now that you mention it, I seem to remember my friend telling me about the principle of a later verse over rides an earlier verse if they contradict. I also got the impression that he was quite comfortable telling me what he believed about Islam, he wasn't trying to convert me and I wasn't trying to convert him, we were just having some pleasant conversation exchanging information.

Yes, that sounds like a worthwhile conversation. I'm glad to hear he was forthcoming. Not everyone is, of course, so it's pleasant to be able to speak freely with some one who doesn't mind telling you the whole story, and listening to yours, of course.

[thedoc]

Now that you mention it, I seem to remember my friend telling me about the principle of a later verse over rides an earlier verse if they contradict. I also got the impression that he was quite comfortable telling me what he believed about Islam, he wasn't trying to convert me and I wasn't trying to convert him, we were just having some pleasant conversation exchanging information.

Yes, that sounds like a worthwhile conversation. I'm glad to hear he was forthcoming. Not everyone is, of course, so it's pleasant to be able to speak freely with some one who doesn't mind telling you the whole story, and listening to yours, of course.

I had a bit of an advantage, I grew up in the US. He was born in Africa to Indian parents, migrated to England where he met his wife and then moved to America, so he didn't understand American culture. He had some of the most amusing questions about religious holidays.

[Immanuel Can]

He had some of the most amusing questions about religious holidays.

I'll bet. Like what?

[thedoc]

He had some of the most amusing questions about religious holidays.

I'll bet. Like what?

"What does the Easter bunny have to do with the Christian celebration of Easter?" or " What does Santa Clause have to do with the Christian celebration of Christmas?" I'm sure there were others, like Halloween, but these are the ones that stand out. I had to tell him that there is no connection, but these were secular additions to the holiday. I know there are some churches that incorporate these things into the religious service but I also know of at least one pastor who, during service, said there was no Santa Clause, some parents were very upset about this.

I used to tease him about his foot washing ceremony before prayers. He would wet his hand and wipe it over his socked foot. I used to tell him to take off his sock and really wash his foot. He would just smile and continue.

[Immanuel Can]

He would just smile and continue.

I guess that's what ritual is.

[attofishpi]

No, i am not suggesting the term God has no specific content.

It has content. Specific, objective content. Do you mean that?

No. Where do you propose one can obtain specific objective content regarding God?

So...there can be "misbeliefs" about God? And a person who imagines God to be in the image of their traditional deity or deities has made that sort of "misbelief" error? Are you saying that?

Of course there are going to be plenty of innacuracies in peoples belief of God, including yours. Why does the "image" matter to you so much? What do YOU imagine God to look like?

I am simply saying that yes, there is a God, and people that have experiences of its existence will tie their own belief (likely to be what they were raised to believe in) to that experience.

...and since, as you say, the term "God" has its own specific content, their belief will be wrong if it does not conform to that content.
Is that your position? For it would follow logically. If what you say above is true, this would also have to be true.

Of course - again - including yours, and what i originally believed regarding God.

This does not change the nature of God.

Therefore, you're saying that some statements about God are true (say, "there's only one") and some are false (say, "god looks like Aphrodite"). Have I understood you aright?

How the hell should i know if God looks like Aphrodite? IT might look like Hitler for all i know - again, why does the image matter?

But if all that's what you're saying, I must ask, why say it at all? After all, all you've then really said is, "People from cultures where the truth about God is not taught are likely to mistake Him for someone different".

No, that is not what i am saying. There is very little TRUTH taught about God by mere mortal man, because most mere mortal man has NO experience of IT.

But everybody already knows that, so why is that an illuminating claim?

Everybody already knows a shitload of bollocks regarding God - including you, in your claims that God is ALL good and loving.

[thedoc]

So...there can be "misbeliefs" about God? And a person who imagines God to be in the image of their traditional deity or deities has made that sort of "misbelief" error? Are you saying that?

Of course there are going to be plenty of innacuracies in peoples belief of God, including yours. Why does the "image" matter to you so much? What do YOU imagine God to look like?

For several years I have been trying to divorce myself from the anthropomorphic image of God to a more spiritual based idea. But I must admit that I am the victim of the same anthropomorphic projection as anyone, perhaps more so. Years ago the pastor at our previous church was teaching a class of HS kids and asked them "If Jesus were here today, what would he look like?" and the whole class agreed that Jesus would look like me. At the time I had a dark beard and mustache that has since turned white, but then I am more than twice as old as Jesus when he died on the cross, and Jesus was God taking the form of a man.

[Immanuel Can]

No, i am not suggesting the term God has no specific content.

It has content. Specific, objective content. Do you mean that?

No. Where do you propose one can obtain specific objective content regarding God?

If there is no content to the concept "God," then it is impossible for one to be wrong -- or, for that matter, right -- about anything one alleges about that concept.

So now this statement is rendered incoherent:

Everybody already knows a shitload of bollocks regarding God - including you, in your claims that God is ALL good and loving.

If there is no particular, objective reference in the word "God," then there is no sense to any claim about what God might or might not be. That's according to your now-stated view, that is.

But again you write:

Of course there are going to be plenty of innacuracies in peoples belief of God, including yours.

Firstly, you don't know what my belief of God is, of course, so have no way of knowing if it were right or wrong. But secondly, there can be no "inaccuracy" to anything with does not refer to objective truth...and you have said that is true of the "God" concept.

Why does the "image" matter to you so much? What do YOU imagine God to look like?

It's not "image" that is important: it is identity. If I say "I know attofishpi, and he is a three-foot tall Chinese woman with a beard," then people can be quite sure I do not know you...whomever I may know...but perhaps rather I know only someone who has stolen your name.

Likewise, if someone says that God is something different and contradictory from what He actually happens to be, and if we happen to know what He happens to be in some way, we can be quite sure they are not thinking of the same entity when he/she says "God" as we are when we say "God."

mere mortal man has NO experience of IT.

Now, how did you arrive at this conclusion? What's your evidence that you know what others have or have not experienced? You are certainly a prophet, I perceive.

[Immanuel Can]

For several years I have been trying to divorce myself from the anthropomorphic image of God to a more spiritual based idea.

Yes. That's hard, though, because for some reason human brains leap to analogies very readily. We tend to imagine using the furniture of what we have already known.

Jesus was God taking the form of a man.

Indeed. So in one sense, it's not at all wrong to think anthropomorphically about God, if we include the Trinity in our thinking.

The Incarnation would invite us to do so...in a very specific way, of course.

[attofishpi]

MOST OF mere mortal man has NO experience of IT.

Now, how did you arrive at this conclusion? What's your evidence that you know what others have or have not experienced? You are certainly a prophet, I perceive.

You have incrorrectly quoted me there and this is something that really pisses me off. You lopped off MOST of mere mortal man has no experience of IT. Then you have the nerve to take me up on it...
Prophet? I have never claimed to be a prophet so why the stupid ?

It has content. Specific, objective content. Do you mean that?

No. Where do you propose one can obtain specific objective content regarding God?

If there is no content to the concept "God," then it is impossible for one to be wrong -- or, for that matter, right -- about anything one alleges about that concept.

I see you have difficulty in simple English comprehension. Again - i did not say there is NO CONTENT regarding the concept of God. I am questioning as to where one may get SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE CONTENT from regarding God?

Of course there are going to be plenty of innacuracies in peoples belief of God, including yours.

Firstly, you don't know what my belief of God is, of course, so have no way of knowing if it were right or wrong.

Actually i do know one of you beliefs in God is as you stated prior - not in converse with me, that God is all good and loving. On the 'all good' part I know you are wrong from over 19yrs of direct interaction with God.

It's not "image" that is important: it is identity. If I say "I know attofishpi, and he is a three-foot tall Chinese woman with a beard," then people can be quite sure I do not know you...whomever I may know...but perhaps rather I know only someone who has stolen your name.

You questioned me regarding whether i thought God looks like Aphrodite - if 'He' or 'She' or 'It' does, how would that identify God? Again, im interested in your fixation as to what God looks like - how do you envisage God to look, and where are you getting this idea from?

[thedoc]

MOST OF mere mortal man has NO experience of IT.

Now, how did you arrive at this conclusion? What's your evidence that you know what others have or have not experienced? You are certainly a prophet, I perceive.

You have incrorrectly quoted me there and this is something that really pisses me off. You lopped off MOST of mere mortal man has no experience of IT. Then you have the nerve to take me up on it...

And how do you arrive at that conclusion considering that you can only "know" your own experience, and get 2nd hand information about other's experiences. I seriously doubt that you know, personally, every Christian on Earth, let alone all humans on Earth. I have had a direct experience of God, so that is just one less that you can claim to "know".

I also note that you are quibbling more about what was quoted and nothing about the actual meaning of the quote. Don't you have anything of substance to say? Or are you admitting that you have nothing to say?

[thedoc]

It's not "image" that is important: it is identity. If I say "I know attofishpi, and he is a three-foot tall Chinese woman with a beard," then people can be quite sure I do not know you...whomever I may know...but perhaps rather I know only someone who has stolen your name.

You questioned me regarding whether i thought God looks like Aphrodite - if 'He' or 'She' or 'It' does, how would that identify God? Again, i'm interested in your fixation as to what God looks like - how do you envisage God to look, and where are you getting this idea from?

You need to read IC's response to my post, he clarifies it rather nicely.

[attofishpi]

I also note that you are quibbling more about what was quoted and nothing about the actual meaning of the quote. Don't you have anything of substance to say? Or are you admitting that you have nothing to say?

If most of humanity have experience of God such that they know it exists rather than just believing they're doing a good job of keeping quiet about it. Do you honestly believe that majority of the people know God exists?

[attofishpi]

It's not "image" that is important: it is identity. If I say "I know attofishpi, and he is a three-foot tall Chinese woman with a beard," then people can be quite sure I do not know you...whomever I may know...but perhaps rather I know only someone who has stolen your name.

You questioned me regarding whether i thought God looks like Aphrodite - if 'He' or 'She' or 'It' does, how would that identify God? Again, i'm interested in your fixation as to what God looks like - how do you envisage God to look, and where are you getting this idea from?

You need to read IC's response to my post, he clarifies it rather nicely.

IC has been questioning me regarding God in terms of physical anthropomorphic attributes, if he doesn't see any then why question it?

[Immanuel Can]

You've got me wrong, atto. I just don't know how you get to decide what other people do or do not know, just as thedoc says. If thedoc, or anyone else, for that matter, were to say that they had an experience of "God," how would you, from your view that God has no objective traits, be qualified to verify or negate that? I just can't see how you'd get that knowledge unless you yourself had some objective experience of God against which to measure it. And you seem to say that's not possible...

Moreover, I can't figure out if you think the word "God" refers to any objective reality or not...you talk both ways at different times on that one, it seems to me. But I don't so far see any clarification in your responses. On the one hand, you claim all traditions have some handle on your "God"; but the "God" you claim to have been acquainted with for, according to you, "19 years," is apparently not-good and not-loving.

So you're right...that's no God I know. And now I'm no longer sure of what you're relating to. And I certainly can't help you to illuminate whatever it is. Because for sure, it's nothing with which I am familiar, as I am happy to admit.