Jonathan H. B. Lobl

A Different Discussion About God

A Scientist Discusses Faith

What does that mean?

Yes. Real religions have body counts.

Very frightening. The same Evangelical forces are backing the State of Israel -- because they believe it will bring about the End Times. These same religious minds -- who disdain science -- are the people who think that Climate Change is a hoax. Who are the movers behind the anti-vax movement. Of course, the impediments to the human rights of Gay people. Faith and Belief over facts, reason and external reality. I thought I would connect a few dots.

I used to think that Dan was deceptive. That he was playing mind games. I was mistaken. What we see is what there is. Dan does not understand. This is not about intelligence. Dan's world outlook is so rigid, that some ideas are simply not permitted into his head. In his own terms, it is the Armor of God. I'm not being mean. I'm speaking the truth as I have come to know it.

In America, the Evangelicals gave us President Trump -- and they own the Republican Party. AKA, the Grand Old Party -- AKA, the Party of God.

The Chinese Communist Party is drunk with power. They persecute followers of the various religions, because they can not stand competition. The Russian Orthodox Church, has made their own deal with the Devil. The State supports them and they support the State. This brings us to the American Evangelicals. Power mad and depraved. Just like all the other Theocrats of the world. They want to rule with the backing of the State.

An Agnostic Scientist

Communism is like any other religion. The schismatic factions can't live with each other. When they have the power of the State behind them -- it gets bad.

In my Pantheist days, I was very clear about the parallels between Buddha and Jesus. That just as anybody can achieve enlightenment and become a Buddha -- anybody could gain Christ Consciousness and become a Christ. There are some obvious differences. In Buddhist thought, Buddha was a messenger. He had discovered the Path. In Christian thought, Jesus was the message. "The Way, the Truth and the Light". Of course, Buddha never meant to start a new religion. He was a reformer of the Vedic religion of his time. Jesus also did not start a new religion. That was Paul.

Dan can't understand the distinction between Atheist and Agnostic. Do you really think he can understand the difference, between Atheism and Science?

Your confidence in Dan is misplaced. In Dan's world, we either believe the Bible and love God -- or reject Scripture and hate God. There is no middle ground. No grey. No nuance. He thinks science is an Atheist religion. I have tried and I have given up.

I think I'm following your thought more clearly. When Atwater Vitki -- a Norse follower -- was on this board, he made this distinction. He did not worship the Norse gods. He emulated them. Some people do worship Nature. I think most of the time, it would be more accurate to say "reverence". I have an authentic Buddhist initiation to Medicine Buddha. Again, worship is not involved. Medicine Buddha is understood, to be a personification of healing. I think gods do help distinguish religion from philosophy. The line is not solid. Communism is a non-theistic religion. I don't know how to classify Taoism.

I put this video up because of my irritation with Dan. I got tired of his assertion -- yet again -- that Atheism is religion. That Atheism is a belief. I wanted to demonstrate how a real scientist thinks about God. Real scientists don't argue about God's existence. Neither for it nor against it. The idea of God, is not considered useful. That's it. It's a non-issue.

I'm not clear on where this is going. Still, I think it depends on the assertion. If I assert that I don't believe in God -- that is the end of it. Unless, somebody wants to argue with me about my non-belief. If I assert that there is no God -- that is a statement of fact. This is a positive statement, which needs something to back it up. I use Atheism in the first sense. A simple declaration of non-belief. Others use Atheism in the second sense. A statement of fact, which requires evidence to back it up. This is the confusion. These days, I tend to avoid the Atheist label. There are many Atheists, who are prepared to spend their lives fighting word wars. I'm not one of them. At least, not any more. Alright. What do we mean by religion? To my understanding, simple non-belief is not religion. Now we add context. If someone enters the military -- and his dog tag says Atheist in the spot reserved for religion -- well -- maybe. It's context. Of course, when my assertion is that I don't care -- misunderstanding my meaning, takes more effort.

Thank you. I have discovered that I find arguing about metaphysics dull and boring. In my current outlook, metaphysics should only be resorted to -- when regular physics -- like prune juice -- won't get the job done.

I've gone on to Apatheism. I don't even wonder now, about God. A God that can not be detected or discerned, is not relevant. I don't care whether or not God exists. Even the question is futile. IMO

A scientist Asks the God Question.

Just this once, Dan is right. The Gospels are the best evidence for themselves. Actually, the only evidence for themselves. Have you seen any other? Neither have I.

Nice try. It's Dan. Reality just bounces off his umbrella of Faith.

I think that you are over thinking this. Making it more complicated than it is. I use vegetarianism as a template for Atheism. What do we know about vegetarians? Only one thing. There is no meat on their plates. There are many different styles of being vegetarian. What any individual vegetarian eats, is highly individual. Assumptions are likely to be mistaken. What do we know about Atheists? Only that they are without Theism. This and nothing more. Some have philosophy. Others don't. Some are materialists. Others are not. We know nothing about any individual Atheist. Except one detail. We know what is not on their plate of spiritual nourishment. There is no god there. We do know something else. People have all manner of emotional baggage. There are a lot of non-vegetarians, who have a burning, passionate hatred, for vegetarians. They take being vegetarian as a personal rejection of themselves. There are also vegetarians who insist on trying to make the whole world vegetarian. You know. People have issues. If nobody ate meat, there wouldn't even be a word for vegetarianism. Conflicts arise over difference. The more we try to eliminate difference, the worse it gets. In the end, we have to live with each other.

Yes. I expect that is true.