It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Will the real Atheists please stand up

page: 1
4
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 18 2010 @ 11:38 PM
link   
For the sake of simplicity, the definition of God is as follows…

God is the creator of the universe and everything in it. (no religious connotations attached)

The above will be the definition for answering the questions below...


Why are you an Atheist?

If it’s because you believe there is no God, then how can you be so sure?

If it’s because there is a lack of evidence for you to believe it and/or because there is a lack of evidence to the contrary, then doesn’t that equate to you being undecided?

If you do not believe, while at the same time, hold the position of saying it’s not untrue either, then doesn’t that equate to you being undecided?

If you reject it, and because the word reject, means to put aside, send back or not comply, then doesn’t that equate to you being undecided?

If it’s because you deny it, the word deny means to declare untrue, disclaim or refuse. How have you been able to do any of these things?

Simple questions with hopefully some straightforward answers…

Why are you an Atheist?


- JC




posted on Dec, 18 2010 @ 11:53 PM
link   
I am an Athiest because I searched for god and did not find him.
I searched for any evidence of his existence and found none.



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 12:04 AM
link   


Why are you an Atheist?

Assume for a half second the definition of atheist meant the disbelief in unicorns.
That is why I personally am atheist. there is no evidence presented that supports a God


If it’s because you believe there is no God, then how can you be so sure?

I do not believe nor disbelieve in the concept of a god overall..I simply do not see any evidence to support such a being. I am not sure that elves riding unicorns also do not exist, but so far, no evidence.



If it’s because there is a lack of evidence for you to believe it and/or because there is a lack of evidence to the contrary, then doesn’t that equate to you being undecided?

no. in the same way that you are not undecided on there believing in a 14 headed mudmonster on a planet halfway across the universe. There is no evidence, therefore not much "belief" in it is required...pointless speculation until there is evidence.



If you do not believe, while at the same time, hold the position of saying it’s not untrue either, then doesn’t that equate to you being undecided?

No, undecided would mean your not sure if you believe or not in a deity.
I currently do not believe in a deity due to no evidence. My belief however is not an absolute objective truth of the universe..just what is presented



If you reject it, and because the word reject, means to put aside, send back or not comply, then doesn’t that equate to you being undecided?

If you reject a cup of coffee, are you undecided on if you want coffee?


If it’s because you deny it, the word deny means to declare untrue, disclaim or refuse. How have you been able to do any of these things?

I have never denied proof of a deity...or rather, I will not deny proof of a deity should it ever surface.
I do deny fantasys and claims with no evidence to back it up from being an objective truth.

Hope that helps.
edit on 19-12-2010 by SaturnFX because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 12:22 AM
link   
I am an atheist because 'God' isn't real.
2nd



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 12:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by NotTooHappy
I am an atheist because 'God' isn't real.
2nd


Prove it.



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 12:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Joecroft

For the sake of simplicity, the definition of God is as follows…

God is the creator of the universe and everything in it. (no religious connotations attached)

The above will be the definition for answering the questions below...


Why are you an Atheist?

If it’s because you believe there is no God, then how can you be so sure?

If it’s because there is a lack of evidence for you to believe it and/or because there is a lack of evidence to the contrary, then doesn’t that equate to you being undecided?

If you do not believe, while at the same time, hold the position of saying it’s not untrue either, then doesn’t that equate to you being undecided?

If you reject it, and because the word reject, means to put aside, send back or not comply, then doesn’t that equate to you being undecided?

If it’s because you deny it, the word deny means to declare untrue, disclaim or refuse. How have you been able to do any of these things?

Simple questions with hopefully some straightforward answers…

Why are you an Atheist?


- JC


Why do you get to define what god is?
That's the straightforward answer you need.



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 01:18 AM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 



Firstly, thanks for your reply



Originally posted by SaturnFX
I do not believe nor disbelieve in a god overall..I simply do not see any evidence to support such a being…



If you “do not believe nor disbelieve in God overall”, then surely that puts you in the position of undiceded.




Originally posted by SaturnFX
no. in the same way that you are not undecided on there believing in a 14 headed mudmonster on a planet halfway across the universe. There is no evidence, therefore not much "belief" in it is required...pointless speculation until there is evidence.


So am I right in thinking that the idea that there is a creator of the universe, is such an absurd idea to you personally, that it is therefore the main reason you have rejected it?

Whether the topic is something absurd or whether we perceive it to be a sensible possibility, is besides the point; if there is no evidence to the contrary either way, then how can you have no belief? Isn’t it better to remain undecided?

Simply put, what are you basing your non-belief on?






Originally posted by SaturnFX
No, undecided would mean your not sure if you believe or not in a deity.
I currently do not believe in a deity due to no evidence. My belief however is not an absolute objective truth of the universe..just what is presented.



People once believed the world was flat based on no evidence; of course lack of evidence doesn’t make something true or untrue. So again I ask you, how have you come to your decision? Or more to the point, how are you able to come to any decision?





Originally posted by SaturnFX
If you reject a cup of coffee, are you undecided on if you want coffee?


Well I see two kinds of reject, one is temporary, as in yet to decide, and the other is a complete decision to reject something outright.


PS - this reply isn’t an attack on your position, I’m just trying to better understand it.


- JC



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 01:25 AM
link   
reply to post by pirhanna
 





Originally posted by pirhanna
Why do you get to define what god is?
That's the straightforward answer you need


That’s just the thing; I don’t get to define it, that’s how it’s defined in the dictionary.

Also, if I bring other aspects into it, it makes it a lot harder to discuss on a forum, for obvious reasons.


- JC



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 01:31 AM
link   
reply to post by NotTooHappy
 





Originally posted by NotTooHappy
I am an atheist because 'God' isn't real.
2nd


Thanks, but I’m trying to work out why you believe God isn’t real.

How do you know God isn’t real?


- JC
edit on 19-12-2010 by Joecroft because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 01:39 AM
link   
Isn't it funny, the law of thermodynamics says mater and energy can not be created or destroyed. Matter can change to energy and visa-versa. The big bang theory describes an event where a bunch of matter/energy was in one spot then exploded. That still does not explain where all this mass/energy came from. So the scientific explanation for the universe as we know it is as follows: Well first hmm, mumble, mumble, miracle of some sort then BANG the big bang happened and here we are. You could say it bubbled in from another dimension but where did that dimension come from? If you know how all matter/energy was created then after you explain it to the world's top astrophysicists you could site a lack of evidence for a creator. But if you do not know how all mass in the universe got here then everything you see including the eyeballs you see with could be evidence of a creator. But there is another option for you, this convenient option allows you to just pick whatever story you like and proclaim your belief in it. Most humans pick this option, scientific and religious people alike. Isn't if funny that in both scientific circles and religions, voicing and unpopular belief can result in being outcast by your peers. So the belief systems are kept static by peer pressure and thus the saying: Science progresses one dead scientist at a time. Meaning that each time an old fart dies we can let go of his antiquated beliefs... But not before.
As for my beliefs, I try not to hold beliefs but rather I have theories in progress that are the sum of what I have learned so far and ever ready to be scrapped if a more sensible theory is discovered.
All through history mankind has tried to explain reality based on frames of reference he has acquired in his life. For example 5000 years ago, if a humanoid stepped off a brightly lit craft from the sky, the people might describe it as an angel stepping out of his chariot of fire. Today our understanding of possible life on other planets gives us a different frame of reference and we would call this guy an alien.
There is another frame of reference we now have that has never existed before this generation: A computer processor. What if every bit of matter and energy was just information on a type of computer vastly beyond what our current technology would be capable of. Ever had a dream that you felt was real at the time? That is proof that our consciousness is capable of convincing us that what we perceive is real. And what better way to make a virtual reality game or school? Like going to a movie but you experience it from the fresh view point of an avatar with a blank memory.
The concept of a digital universe has no basis in history, we can not consult our family customs and passed on wisdom to make us feel comfortable with the idea. Cognitive dissonance and lack of peer support make it almost impossible to take seriously. Quantum physics experiments with entanglement seem to suggest that two particles can exist separately in space yet still affect each other over a distance instantaneously (faster than the speed of light). This is a supportive indicator of non locality, that space is an illusion just like space in virtual reality in one of our own computers is an illusion.
Ironically, this theory would bring together both religion and science. Religious prophets in our past could have been real beings that entered for the purpose of helping some who were getting too involved and addicted to the seeming reality of this place. And every law of physics could be part of a program, each particle and electron following the parameters of their program. This theory would allow for infinite parallel dimensions (parallel servers) as well as dimensions within dimensions. In million years of computer development, could we make a virtual reality that could rival the one we call real? Moore's Law seems to suggest we could.

I am not saying this is all true... Just a theory to play around with.
edit on 19-12-2010 by RedPill because: Typo



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 01:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Segador
 





Originally posted by Segador
I am an Athiest because I searched for god and did not find him.
I searched for any evidence of his existence and found none.


Is the fact that you found no evidence, a good enough reason to call yourself an Atheist?

Where did you look? And what kind of evidence were you hoping to find?


- JC



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 02:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Joecroft
reply to post by SaturnFX
 



Firstly, thanks for your reply



Originally posted by SaturnFX
I do not believe nor disbelieve in a god overall..I simply do not see any evidence to support such a being…



If you “do not believe nor disbelieve in God overall”, then surely that puts you in the position of undiceded.
I fixed that..was supposed to read not believe or disbelieve in the concept of a god..hair splitting overall.
and no...as I said, there is no evidence beyond some stories. I have no major thoughts on it in regards to the existance in the same way I have no real opinion at the concept of gremlins living in my wall..unless there is some evidence presented, then I simply do not believe they are there. This does not mean they couldn't be there...just that there is no evidence to suggest otherwise.





Originally posted by SaturnFX
no. in the same way that you are not undecided on there believing in a 14 headed mudmonster on a planet halfway across the universe. There is no evidence, therefore not much "belief" in it is required...pointless speculation until there is evidence.


So am I right in thinking that the idea that there is a creator of the universe, is such an absurd idea to you personally, that it is therefore the main reason you have rejected it?
No, the idea is fine...one day we may be able to actually create a micro universe. We already have the ability to genetically create animals..and one day we may become such creatures that can start entire universes and populate them. I simply see that this universe we live in shows no evidence in tampering with or unnatural simple uncoverings leading to our understandings of evolution and cosmology.
One day these understandings may be challenged with evidence supporting something else, in which case, opinions will conform..but until then, its sort of useless to try and add elves into gravity, magical pixie dust into nuclear power plants, or a deity in evolution



Whether the topic is something absurd or whether we perceive it to be a sensible possibility, is besides the point; if there is no evidence to the contrary either way, then how can you have no belief? Isn’t it better to remain undecided?
There is no evidence suggesting the entire universe is not a dream I am having..there is also no evidence disproving a giant squid living in the center of the world...but that shouldn't be accepted as a potential truth just because it cannot be disproven.



Simply put, what are you basing your non-belief on?
Reason.





Originally posted by SaturnFX
No, undecided would mean your not sure if you believe or not in a deity.
I currently do not believe in a deity due to no evidence. My belief however is not an absolute objective truth of the universe..just what is presented.

People once believed the world was flat based on no evidence; of course lack of evidence doesn’t make something true or untrue. So again I ask you, how have you come to your decision? Or more to the point, how are you able to come to any decision?
True, popular opinion does not make something true or false. Science will always quest to uncover the true nature of the universe and all things in it. Mistakes will be made and held onto for awhile until more things are uncovered. This is all the more reason to demand investigation and try and falsify understandings.
Deities were regarded in the same thing as flat earth...a primitive, non-scientific understanding. The ancient greeks knew the world was a sphere, and came damn close to estimating the size. This information was lost and destroyed by religions that decided it went against doctrain. Science was crushed by theology for over a thousand years.




Originally posted by SaturnFX
If you reject a cup of coffee, are you undecided on if you want coffee?


Well I see two kinds of reject, one is temporary, as in yet to decide, and the other is a complete decision to reject something outright.

The coffee example may have been simplistic. let me rephrase
I reject the notion of creation because that requires a god, there is no evidence of God
I reject in the 7k year old universe, because thats just silly and again, requires a deity. there is no evidence..
I reject every single deity-centric religion as nonsense considering there is no evidence of a deity.
I do not reject "god" conceptually..just that there is one that somehow had a hand in my current existance.

here is the difference between science and religion...ready:

I may be wrong.



PS - this reply isn’t an attack on your position, I’m just trying to better understand it.
- JC


I don't feel attacked. if someone is truely trying to understand a point of view, great. My position cannot be attacked because my position is changable based on proof..a simple request really.
edit on 19-12-2010 by SaturnFX because: tired.



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 02:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by RedPill
That still does not explain where all this mass/energy came from. So the scientific explanation for the universe as we know it is as follows: Well first hmm, mumble, mumble, miracle of some sort then BANG the big bang happened and here we are.


Actually, one of the current hypothesis's that I favor is the colliding membrains. I think that will end up being the one accepted considering they are finding more and more evidence of different dimensions.

there could be a infinate amount of universal bubbles constantly exploding in space...our entire universal sphere may be the size of a single electron in a mind bogglingly huge system.

there is a phrase."as above, so below". which could be said that no matter how far we look down into the molecule, the atom, the proton, the subatomic quirks, etc...it will go infinately small...and also infinately large.



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 02:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by RedPill
that space is an illusion just like space in virtual reality in one of our own computers is an illusion.


That is a pet consideration I enjoy entertaining...this is all a giant virtual reality program.

What better time to live through than the dawning of the "immortal age". going from a time of mortality, to a sudden shift of longevity, and finally immortality in a species. the game would be quite popular..and for a race of beings with literally a eternity to burn, 80 years in a game would be like nothing..a quick distraction..

I would venture to say that perhaps in 1000 years (or much less), such immersive virtual reality games will be very popular.

And yes, the core basis of all religions basically suggest that this universe isn't the real universe...just a illusion. Perhaps the ancient theologians simply didn't have the vocabulay to suggest we are in virtual reality just screwing around...

and if that is the truth...then is such knowledge actually good to try and uncover...I mean, you don't play a game to try and not be in the game...rather, to fully play every part of it and enjoy the environment it creates as is..



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 02:54 AM
link   
*Stands up*



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 04:44 AM
link   


God is the creator of the universe and everything in it.


No he isn't.The Big Bang created the universe.So if this the definition of god, there is scientific proof that says otherwise.
So if there is a highly evolved being or beings that our ancestors called him/her/them god(s),i don't have to follow their belief system and worship him/her/them.



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 05:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Joecroft
 


Well I am an Atheist because no evidence or logic supports the existence of one or more higher powers . The burden of proof lies with the claimant despite that some daft people will claim . Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence .

Cheers xpert11.



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 07:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Joecroft

For the sake of simplicity, the definition of God is as follows…

God is the creator of the universe and everything in it. (no religious connotations attached)

The above will be the definition for answering the questions below...



You can't really describe God like this though as it means that whatever answer is postulated as to how the universe started then you can call whatever that is "God" a quantum fluctuation or a fully formed pink Rabbit with a magic wand all fit this description and so by your description would both be called "god"

What most people call God is some kind of concious being that deliberately created the universe through his own will.

Taking this definition then the answer is pretty simple.

When you discuss the problem of the start of the universe you always hit the wall of having to postulate how something could come from nothing, one popular explanation for this, the one that's often called God, states that the something was put their by a fully formed concious being with the capacity for abstract thought and planning, This answer however does not answer anything at all and only puts forward a billion more questions such as "where did god come from" What created god" "how is it that god can have thought without having any physical form" etc etc etc

Belief in God then becomes an admissions that you have just decided to give up trying to think of how the universe may have been created and just decided "It was magic" and then left all of the other questions unanswered by saying that they are "un-knowable" it's lazy



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 07:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Joecroft
 


Because I'm skeptical to all theistic claims. Now, I'm not equally skeptical to all claims, as some are more ridiculous than others, but most of them are equally unfounded. I'm not sure, as I think that epistemological certainty is impossible.

Short version: I reject all current theistic and deistic claims due to lack of evidence in support, just like I reject all sorts of ridiculous "snake-oil" salesman claims due to lack of evidence. So that's why I'm an atheist.



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 09:04 AM
link   
Hmm. I hope Segador comes back. Obviously, the evidentiary force of a negative search result depends on the nature of the search performed, so it would be interesting to hear her or his details. Added a star for encouragement.

Anyway, I am not an atheist. I have no difficulty locating in real life atheists who are delighted to say "I believe there is no god." Here at ATS, we often get the "I don't believe anything about God" wannabes, and my personal favorite, the guy who claims to be 21 and who can't bring himself to say "I believe there is no Santa Claus." Facepalm.

So, let me answer by proxy for the atheists I know, with some comments on my personal beliefs along the way.

Right atop your list, I see no reason to believe that the Universe was created, nor if it were, that any single personal agent was responsible. I don't see this as a religious issue. How the Universe came to be is secular subject matter. Just because someboday has claimed that Zeus hurls lightning bolts doesn't make a thunderstorm a religious event.

Nevertheless, we could probably agree in a practical sense what an atheist is, even if we disagree about a reasonable definition of god.

If it’s because you believe there is no God, then how can you be so sure?
Certainty is not required in order to express a religious belief.

If it’s because there is a lack of evidence for you to believe it and/or because there is a lack of evidence to the contrary, then doesn’t that equate to you being undecided?
Personally, I am an agnostic. I am not "undecided," I have categorical beliefs about the state of the evidence, similar to what you describe. Ultimately, the evaluation of the evidence is prioristic, a matter of opinion (lol, there can't be "evidence" which decides the right way to evaluate evidence).

There is no reason why someone couldn't reach a prioristic conclusion about the question of gods, just as I have reached a prioristic conclusion about the sufficiency of the available evidence about gods. A prioristic conclusion is equally "rational" either way, so I predict that there are some "prioristic theists," too. There certainly are people, both theist and atheist, who have reached a different prioristic conclusion from mine about the sufficiency of the evidence.

If you do not believe, while at the same time, hold the position of saying it’s not untrue either, then doesn’t that equate to you being undecided?
Umm, if you say "It's not untrue," then are you not a theist? I think you meant to ask something else, but my best guess for what you might have meant has already been asked. So, I don't know what you're asking here.

If you reject it, and because the word reject, means to put aside, send back or not comply, then doesn’t that equate to you being undecided?
Reject is a vague word. But a person believes what they believe. If they have chosen a vague word to describe their beliefs, then you can't just guess what they really meant. OK, fine, maybe you're asking them that, but if so, then you're also leading in your question, which is uncalled for.

If it’s because you deny it, the word deny means to declare untrue, disclaim or refuse. How have you been able to do any of these things?
Again, I don't see how this question differs from your earlier one about "how can you be so sure?" Someone can deny something based on their beliefs about the subject. Certainty is an unreasonably high threshold for speaking your mind.

Hope that helps.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join