Logical Atheist Vs Illogical Theist (With FlowChart)

Firstly, don't consider this an attack, this is my opinion, you're more than welcome to argue why I am wrong. Atheists have a place on ATS too.

A rational atheist uses logic; the atheist asserts that we don't have enough information to discern the cause (if any) of reality, because the athiest "doesn't know" (i.e. is agnostic) it would be unwise to commit to one specific theory that cannot be verified. (it's unfalsifiable)

Rational atheists do not assert positive atheism ("There is no God") - This is as irrational as saying "There is a God"

Atheism, by definition is simply a lack of belief. Atheists are in the same naive position as the Theist (or believer) BUT the rational atheist does not make the mistake of committing to a theory that has been formed without evidence.

The rational atheist would not be so irrational and dishonest to make a claim to truth regarding the unknown.

A few dilemmas/paradoxes that Theists have to answer (and often have difficulty rebutting):-

"Euthyphro Dilemma"

The Euthyphro dilemma is found in Plato's dialogue Euthyphro, in which Socrates asks Euthyphro: "Is the pious (τὸ ὅσιον) loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is loved by the gods?" (10a)

The dilemma has had a major effect on the philosophical theism (faith) of the monotheistic religions, but in a modified form: "Is what is morally good commanded by God because it is morally good, or is it morally good because it is commanded by God?" Ever since Plato's original discussion, this question has presented a problem for some theists (believers), though others have thought it a false dilemma, and it continues to be an object of theological and philosophical discussion today.

"Epicurean Paradox" (Or "Problem of Evil")

God exists.
-God is omnipotent, omniscient, and perfectly good.
-A perfectly good being would want to prevent all evils.
-An omniscient being knows every way in which evils can come into existence.
-An omnipotent being, who knows every way in which an evil can come into existence, has the power to prevent that evil from coming into existence.
-A being who knows every way in which an evil can come into existence, who is able to prevent that evil from coming into existence, and who wants to do so, would prevent the existence of that evil.
-If there exists an omnipotent, omniscient, and perfectly good being, then no evil exists.
-Evil exists (logical contradiction).

Christian apologists often use weak arguments for belief in a supernatural deity (especially that of a specific religion)

"Pascal's Wager"

Pascal's Wager (or Pascal's Gambit) is a suggestion posed by the French philosopher, mathematician, and physicist Blaise Pascal that even if the existence of God could not be determined through reason, a rational person should wager as though God exists, because living life accordingly has everything to gain, and nothing to lose.

Compare this Christian apologetic wager to that of the "Atheist's Wager"

You should live your life and try to make the world a better place for your being in it, whether or not you believe in god. If there is no god, you have lost nothing and will be remembered fondly by those you left behind. If there is a benevolent god, he will judge you on your merits and not just on whether or not you believed in him

I personally know which wager i find more honest, humble and courageous.

Also, consider the following image.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/9cb57a3721f1.jpg[/atsimg](right-click and "view image" for the full image, or find the URL)

It may help your on your path to enlightenment. Perhaps people could try the chart out, and tell me what position they believe they are. Don't consider the destinations to be "labels", only a point of reference for your belief (or lack of belief)

Hope this information is useful.

That is a really cool chart, but I found myself everywhere. I am more of a Gnostic. But not solely one label describes me so I call myself a seeker. I see ALL that is... in everything....Science and or Physics especially made me veer toward a creator.

Good thread and I am out of here before it turns into who is right and who is wrong. ( No offense)

Peace and love to you my friend!!!!!!!!!!!! xoxoxox


Jenn

Just curious if you think that Schrodinger's cat applies here? The cat is both dead/ alive until the observer opens the box. Since we have not observed God, wouldn't it follow that He can both exist/ not exist? And we will not be able to prove either state until we observe for ourselves?

reply to post by ExistentialNightmare


The chart seems about right/accurate, but I have to wonder why you listed a logical Atheist versus an illogical Theist, why not a logical Atheist vs a logical Theist? or an illogical Atheist vs a logical Theist?

Inb4 logical Theists don't exist. Just because someone believes in something doesn't mean they can't be logical, or even rational. Can an Atheist be illogical and irrational in his arguing? If yes, then a Theist can be logical and rational as well. If no, you should review your life and question why you actually believe that.

[edit]Also,
"The rational atheist would not be so irrational and dishonest to make a claim to truth regarding the unknown. "

All Atheists claim God does not exist, but it is unknown whether he exists or not, so.. all Atheists are irrational?

Heres a question for you. The Big Bang happened, this has been proved by science. So HOW did the ancients know it happened if God didnt tell them? They knew nothing of science in those times, not what gravity was, nor what stars truly were.

I say the ancients knew about the Big Bang because in the Bible's Book of Genesis:

www.talkorigins.org...

001:001 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

001:002 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was
upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon
the face of the waters.

001:003 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

001:004 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the
light from the darkness.

Now ask yourself again. How did Moses (whom wrote the book of Genesis on Mt. Sinai during the Exodus) know that there was a Big Bang if God didn't tell him? The Void was dark, and God said let there be light, and the darkness of the void exploded into light and the darkness was illuminated.

Clearly The Big Bang didnt start of its own accord. Physics tells us an object at rest remains at rest UNLESS enacted upon by an outside force. So here was this TINY microcosmic spot in space filled with huge mass, and it just explodes. There has to be a catalyst, and it wasnt gravity.

The power of God was such a magnitude that just His uttering the words "let there be light" caused this mass to explode and fill an empty universe that was dark and without form, with light and mass and gave it form. But the question remains the same, HOW did Moses know this if he hadnt been told by a being of vast and greater intelligence when in his time there was no science, no telescopes, when everyone thought the earth was flat?

Meditate on that one, and open your mind.

I prefer to avoid the older reasoning for what is right in our face. LINK We are artificial. This goes without saying. Even if you are an Atheist, realizing that your only action in this reality is to think and move the body should be obvious. This can easily be demonstrated by the creations of man.

A car will only drive itself when a consciousness is placed it it. If a car is to drive itself, a consciousness must be created that can sense the road. Apart from sensing the world, no choice is possible. The human can only move the vehicle and think about how choices affect his body and the bodies of other objects he comes into contact with. All other is done for us. This reduces us to consciousness residing in a vehicle. There are no examples to refute consciousness being necessary to drive a vehicle or make choice.

The result of this obvious logic is to see that consciousness, like truth, is pre-existent. There are many things that can be demonstrated as pre-existent. We determine the difference between opposites in all areas of reality. Chaos must be governed by some law or there would be no dividing of opposites. The early universe was in a high state of order and low entropy. This amounts to energy at high frequency. To separate this light from darkness and produce form, there must be conscious choice.

To make an if then statement, we must have a source of information to give the reasoning a glimmer of truth. Truth must be pre-existent or it is created. If truth is created, then we should be able to produce our own truth that results in the desired outcome. As it stands, all outcomes are easily defined by good and evil. History and experience is the laboratory that gives the result.

If we trace our understanding back, we see that the Bible holds all the answers before we even begin. It starts with the basics of physics noted by Einstein in the previous generation. Remember, we did not know this before Einstein.

In the beginning (Time), God created the heavens (Space) and the earth (Matter). Let there be light (Energy).

This seems like a coincidence. The problem is, the Bible carries it further. It also says that God "Spoke" reality into existence from a Word. A word is a wave in our reality. A wave is the other duality of light. Light is both particle and wave. John 1 goes on to call Christ the Word and the creator of our reality with God. It also says He is God. Christian tradition says God is three things:

Father (Origin of life / Light / Prima Materia)
Son (Logos / Wave / Word / Force / Governor / Law)

When you put the prima materia with the force (Wave), you get the associated force that carries the light to form. This amounts to a projection.

The third part of the trinity is consciousness. This is the part that man denies as pre-existing. For faith to take hold as evidenced by fact, we need to examine our view of our own person. If God is one person with three parts, and He created us in His image, then we must be those three parts. As it turns out, we have particle and wave making our bodies and we have consciousness.

Now we have more evidence to back the claims of the biblical God. It is demonstrated.

Now let's look at Genesis 1:27

27 So God created mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them.

Clever. He says it two ways. Not only are we inside His image, we are also in the image of God's likeness. We are a trinity of body (Particle / Wave) and consciousness just like God. We are 'in' an image He created (Reality) and in His image. Both.

From here, we should just sit back and praise what He has accomplished for us. We did not pre-exist as you recall. We are created from what was always there. He was not required to share consciousness. He requires law to govern His Kingdom. As newly formed creations, we must humbly sit back and learn from the good Shepherd.

Now that you know some of the evidence, consider what Father means in Hebrew. Go through each of the words in this list from the root meaning of Ancient Hebrew. As you do, pay particular attention to Father and Son and God.

Make sure you download the font. It is required to see the pictographs.

LINK

Father

God EL

This is the root morphology of Ancient Hebrew. This is not a man-made language. It surpasses all understanding.

reply to post by Lionhearte

The chart seems about right/accurate, but I have to wonder why you listed a logical Atheist versus an illogical Theist, why not a logical Atheist vs a logical Theist? or an illogical Atheist vs a logical Theist?

The atheist doesn't commit to any theory, because the atheist is agnostic in regards to the cause (if any) of reality, or the universe ("the big bang") The atheist is just as naive as the theist when it comes such profound questinos regarding the universe/and reality (and the cause, if any)

Making a positive claim; i.e. "There is No God" or "There is a God" can only be formed without evidence/knowledge.

Not only does the Theist claim there is a deity, but the Theist claims to understand the Deity's thoughts and desires/commandments of the life (specifically one species) in a suberb of a relatively small Gallaxy.

EDIT (In reponse to your edit):-

All Atheists claim God does not exist, but it is unknown whether he exists or not, so.. all Atheists are irrational?

Atheism isn't a position that makes a claim, Atheism is a lack of belief, not a claim to truth. Although, some Atheists may assert there is no God:-

Negative and Positive Atheism

reply to post by lonewolf19792000


So who was it that proved undeniably the big bang happened again I forgot?

The ultimate truth in life is this. There will always be believers, and there will always be doubters, until the end. Man cannot go on living in his current state for eternity, we will tear ourselves apart left to our own devices because we are too destructive, too greedy and too warlike. As for me? I choose to believe, i lose nothing in believing, i cannot take my money with me when i die, nor my land or personal property.

reply to post by lonewolf19792000

theres a whole list of creation myths here
www.magictails.com...

my favourite is:
www.dreamscape.com...

Scandinavian Odin is the All-Father. He is the oldest and most powerful of the Gods. Through the ages he has ruled all things. He created heaven and earth, and he made man and gave him a soul.

but

Maya
In the beginning were only Tepeu and Gucumatz. These two sat together and thought, and whatever they thought came into being. They thought earth, and there it was. They thought mountains, and so there were. They thought trees, and sky, and animals. Each came into being. Because none of these creatures could praise them, they formed more advanced beings of clay. Because the clay beings fell apart when wet, they made beings out of wood; however, the wooden beings caused trouble on the earth. The Gods sent a great flood to wipe out these beings, so that they could start over. With the help of Mountain Lion, Coyote, Parrot, and Crow they fashioned four new beings. These four beings performed well and are the ancestors of the Quich�.

is good to

Can anyone comment on the Schroedinger's cat post that I previously posted? I am interested on peoples positions on this.

reply to post by micmerci


Yes it's an agnostic position that is all.....

reply to post by jheated5


So then if no one knows, where is the validity in each side of the argument perceiving the other side as illogical while their side is viewed logical?

Some people believe they know that's why......

reply to post by micmerci

Just curious if you think that Schrodinger's cat applies here? The cat is both dead/ alive until the observer opens the box. Since we have not observed God, wouldn't it follow that He can both exist/ not exist? And we will not be able to prove either state until we observe for ourselves?

We know a cat exists, and we know a box exists.

Quantam theory has resulted in many unfalsifiable theories (metaphysical theories) such as mulitiverse theorem, where for every posibility exists a new "verse", and thus every possible choice or action you could make creates a new verse.

I can't see how a God would fit into this, other than suggesting that God had willed this multiverse construct (but then the question would be, what realm does this God exist in? How was it created?) Or perhaps in one particular verse there is a God; in one universe Allah, in another universe Yahweh?

Also, would a omnipotent God create chaotic, destructive universe (like ours) or a perfect, peaceful, eternal universe? There are too many proliferating questions.

I'm really not sure, certainly a question i have never seen asked (very intriguing!) it would be an interesting question to ask a metaphysicist.

Peace.

Logical thinking dictates that the cat is both dead and alive are true statements until an observer discredits one of the states. But what effect did the observer have on the observed outcome? So it follows that knowing God exists and knowing God does not exist are equally logical statements until an observer discredits one of the claims.

Like someone said, they don't know the state of the cat as an observer but they do acknowledge that the cat and the box do exist...... You can't know about something that has never been observed in the first place....

reply to post by jheated5


The experiment is certainly not that simplistic, that is all...

Originally posted by micmerci
reply to post by jheated5

 

The experiment is certainly not that simplistic, that is all...

Yes it really is that simple.....

reply to post by jheated5


“There is no confusion like the confusion of a simple mind.”