Atheist Chat

If the higher power did die it couldn't be the all powerful being it is made out to be. Strictly speaking the god(s) begin to die when people embrace proven facts , science and logic because gods or gods are nothing more then an idea that isnt backed up by any evidence or the weight of logic.

So naturally Atheism goes the furtherest way towards killing the idea of the existence of an higher power. IMO the existence of an higher power is the greatest con job in the history of man kind.

All righty then ...

Since atheists (and agnostics) don't have a common worldview except as it comes to the existence of a god being, then what do you think of "prophecy"?

Is it possible people can actually see the future and affect the outcome? Or is it just clever manipulation of people's imaginations and tapping into subconscious knowledge of averages?

As far as I'm concerned, so-called prophets are either liars (like Sylvia Browne) or they're deluded into thinking that their guesses based on an active imagination pairing up with subconscious knowledge are actually visions of the future.

Originally posted by MajorMalfunction
All righty then ...

Since atheists (and agnostics) don't have a common worldview except as it comes to the existence of a god being, then what do you think of "prophecy"?

I believe in infinite possibilities (that's another one of my belief system points).

So, as far as prophesies or readings or speaking with the dead, I absolutely believe it's possible. That's not to say I believe that Sylvia Browne is legit. I don't. But John Edward? Perhaps...

I have personal experience communicating with dead people, so I believe it's possible. It's also possible it was all my imagination, so I'm open to that being the Truth. But for now, because of my strong and repeated experiences with the dead, I remain open to other possibilities of spiritual, other-worldly and paranormal origin.

Ive often thought that Prophecy and Speaking to the dead are more than likely receptive people 'overhearing' other dimensions or 'parrallel universes' rather than hearing God or speaking with deceased people. Quantum physics could explain multiple universe theory's and some people eavesdropping in on these different planes. Just a thought for what its worth.

Originally posted by MajorMalfunction
So does this mean that people will eventually give in and accept what science is saying and find a way to channel their faith so that they can have both? Or is Dawkins right in that people are going to have to give up religion in order for science to advance properly?

Is it possible that it could come down to a war between faith and science?

Very interesting thread. If you dont mind I would like to add my thoughts on the subject. I personally do not think one can exist with out the other. I also do not think that mankind as a whole will ever get even remotly close to knowing the full truth about either. Science is discovering what is already there and how everything works. There are too many variables to come up with any definate answer to anything really. Most of which we have not, and may never discover. I believe in a creator, and a lot of what I learn in church when I was a kid. I dont, however believe in everything the church teaches, and at the same time I believe in more than the church teaches. I think the creator and a lot of what exists beyond my own visions is too large and intense for me to even begin to wrap my mind around. The amount of forms that energy can take is infinite. The amout of ways energy can move around is also infinite. Add knowing that energy can not be destroyed (to our knowledge) to those two details, and you might as well take everything you have ever learned shake it up and flush it down the toilet. The only two things I truely understand is that just about anything is possible, and I will never really understand any of it.

[edit on 14-7-2007 by mrsdudara]

Originally posted by mrsdudara
I personally do not think one can exist with out the other.

You know, I've heard this said before and I really don't know what people mean when they say that... Surely science exists without religion and religion exists without science. Don't they?

What does science require from religion? And vice versa.

I think the creator and a lot of what exists beyond my own visions is too large and intense for me to even begin to wrap my mind around.

I agree with this. Not about the creator, but that there is so much "out there" that we don't and perhaps can't understand in our present form that I don't even try to nail it down. It's fun to think on it and wonder, but I think there's a lot more that we don't know than we do know...

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Surely science exists without religion and religion exists without science. Don't they?

What does science require from religion? And vice versa.

I guess that would depend on what your definition of religion is. And what you believe the point of science is.


[edit on 14-7-2007 by mrsdudara]

Well, what do you mean when you say that you don't think one can exist without the other?

This is why I like Buddhism, no god, logical rules (if you want to call them rules) and the don't mind when science proves them wrong which for the core of Buddhism I don't think it ever has yet.

MajorMalfunction I think its entirely possible that people could in a sense see the future, though there are a lot of lairs out there there are people (i know of one) who have on occasion seen things which have then for the most part come true. Though I've never heard of anyone who has had specific very detailed accounts of future events the things i've personally heard of are seeing a disasters happen a couple of days before they happen and the like. Another not so much future prediction but example of how everything is connected is how my dog knows when someone is coming home before they can been seen or heard. He doesnt do it often but I've seen him on occasion get up an look outside a minute or two before my dad appears.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

What does science require from religion? And vice versa.

Can the combination of both working in tandem open new doors of understanding?

Can we as a human race continue to develop and reach our full potential as long as science and religion have very little or no common ground? Can science develop further with esoteric and spiritual input, can religion maintain and increase its followers without accepting the evidence that science continues to discover that explains our place in the universe?

Can there ever really be one without the other?

Originally posted by mojo4sale
Can the combination of both working in tandem open new doors of understanding?

I suppose so, sure. They CAN work together. But my confusion lies in understanding what people mean when they say you CAN'T have one without the other.

Can we as a human race continue to develop and reach our full potential as long as science and religion have very little or no common ground?

I believe so, yes. I don't see what one has to do with the other.

Can science develop further with esoteric and spiritual input,

Ah... but you're talking about spirituality, not religion. They're 2 different things. Yes, they can and do sometimes work together, but they're not the same and they don't depend on each other. Perhaps religion needs an element of spirituality, but spirituality does not need religion.

can religion maintain and increase its followers without accepting the evidence that science continues to discover that explains our place in the universe?

Well, they've done pretty well so far. I'm pretty certain there are many people who can deny science in favor of religion. Most people claim some sort of religion. It's pretty popular.

Can there ever really be one without the other?

Yes. In fact, they do exist without the other. Don't they? In my world they do.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by mojo4sale
Can the combination of both working in tandem open new doors of understanding?

I suppose so, sure. They CAN work together. But my confusion lies in understanding what people mean when they say you CAN'T have one without the other.

I guess what i'm getting at and im not so flash at explaining myself sometimes, , is that there has probably never been a time in our history when there hasnt been both Science and Religion.

From the moment we discovered fire and its beneficial uses and tools we probably also started deifying the things around us as well.
My point which probably wasnt well made is that there has never been a time when the two havent co-existed, but can we progress further without choosing one over the other or without them finding common ground and working together?

Sorry BH thats probably even more garbled, most stop drinking and posting!!

Originally posted by mojo4sale
there has probably never been a time in our history when there hasnt been both Science and Religion.

Agreed. And my point is that because they exist in the same space doesn't mean that they depend on each other or that, as mrsdudara (and others) said, one cannot exist with out the other.

Cell phones and hamburgers also exist in the same time. You get my point.

but can we progress further without choosing one over the other or without them finding common ground and working together?

I can't choose religion. I can't choose it at all. There's no place in my life for religion. And frankly, I have no interest in working together with people who do have religion or who choose religion over science.

To me, there is no choice of religion OR science. It's not an either/or situation. That's like choosing between buying a car and having breakfast. They're not related, not "opposites", not something I have to make a choice about. I have not chosen science over religion. I just don't participate in religion.

I'd still like to know what people mean when they say one cannot exist without the other.

stop drinking and posting!!

Or maybe I should start! :w:

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

I have not chosen science over religion. I just don't participate in religion.

Likewise. Perhaps were just all hardwired differently, some need the faith crutch to make meaning of their lives, others (atheists) make do.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Or maybe I should start! :w:

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Well, what do you mean when you say that you don't think one can exist without the other?

Science is the search and discovery of the "how's", religion is the search and discovery of the "why's". One with out the other is kind of like eating pizza with out the cheese...pointless to most. There wouldnt be enough people who would want to learn either to make a difference, and no one would realy care what they had to say. Therefore they would both crumble, and the human species would self distruct. Fortunatly that will never happen because the need to understand the why's, and the how's is as great of a need with the human species as the need for water, and air.

Here's a fun little quiz, just for some light-hearted conversation:

What Kind of Atheist Are You?

You scored as a Scientific Atheist
These guys rule. I'm not one of them myself, although I play one online. They know the rules of debate, the Laws of Thermodynamics, and can explain evolution in fifty words or less. More concerned with how things ARE than how they should be, these are the people who will bring us into the future.

Scientific Atheist 92%

Apathetic Atheist 75%

Angry Atheist 42%

Militant Atheist 33%

Agnostic 33%

Theist 25%

Spiritual Atheist 17%

Looks like I tied between Spiritual and Apathetic. Neat test.

You scored as a Apathetic Atheist
Meh... whatever. Apathetic Atheists tend towards disbelief because believing takes more work. These are the people who won't argue religion, even if a total nutjob confronts them because arguing just seems like a waste of time they could spend doing something else.

Spiritual Atheist 75%
Apathetic Atheist 75%
Scientific Atheist 67%
Agnostic 58%
Angry Atheist 42%
Militant Atheist 42%
Theist 17%

[edit on 14-7-2007 by Benevolent Heretic]

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
These are the people who won't argue religion, even if a total nutjob confronts them because arguing just seems like a waste of time they could spend doing something else.

Except this part doesn't seem to suit you at all.

I don't think the apathetic part suits me. I post in the Theology forum a lot. I think the Spiritual would have probably suited me better.

But, who cares?

Ha i scored as a spiritual atheist, just a moment i have to help my wife up off the floor she seems to be having some kind of laughing fit.

What kind of atheist are you?
You scored as a Spiritual Atheist
Ah! Some of the coolest people in the world are Spiritual Atheists. Most of them weren't brought up in an organized religion and have very little baggage. They concentrate on making the world a better place and know that death is just another part of life. What comes after, comes after.

Spiritual Atheist

67%

Scientific Atheist

50%

Apathetic Atheist

50%

Angry Atheist

42%

Agnostic

42%

Militant Atheist

17%

Theist

17%

[edit on 14/7/07 by mojo4sale]