Belief and Desire

Originally posted by IshDaGegg
I have a suspicion.

I suspect that most believers think it is better that God should exist than not exist whereas most atheists think it is better that God should not exist than exist. Put another way, there are relatively few believers who would regret the existence of God, and relatively few atheists who would regret his non-existence.

Perhaps we c ...[text shortened]... s might be more open-minded about whether the existence of God would be a good or a bad thing.

Whatchu mean "better?"

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
I'm more of an agnostic, but I'd love it if some sort of god does exist - it'd be great to survive my death in some way. Of course if some of these christians are right I'll never know anyway as I'm told my soul will die with me for not being a believer. That's ok though, because if the christians areright about that, then I disrespect my cr ...[text shortened]... ator, and that sounds like a tricky relationship to maintain with equanimity for eternity.

So the cat is out of the bag!

You've said a lot here.
"agnostic"
"survive"
and that bit of commone sense you always seem to display.
looks funny when you rite it down, doesn't it?

You heard the one where a man is rounded up by a tiger on top of a cliff? He scrambles down the cliff and away from the tiger. He is stuck on a branch. Above him the tiger, below him certain death if he falls. So he just looks ahead and sees a solitary berry. He eats it. How sweet that berry was!!

Originally posted by SwissGambit
I'm an atheist, but I think it would be highly desirable if certain types of gods existed. For example, gods that are primarily benevolent, without the mean streak that many of today's popular gods have.

These gods you speak of shall and do exist. Balance is maintained throughout the universe...always.

Originally posted by karoly aczel
So the cat is out of the bag!

You've said a lot here.
"agnostic"
"survive"
and that bit of commone sense you always seem to display.
looks funny when you rite it down, doesn't it?

You heard the one where a man is rounded up by a tiger on top of a cliff? He scrambles down the cliff and away from the tiger. He is stuck on a branch. Above him th ...[text shortened]... . So he just looks ahead and sees a solitary berry. He eats it. How sweet that berry was!!

Which bit looks funny to you? The desire to persist beyond death in some way? Doesn't everyone have that? I suppose that is a bit odd if you think about it though.

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
Which bit looks funny to you? The desire to persist beyond death in some way? Doesn't everyone have that? I suppose that is a bit odd if you think about it though.

To survive beyond death. To be agnostic. These are funny to me.
Mind you , I have given the same type answers before to similar questions.

I can just feel that you are inherintly intelligent to a point where you like to prove your points with links or whatever.
"Does everyone have that"? . Yes, mostly(imo).
Is 'agnostic' a good answer to the question of your spiritual disposition?
I thought it was at first . I'm not so sure now.
I reckon you would be the only one on here that admits to being agnostic.(Can anyone that disagrees please pipe up, I'm trying to wade through the linguistics on this site so I can get down to the business of actually communicating)

Originally posted by karoly aczel
To survive beyond death. To be agnostic. These are funny to me.
Mind you , I have given the same type answers before to similar questions.

I can just feel that you are inherintly intelligent to a point where you like to prove your points with links or whatever.
"Does everyone have that"? . Yes, mostly(imo).
Is 'agnostic' a good answer to the que the linguistics on this site so I can get down to the business of actually communicating)

Gosh, I guess I kind of thought that most people were essentially agnostic. Maybe it's the archaeologists' viewpoint - there are usually lots of different interpretations of any evidence that is excavated, and it's almost invariably impossible to say which (if any) is true, so we get used to accepting that we just don't know the answers.

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
Gosh, I guess I kind of thought that most people were essentially agnostic. Maybe it's the archaeologists' viewpoint - there are usually lots of different interpretations of any evidence that is excavated, and it's almost invariably impossible to say which (if any) is true, so we get used to accepting that we just don't know the answers.

So does the evidence, in your opinion, point to a significantly different view of history than the one we've been fed?

Do you do carbon dating?
Since I heard you were an archeologist, I've been quite intrigued and have wanted to pick your brain.
I just kinda hoped some others would come along for the ride, rather than us just chatting. I think we're on the same page with a great deal of things, but still I'm sure your field of expertise is a great tool in discerning between potential truths and utter rubbish.