Do Atheist Bow to Anthromophism?

a reply to: Annee

right atheism doesn't say god doesn't exist, to some degree our human ignorance may stop us from doing that, but we can say, the idea of a god makes no sense. which is all we need

a reply to: mOjOm

Communist China and Russia were lead by Atheist and that had much to do with pitting people against each other.

originally posted by: Kashai
a reply to: vjr1113

The Existence of God is a matter of Faith and I am simply presenting that it is possible.

Any thoughts?

Of course. Because when you're talking about faith anything is possible. Faith allows me to believe the universe is actually just a tiny speck of dust on the ass cheek of a magic unicorn who's tromping around the fields of some other universe. But that is because Faith doesn't require anything to back up it's claims. Anything is allowed.

originally posted by: Kashai
a reply to: mOjOm

Communist China and Russia were lead by Atheist and that had much to do with pitting people against each other.

because Russia and China where the epicenter of secularism

a reply to: vjr1113

Perhaps with regards to this modern society we should consider that what in ancient society was defined as "super natural", is actually natural.

originally posted by: Kashai
a reply to: mOjOm

Communist China and Russia were lead by Atheist and that had much to do with pitting people against each other.

Like I said, Atheists as individuals have many beliefs and not some commonality of ideals they all hold. I never said Atheism is some kind of unifying idea. It's not. It's not even a positive claim of anything. It just a default position of non-belief in a God Being. Just like the default position of non-belief in the Easter Bunny. I'm not saying for sure there is no Easter Bunny, but if there is I'm going to have to see the evidence for it before I'll consider it being real. Otherwise I'll just keep assuming it's not.

a reply to: mOjOm

As is theoretically, given current scientific comprehension what a singularity at the center of a black hole actually is.

When a mathematical calculation reaches infinity anything is allowed.

a reply to: Kashai

Any thoughts?

There are all kinds of different Atheists and I have no problem with the ones that keep their mouth shut about their beliefs (unless I ask or they are a friend that wants to talk about things like that with me).

The problem is the militant wing of the Atheists are just as annoying as people who are TOO religious. These Atheists are essentially in your face religious zealots just without God.

If you want to believe in God or not believe in God then fine, but STFU about it unless someone wants your opinion.

a reply to: vjr1113

No because Communism/Atheism failed miserably in those countries and were replaced with Socialistic Oligarchies.

originally posted by: Kashai
Atheism argues that God in relation to how man defines reality does not exist which, in retrospect is a fallacy of logic.

I'm afraid you are still incorrect. Atheism isn't an argument, it's a lack of belief. Do you make a hobby out of non-stamp-collecting?

originally posted by: Kashai
In relation to the Scope of reality and with all due respect. There is no real reason at present to conclude that what we today, generally define as random in fact really is.

Again, Atheism isn't a belief system. Other members in this thread have already shown that Atheists can believe in a variety of things, and hold any number of positions and opinions. The only thing that universally connects Atheists as a whole, is a lack of belief in gods

So your argument that 'there's no real reason to conclude that everything we see around us is due to random chance' isn't even a position held by all atheists.

Every single one of your arguments presupposes some universal ideology that atheists hold, when in fact the very notion is a false premise.

Furthermore, it is perfectly reasonable to come to the conclusion that everything came in to being with some sort of randomness, and without an intended purpose because nothing in the universe suggests that there was purpose to anything. We see naturally occurring processes everywhere, without the need for a mystical being/force that controls and creates it. So it is illogical to believe otherwise because all the evidence points to naturalistic occurrences at this point in time.

originally posted by: Kashai
a reply to: mOjOm

As is theoretically, given current scientific comprehension what a singularity at the center of a black hole actually is.

When a mathematical calculation reaches infinity anything is allowed.

Yep, that's infinity for ya. But as far as I can tell, infinity doesn't exist in reality. It does in math and as a conceptual idea but in any type of physical reality or as something measurable it doesn't exist. Does that mean infinity is false. No because even as a concept it's something.

Same could be said of God too. If God is infinite then he's not going to be in this reality. If God exists he wouldn't fit in this reality because it has limits so we won't find him here. Like Faith, Infinity doesn't do anyone any good in a practical sense. But it's good for conceptual things like math and imagination.

At the same time, an infinite God wouldn't be infinite when it's contained within the parameters of Region either. So any Religion that defines God logically must be false if they claim God as both Infinite as well as Defined in any way. Making God with any kind of Anthropomorphized details incorrect too.

originally posted by: Ghost147
Furthermore, it is perfectly reasonable to come to the conclusion that everything came in to being with some sort of randomness, and without an intended purpose because nothing in the universe suggests that there was purpose to anything. We see naturally occurring processes everywhere, without the need for a mystical being/force that controls and creates it. So it is illogical to believe otherwise because all the evidence points to naturalistic occurrences at this point in time.

Nipping the fine tuned universe in the bud.

If the universe is fine tuned for life, then why will 99.999999999% of it kill you instantly. If you ask me, that's not a very effiecient use of matter or space.

a reply to: Ghost147

Believing I can rebuild a car engine is a lot different and actually being able to do so. AS is believing that humans have the capacity to comprehend anything in the context of all reality.

Again you are bowing to Anthromophism....you are presenting that the lack of a God can be understood by any definition of God you are capable of understanding.

Any thoughts?

a reply to: Tearman

Yes, it's an absurd argument based off of arrogance and ignorance

a reply to: Tearman

That depends as to what is cause.

The strange quark blinks in and out of what we comprehend as reality. Despite this it is integral to the structure of the atom.

Without its effect the atom would collapse.

originally posted by: Kashai
a reply to: Ghost147

Believing I can rebuild a car engine is a lot different and actually being able to do so. AS is believing that humans have the capacity to comprehend anything in the context of all reality.

Again you are bowing to Anthromophism....you are presenting that the lack of a God can be understood by any definition of God you are capable of understanding.

Any thoughts?

I don't understandw hat your point is. It sounds like... we can't rule out all possible things in the realm of infinite possibility, ( even though that doesn't give us any reason to believe in any thing )... and then I don't know what comes next.

originally posted by: Kashai
a reply to: Tearman

That depends as to what is cause.

The strange quark blinks in and out of what we comprehend as reality. Despite this it is integral to the structure of the atom.

Without its effect the atom would collapse.

So what does this mean? God couldn't think of a more economical solution?

originally posted by: Kashai
a reply to: vjr1113

No because Communism/Atheism failed miserably in those countries and were replaced with Socialistic Oligarchies.

so they couldn't secularise their country, so secularism is bad?

makes sense

originally posted by: Kashai
a reply to: Ghost147
Believing I can rebuild a car engine is a lot different and actually being able to do so. AS is believing that humans have the capacity to comprehend anything in the context of all reality.

What I can't comprehend is what this argument has to do with anything I just wrote.

originally posted by: Kashai
a reply to: Ghost147
Again you are bowing to Anthromophism....you are presenting that the lack of a God can be understood by any definition of God you are capable of understanding.

How am I acknowledging anthropomorphism at all? A god can simply be an invisible force that exists outside of the dimensions we have within our Universe. That force could have as much or as little involvement with our universe as you want to believe.

The concept is ridiculous, regardless if it's a personified godly figure like in Abrahamic religions or a formless thing that simply exists, because all the evidence we have, and all the observations we've made, points to a natural cause for everything.

a reply to: Tearman

What difference would that make?