Godaphobia

  • The fear of belief in God.

Ever notice the extremes that some people go to at the slightest hint (and in some cases not even a hint) that a topic might have something to do with a belief in God? How could you avoid it? :confused:

They even inject some concern for God belief into topics that had nothing to do with any religious anything. They are willing to believe in anything at all, as long as it isn’t associated with God in even the most subtle way. Time travel? Sure, why not. Bending space? Certainly. Mind over matter? Well, of course. Magic spells? Clear everyday occurrence. But a prime cause of physical reality??? HELL NO!! What kind of stupid, moronic, psycho would believe that retarded non-sense… spit on him… burn him at the stake. He’s a plague!!!

Religiously terrified, fanatical, zealots against the notion of God.
Godaphobia

He’s Godaphobic. She’s Godaphobic. You should get a phobic too!!

[size=85]…whimps.[/size]

What God, James? Your God? The Real God? The ONE God?

Is the existence of God predicated on how one defines Him? On what God means to someone? On the fact that someone believes He exist? On how one relates his or her own personal experiences with God?

Is expecting actual empirical, phenomenal, material, existential etc. evidence of His existence something that only the most extremist, wacko atheists will clamor for?

And that is before we get to the relationship between a particular belief in God and dasein. Or the manner in which a belief in a particular God is relevant to the thousands upon thousands of contradictory moral and political narratives pertaining to the hundreds of conflicting goods “out in the world” of actual human interaction.

A place we almost never see your own “Real God”.

I’m not sure if this is :

  • a case of you bringing your Rant fight here and having another go at James
    or
  • a case of you spreading the dasein religion

Either way, it doesn’t seem to be addressing the post.

lolz

Well, Bigus seems to have J.Saintaphobia. :icon-rolleyes:

…or perhaps a complex formed of the two. :confused:

Well, in that case, you might want to avoid my posts here. From my perspective, discussions about God always revolve first and foremost around one’s capacity to actually demonstrate the existence of this God.

And if one’s own perspective about God doesn’t revolve first and foremost around the existential variables that came together in the course of actually living your life – your experiences, your relationships with others, the knowledge you have acquired – what does it derive from – a voice in the night?

Besides, if James feels I am missing the point, he can always simply ignore my post and move on to others.

And if you actually believe that my arguments regarding dasein constitute a “religion”, well, that’s your problem.

Yes, and this is related to the points I raised above…how? Oh well, some things never change.

Iambig, all those points were just about your point of view.

I would like to do that, but something has to be said about this kind of derailing and trolling which has become common on ILP. You are both acting like bickering children. Stop it. Walk away. Show some maturity. Reply to his post or don’t reply to him at all.

You bring up dasein in practically every thread. You’re either an evangelist for the Church of Dasein or you’re a Used Dasein salesman.

Fine. Now where are the arguments addressing them?

I see. This exchange is only how you see it. As though the points I raised are an example of childish bickering. As though you are in charge of deciding when another either does or does not reply to a thread appropriately.

Look, James either begins or participates in dozens of threads every single day here at ILP. If my motivation were in fact derailing and/or trolling him why in the world would I pass up the opportunity to do so over and over and over again? Again, this is your problem not mine.

Over and over again I note that my interest in philosophy revolves around human identity, value judgments and political economy. The existential relationship between them.

Now, will you or will you not respond intelligently to the point I raised:

And if one’s own perspective about God doesn’t revolve first and foremost around the existential variables that came together in the course of actually living your life – your experiences, your relationships with others, the knowledge you have acquired – what does it derive from – a voice in the night?

I hope that you are able to see how this behavior can form as a consequence of being constantly bombarded with god related discourse.
It is after all, a believer’s mandate to spread the word, to the point that everyone around them are sick of it.

There is a world that’s independent of our individual views of it for starters.

Okay, but does it include God or not? And if one questions the existence of God does that make her “Godaphobic”? Where are these people James rails about? And who decides whether they fall within his definition of a Godaphobe? And that he defines these things – does that make them real objectively?

I think he’s complaining about the internet-atheist types who will call you religious the minute you engage in metaphysics.

Most passionate atheists seem to be children of the stricter religious. Maybe they attach the anger they hold against their family to gods.
Mom or Dad may have injected religious themes or words into punishment and or happy times.
Emotional attachment to resenting the wrong object.

I suspect it to be the effect from the fear of judgment;
the thief wanting to convince the world that there is no justification for laws against stealing,
the physicians trying to convince the world that there are no cures,
the media trying to convince the world that there is no time for the whole truth,
the military trying to convince the world that there is no peace,
the lawyers trying to convince the world that there is no clear wording of the law,
the defendant trying to convince the world that there is no convincing evidence,
the immoral trying to convince the world that there is no justification for morality,
the liar trying to convince the world that there is no such thing as truth,
the conspirators trying to convince the world that there are no conspiracies,
the guilty trying to convince the world that there is no such thing as guilt.

The subtle message being that if there is no God, “I should be free to do whatever I want to do without judgment”.

That assumes a god that is a judge.

You see, now you made a mistake. You switched from the vague, deistic conception of God in your OP (prime cause) to a more specific, theistic concept which has God as a judge for humans. That allows for some actual discussion and not just mere speculation.

I don’t believe in god and I can’t fear something I don’t believe exists. But do I fear belief in God? Yes, I do. I would be stupid not to, considering how much harm and ignorance it brought to humanity.

I’m generally bullshitphobic and since God is one of many bullshit concepts that humans are yet to overcome, yes, I am Godaphobic, you could say that.

But who is going to judge me? The one who designed diseases that killed billions of organisms? The one who ignores the pain and suffering of others when he could easily help?

If god exists he is ultimately responsible for everything that has ever and will happen. And taking into account all the evil, even if a God exists I don’t think he particularly cares about truth, morality, evidence or humanity at all. He is just a big antagonist, a villain that designed a planet in which complete chaos rules without any order. Some people are lucky in life, some aren’t. Some are born intelligent, others are born idiots. Some are born into rich families, others into poverty. Some live long, happy, fulfilling lives others die at childbirth.

That god has not revealed itself to help once, not fixing his obviously flawed design, not caring for humanity even in its most desperate moments. Imagine how many Jews screamed for God’s help during the Holocaust. Would you ignore them if you could easily help? Do you think a being that can easily help but ignores is a moral one?

And that is the God you worship. Great for you. You worship a God (or rather, a concept of a God) that makes Hitler look like Gandhi because of all the evils he caused and allowed to happen. You worship the ultimate villain that doesn’t even exist.

Okay, that is one way to construe his intent. I agree.

But that is not the way that I constured it. He may have begun with metaphysical speculation but he ended with this…

Which I believed was his focus all along.

After all, on every single one of his posts, in his signature, we get this:

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = “The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is”.

I was just [once again] trying to get him to elaborate more regarding what on earth that means?

But, again, sure, your own take might have been closer to his intent.