Dr. Zaius, your conclusions are already acknowledged as valid given your assumptions that there is no Christian God. There is no need to convince enyone that, if a Godless reality is axiomatically assumed, prayer and faith are a waste of time. No need to convince anyone, and no need to defend yourself.
Dr. Zaius wrote:
...And then, you think that men somehow harness the will of god though them, even though all they're doing is reciting from said story book...
That question would be the topic of the thread, yes.
Dr. Zaius wrote:
So, for all you know, they could just be messing with you.
Again, the branch that's already answered. No one is arguing with you in this thread on that. That's the topic of the 9-page "Can God Be" thread, and thousands of books, articles, songs, paintings, poems,
et cetera.
Dr. Zaius wrote:
Faith can be a dangerous thing, total unquestionable loyalty leads to disaster.
Yes, that is why my loyalty is not unconditional. I do not axiomatically assume the existence of the Biblical God, I reach it as the result of reasoning based on the axiom that
I exist. So, it seems that people who axiomatically assume nonexistence of God are more "unquestioning" than I, good doctor.
Dr. Zaius wrote:
Your reasoning seems highly questionable, because some book and a preacher man said it, it must be from god? Right, come back to me when you start hearing voices, and you shoot rays of sunshine out of your eyes...
Actually, my reasoning comes to the confirmation of the hypothesis of the Biblical God as a conclusion, then using that as a lemma I use the Biblical authority to derive the authority of Spirit-filled leaders, and using both of those as intermediate steps, finally conclude that God wants me to pray. I have studied logic at the graduate level even under atheistic teachers and apply the clear logic here. So your perception of the questionability of my reasoning comes from the fact that you don't understand it yet. I recommend you go to the library and read the book
Miracles by C.S. Lewis for a confirmation of my methods in completeness rather than in summary. But if you've already dogmatically decided what the answer must be, then that would be a waste of your time.
Usually the supernatural voices you'll hear audibly should be subject to the same level of scrutiny as an unknown Pastor, since they could just as easily be evil. Finally, I've often been told I have light in my eyes.
Dr. Zaius wrote:
It's total arrogance to think that your "reasoning" is just, but if someone else were to use the same functions for a different message, you'd call them crazy.
If someone would use the same level of reasoning with different axioms, they will come to different conclusions: much like non-Euclidean geometry. Insanity instead comes from the lack of power over reasoning or invalid (that is, wrong) stimuli being sent to the brain. It is when someone uses brain chemicals to arrive at their conclusion (instead of reasoning) that they are crazy. I have met crazy people, one of which called me the King of Kings (maybe the sunlight shooting from my eyes?), in an insane asylum. So I do not call people with different axiom systems, like yourself, crazy.
Dr. Zaius wrote:
Just think about it, the notion of an invisible man controlling everything? Come on. Even if there was some hyper evolved being with super cosmic powers that triggered the big bang, I doubt that it would care about little ole Earth. So praise is not necessary...
God didn't evolve: time is an artifact of sapce-time inside the universe, so whatever (if anything) created the universe does not change. That's freshman physics.
The fact that I believe he cares about little old Earth is a derivative of my conclusion that the Bible is inerrant. It is not an assumption or blind faith.
Dr. Zaius wrote:
You ask me to understand? I understand all I care to. Understanding is not required.
Then neither is discussion required. Thank you for sharing your dogmatic opinion and I assure you that I give it all the consideration that it merits as such, and more.
Dr. Zaius wrote:
I acknowledge, that's good enough. It's impossible for me to understand,
Then why do you participate? I am really trying to understand your line of thinking here, and think that if we met under different circumstances we may have even been buddies...
Dr. Zaius wrote:
because since I have broken free of that way of thinking I can't bring myself to believing anything other than it's complete craziness. So go ahead and mock me for being "Ignorant", I'm not the one who praises some super being in the sky...
I do not mock you Dr. Z, I engage you in discussion as a peer with blind faith that everyone has something to contribute. I will re-evaluate that position.
But you don't sound like someone who's trying to help people understand things better, you come off more like someone who got hurt and is lashing out at things he associates with the cause of that hurt. If it's personal I will not raise the wound here in a public forum, but if you would like to talk about it I will listen. And I won't listen with an attitude of "justifying myself and using your vulnerability against you," but I will listen as someone who sees past the deeply hurt man lashing out and sees the valuable person inside. You can use the email function or the PM system to talk... but it's just an invitation -- not a demand.