Humble

humble brother wrote:
This has to be:
“I don’t believe anything without evidence”
Then they post another message:
“I believe no gods exist”
That’s the very definition of irrational thinking.
Many of these funny atheists also say:
“Nonexistence of evidence is evidence of nonexistence”
Can you believe these yahoos? πŸ˜‰

The reason that these statements appear contradictory
is because you don’t understand what they actually mean

because you do not understand naturalism or the study of nature, which is science

Statement: “I don’t beleive things without evidence”

This does not mean that I have to personally evaluate or experience or understand – this is an incorrect literal interpretation – and only literally interpreting text means that you are not only missing the subtext, nuances and meaning, but you are not understanding what’s being communicated at all. Nothing is only what it appears to be.

In naturalism, belief is used to describe the moment that they accept the premise without further evaluation. Okay, proved as much as it can be, next steps and build to the next belief from there – and all the beliefs and proofs are peer reviewed, debated, evaluated and eventually, the bad beliefs are proven faulty and the good beliefs are rolled up into a Scientific Theory.

Because while it’s true – Evolution is just a theory – but that also means, religion is just an opinion – because there is no corroborating evidence to support any of the significant claims of any religion that involves deities doing anything.

That the stories told to explain the religion or the events they claim as being relevant to the religion – are no different from Sex in the City – that New York is a real place and some of the locations were real locations that even involved real people who are in the real life real locations – doesn’t mean that Carrie Bradshaw and her friends are real – or even realistic.

Forest Gump – with all it’s incorporated newsreel footage should have made people come to that understanding – a story about real things involving characters who are dubious – aren’t true stories – they are fables and parables, passion plays – they are a means of conveying truth without being truth.

And the problem of reading religious texts as literal isn’t the religious text – it’sΒ  reading any writing of any kind as literal.

People think of literacy as being able to read. That’s only stage one.

Being able to read just means you aren’t illiterate – it doesn’t make you a literary reader – because that’s about comprehension.

If you read only for the literal meaning of any writing, then you can read it but you have no understanding of it – because you are not a reader, you are just reading.

And you don’t have to be an expert, you just have to be familiar with literature and the forms of artistic expression – something that people who only beleive in one book can’t understand because they haven’t read enough other books to see the literary aspects of their bible – especially the King James version – the most poetic book ever written by a committee – but, this being the source, it’s only as good as a committee without the original authors could make it.

To a naturalist, to beleive something means accepting a premise that has been arrived at over time, and revealed through the collective and cooperative work of many people who have made logical and intuitive leaps arising from their robust and complex understanding of the work.

To beleive isn’t an acceptance without question, but to come to understand potential, probability, random chance and verified foundations that have withstood the test of human knowledge – which is why science changes over time – because it’s a process of incorporating new information and ideas.

Whereas, religion is handed down complete and unchanged – except for fits and starts where it had to change to remain in the world, instead of consigned to the mythology section of the book store.

“I beleive no gods exist”

That is a leap, not of faith, but a statement of credibility and logic.

It’s not an emotional beleive that is felt because belief in a god or gods is an emotional belief that is satisfying and makes you feel comforted and connected

There is no emotional content in the statement that no gods exist, it is a logical and intellectual position that means

many have claimed a god or gods, but none have proven or provided any evidence – thus, there are no premises, evidence, work that has been presented that is verifiable.

religion is not a theory, it’s a hypothesis – and not even a good guess based on wishful and magical thinking and without substance – it is pure emotion and emotion alone.

instead, people through the ages have tried to sort out how to make the world a better place and how to communicate those ideas – and not knowing or understanding the human body

opened themselves up to experiences – often drug related – and felt things and the way that their personal expereinced felt could only be interpreted through what they beleived about the world

so the washes of love and comfort where mis-interpreted as gifts from the gods and the person went out in the world and figured out how to make others feel the same way – and that feeling became the basis by which converts were made and some people who got into religion, saw the potential for wealth and power and that was the end of the goodness of religion.

“Nonexistence of evidence is evidence of nonexistence”

When there is no evidence, there is no trail to follow to discovery and understanding

because you say there’s a god and I say there’s an invisible pink unicorn who farts rainbows that cause all those same good feelings that you get from your god

so – it all comes down to your personal experience

I have as much proof for my rainbow farting invisible pink unicorn

as you do for your god

and in person, I can trigger in your brain all the same good feelings that you get from church

so prove that your god is real and my unicorn isn’t.

and you can’t, because all you can talk about is your experience of your religion and why it seems real to you

and I can talk about the human brain and explain all those feelings that you feel without reverting to goddidit