Ask An Atheist Anything

The only logical path would be agnostic.

We simply do not know one way or the other, obviously.

Originally posted by Zstugome
The only logical path would be agnostic.

We simply do not know one way or the other, obviously.

Sod logic, choose freedom.


freedom to be free of doubt and faith.


Proud, happy - Atheist

reply to post by FearNoEvil


While not everyone agrees, the Jewish calendar is counted from the creation of the Earth. When I mentioned "6000 years old Earth" I wasn't implying Christian belief. In fact, I thought Christians were in a bit of disagreement about this... are they not?

Anyway, just wanted to clarify that and point out one more thing:

Some of us aren't willing atheists. I would love to be Christian, but I can't force myself to earnestly believe the doctrine, because I've yet to see enough evidence despite reading into some apologetics. I believe that living humans cannot know the truth about God, and thus can't force myself to believe in an arbitrarily selected fact-set called "Christianity". In a way, I'm almost Calvinist. If there is a God, which is entirely possible, then I am predestined to go to Hell because I was not gifted with the ability to believe.

Originally posted by ptmckiou

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by ptmckiou

 

No, an atheist simply doesn't believe in a god. If physicists finally prove M-theory is true then an atheist will accept those dimensions as existing as they are empirically supported. Every dimension above time is still spatial in nature, so just because we can't perceive these extra dimensions doesn't mean we currently aren't a part of them. In fact most researchers say that it would be impossible to perceive these dimensions outside of the quark or string level. So, when we die we die in all these dimensions, we just don't notice most of them.

Yes, and science thought blood letting by leaches was the cure for all things too...

Yes, but does it think that anymore?
Or has it evolved and now saves millions of lives daily?
I don't know why theists have a problem with trial and error, when it's pretty much put us where we are right now.

Originally posted by malcr
You can only be in denial of something that exists. God does not exist. I don't "believe" he does not exist. He/she does not exist full stop.

As noted, you cannot base an absolute ("God does not exist") on non-absolute observations. You have not observed all of reality, so you cannot categorically state that ANYTHING doesn't exist. Hence, you are stating a belief, not knowledge of a fact.

This may be applied to anything, but it demonstrates the impossibility of proving a negative, which atheists are doing when they want to argue the point.

i love all the theists trying to convince atheists that atheism is a religion.



religion is in my opinion a waste of time and money, and is in many instances irrational, ignorant and deaf to reason.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

what a great ambasador for christianity.....

reply to post by ptmckiou


To be fair it still is a viable cure for certain blood disorders. I had a professor who had an excess of some mineral in his blood and one of the proposed cures was bloodletting.

You guys are arguing over questions that have no answer.

If a tree falls in the forest and nobody is there to hear it, does it make a sound?

Logically we can not answer this question because nobody is there to hear the sound. It was a question that was never meant to be answered.

Is there a god? Is one of those questions.

You can spend as much time as you want fighting over an answer but it won't happen.

We are left to be Agnostic, there is no other choice.

Originally posted by pondrthis
reply to post by FearNoEvil

 

While not everyone agrees, the Jewish calendar is counted from the creation of the Earth. When I mentioned "6000 years old Earth" I wasn't implying Christian belief. In fact, I thought Christians were in a bit of disagreement about this... are they not?

Anyway, just wanted to clarify that and point out one more thing:

Some of us aren't willing atheists. I would love to be Christian, but I can't force myself to earnestly believe the doctrine, because I've yet to see enough evidence despite reading into some apologetics. I believe that living humans cannot know the truth about God, and thus can't force myself to believe in an arbitrarily selected fact-set called "Christianity". In a way, I'm almost Calvinist. If there is a God, which is entirely possible, then I am predestined to go to Hell because I was not gifted with the ability to believe.

James Ussher (an archbishop of the Irish church) calculated the beginning of time to be 23 October 4004 BC, by working his way back through the stories in the Bible. I'm not sure how much credibility anyone puts in that these days, but I supposed, at the time, it seemed spot on.

You don't have to "force yourself" to believe in God, that would be rather pointless, and God wouldn't want you to, anyway. It's that whole "free will" thing (and, for the record, I'm in agreement that Pascal's Theorem, while logical, is flat out wrong, because it supposes that God wants you to "act" like you're with him, even though you're not, which is counter to what he says.)

Live your life the best you can, give thought to things beyond what you can see and hear, recognize, most importantly, that we don't know everything, and be open to the possibilities that you can, indeed, develop a real relationship with whatever you perceive God to be. If you don't like the Christian Church, explore your faith outside the Church (the aforementioned "Mere Christianity" is C.S. Lewis' view of the faith after taking away the dogma of established religion, a very refreshing thing, and was one of the main things that brought me back to Christianity after leaving the Church for a while.)

Everyone comes to (or leaves) God in their own way -- your spiritual journey, where ever it leads you, is your own, and the fact that you say that you're not happy with where you are demonstrates that your destination is likely still ahead of you.

Originally posted by loglady
i love all the theists trying to convince atheists that atheism is a religion.

Belief doesn't equate religion, not in any sense. Saying that I believe the sun will rise in the morning doesn't make me a worshipper of Ra. My statement is that atheism, unlike agnosticism, is a belief, not a statement of fact. If you want to turn said belief into a religion, knock yourself out, but there's no value in it.

reply to post by adjensen


I disagree, its not a belief, its an conclusion reached by studying all the evidence available to us at the present time. If new undeniable proof came tommorrow that god existed, im sure all atheists would consider this and change to whatever religion it supported. Working on this scientific principle im amazed how many people still hang on to outdated religions given the lack of proof. If it was unconditionaly proved that god didnt exist would you be so brave as to admit defeat and give it all up?

Originally posted by loglady
reply to post by adjensen

 

I disagree, its not a belief, its an conclusion reached by studying all the evidence available to us at the present time. If new undeniable proof came tommorrow that god existed, im sure all atheists would consider this and change to whatever religion it supported. Working on this scientific principle im amazed how many people still hang on to outdated religions given the lack of proof. If it was unconditionaly proved that god didnt exist would you be so brave as to admit defeat and give it all up?

If you can explain to me how it is possible to make an absolute statement ("There is no God") that is based on non-absolute observations, I would be very grateful. When I look at my desk here, my eyes tell me that I can make the statement "there is nothing alive on my desk", but if I were to get a microscope, I'm sure that I would find plenty of bacteria and other crud living on there. My absolute statement of fact was nothing but a belief, because I based it on my observation, which was obviously limited.

There is no way that you can "prove" that God doesn't exist, because you can't prove a negative. As for whether all atheists would become believers if "undeniable proof" was available, I kind of doubt it, but the point of faith is that it's based on your wanting to believe, not your needing to. Ergo, so long as we're in this reality, I don't think that there ever will be any such proof, and I'd be a bit disappointed if there was.

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by loglady
reply to post by adjensen

 

If you can explain to me how it is possible to make an absolute statement ("There is no God") that is based on non-absolute observations, I would be very grateful.

I refer you to my earlier post, which you actualy quoted,

"its not a belief, its an conclusion reached by studying all the evidence available to us at the present time. If new undeniable proof came tommorrow that god existed, im sure all atheists would consider this and change to whatever religion it supported."

how did you get an "absolute statement there is no god" from this?


"but the point of faith is that it's based on your wanting to believe, not your needing to. Ergo, so long as we're in this reality, I don't think that there ever will be any such proof, and I'd be a bit disappointed if there was.

you would be dissapointed if proof came?? this is ATS!!!! Deny ignorance and you rather stay oblivious!!!!!

Actualy

i feel sorry for you

Originally posted by loglady

Originally posted by adjensen
reply to post by adjensen

 

If you can explain to me how it is possible to make an absolute statement ("There is no God") that is based on non-absolute observations, I would be very grateful.

I refer you to my earlier post, which you actualy quoted,

"its not a belief, its an conclusion reached by studying all the evidence available to us at the present time. If new undeniable proof came tommorrow that god existed, im sure all atheists would consider this and change to whatever religion it supported."

how did you get an "absolute statement there is no god" from this?

"It is not a belief, its an conclusion (that there is no God)" -- doesn't get much more absolute than that.

"studying all evidence available to us at the present time" -- doesn't get much less absolute than that.

Instead of claiming to have not said what you did, kindly defend your ability to prove a negative, and to find basis for an absolute conclusion from non-absolute observations. If you want to stand by your claim that you wish to make a statement of fact, then just admit that you're an agnostic, that the fact is that you have no opinion of God's existence or not, and be done with it.

"but the point of faith is that it's based on your wanting to believe, not your needing to. Ergo, so long as we're in this reality, I don't think that there ever will be any such proof, and I'd be a bit disappointed if there was.

you would be dissapointed if proof came?? this is ATS!!!! Deny ignorance and you rather stay oblivious!!!!!

Actualy

i feel sorry for you

I can live without your misplaced pity, but you miss the point. The beauty of faith is that it is NOT based on some sort of concrete proof, and thus represents a true relationship between myself and God. If there was actual, physical proof, it would introduce doubt into the authenticity of the love that I have for him, because only a fool would dismiss God if he had no doubts.

Originally posted by ptmckiou
An atheist believes there is no life force outside their own body.

This is incorrect. An atheist's views pertain around only one thing: the evidence of deities. Atheism has no position on the belief of "life force." Though, obviously and for similar reasons, it's a smart wager that if someone is an atheist they also do not believe in souls ... though it's not impossible that there are atheists that deems themselves to have evidence of souls, but somehow not a deity.

The point is just that atheism doesn't have all this baggage that people love to associate with it. It simply indicates a lack of evidence of deities. That's absolutely it.

Originally posted by adjensen
You say that lack of faith inspires a desire to do good here on Earth. While I commend you for that attitude, I would like to ask where you believe that desire comes from? What motivates it? When you say that you want to do the best for yourself, I understand that, but why would you want to do the best for others?

I hope I'm not talking out of my buttocks because I didn't read the rest of this post, but if you are inferring that god is the source of the desire to do good, then that would imply for those who desire to do bad, that god is the source there, as well. Then, there's the whole cliché about worshipping a deity that forces people to do bad things, then punishes them for it.

If you go the free will route, then god can't receive the attribution for being responsible for good behavior.

Originally posted by mr-lizard

Originally posted by Zstugome
The only logical path would be agnostic.

We simply do not know one way or the other, obviously.

freedom to be free of doubt and faith.

Proud, happy - Atheist

YES! Although I do follow the belief everything is energy.

I DEFINITELY - DO NOT - believe in any omnipotent "guy in the sky" God.

I Do Not believe in any God. I Do Not question "is there or isn't there".

Therefore - I am not Agnostic.

I consider myself a Spiritual Humanist. Because I do believe there is more going on then meets the eye. But NO god.

Originally posted by Hadrian

Originally posted by adjensen
You say that lack of faith inspires a desire to do good here on Earth. While I commend you for that attitude, I would like to ask where you believe that desire comes from? What motivates it? When you say that you want to do the best for yourself, I understand that, but why would you want to do the best for others?

I hope I'm not talking out of my buttocks because I didn't read the rest of this post, but if you are inferring that god is the source of the desire to do good, then that would imply for those who desire to do bad, that god is the source there, as well. Then, there's the whole cliché about worshipping a deity that forces people to do bad things, then punishes them for it.

If you go the free will route, then god can't receive the attribution for being responsible for good behavior.

No, that's not what I said, sorry, and definitely not what I believe.

My question was what the atheist sees as the origin of altruism, where that desire within us to do good comes from. Consider the panhandler. If you give him money, you're going against your own best interests, because you could use the money for your own betterment. You're going against society's best interests, because you're just encouraging people to be bums. You're going against some vague "humankind" interest, because you're supporting someone who is clearly a parasite, not a contributor.

If the answer is "I'm a decent person and I have compassion for the poor", that's fine, but then the question simply becomes "where does compassion come from" and we're back to square one.

How can atheists be so sure that we were not created? I've always felt that there is more to our existence than we think... ...but i don't follow/believe any religion...I guess i'm considered agnostic.

reply to post by traditionaldrummer

Because I'm able to recognize the difference between legitimate scientific study and pseudoscience.

You know many different well respected legitimate branches of science that we have today, were actually considered psuedoscience just 40-140 years back.

Science itself has limited its approach to materialism. Once the technology and instruments come out that are sensitive enough to measure the soul, then that will knock alot of you guys on your behinds.

never the lass, we are at least a half century or more until that glorious day. Still have to go through WW III of course.