Is atheism logical?

[UncleHermit]

You can run, but you can't hide from the living God.

I do neither.

*looks around for a god, but doesn't see one*

*shrugs*

 

[Eudaimonist]

You can run, but you can't hide from the living God.

You can run, but you can't hide from Cthulhu.

Horror movie tags don't scare me, though I suppose they might make you feel better.

There is no such thing as an aethist- only a person of God who tries hard, for a multitude of reasons, to maintain themselves in a state of denial- despite the obvious.

What may seem obvious to you won't seem obvious to a Buddhist, a Hindu, a Baha'i, etc.

We are born with a conscience- how can that possibly come to us except through God?

Evolution.

Also, each and every one of us can directly trace our very existence back to a common origin. I happen to believe that the origin was the created Adam, but even if you believe it to be the first cell, it still had to be created by God from the material of the earth and given, at exactly the same instant, the breath of life and the ability to reproduce itself.

No, it really doesn't.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Servant of Jesus]

There is no such thing as a theist: only a human being who tries hard, for a multitude of reasons, to maintain themselves in a state of denial - despite the obvious.

See how silly statements of this sort are?

I'm sorry- I don't understand your logic. When the very existence of the Universe is proof-positive of the reality of God, then it is obvious, and not silly, that atheism is a state of mind, not a reality.

Through the process of natural selection.

Well first, thought and conscience are not something that I have ever seen a scientific paper show is a product of natural selection. But even if it is, it still doesn't explain how the first living cell able to start the process of natural selection came to be.

The 'breath of life', at that basic, viral level, is, arguably, the ability to reproduce oneself.

No- that's less than half of the equation- which is why the accidental creation of life is so improbable. First, you had to have matter. Then you somehow had to make that matter come alive- to becoming a living entity. But if that living entity was not just to live for a short while, die, and become dust once again, it had to be given the ability to reproduce itself- at exactly, precisely the same instant that it was first formed. I maintain that for all those things to happen is absolutely impossible without a Creator God.

The only mystery to me is why some people cannot see the obvious- in Matthew 13, Jesus addresses that:

"Though seeing, they do not see;
though hearing, they do not hear or understand. 14In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah:
" 'You will be ever hearing but never understanding;
you will be ever seeing but never perceiving.
15For this people's heart has become calloused;
they hardly hear with their ears,
and they have closed their eyes.
Otherwise they might see with their eyes,
hear with their ears,
understand with their hearts
and turn, and I would heal them.'[a] 16But blessed are your eyes because they see, and your ears because they hear. 17For I tell you the truth, many prophets and righteous men longed to see what you see but did not see it, and to hear what you hear but did not hear it.

 

[UncleHermit]

I'm sorry- I don't understand your logic. When the very existence of the Universe is proof-positive of the reality of God, then it is obvious, and not silly, that atheism is a state of mind, not a reality.

I don't understand your logic either - since when is the existence of the Universe proof of God?

Well first, thought and conscience are not something that I have ever seen a scientific paper show is a product of natural selection. But even if it is, it still doesn't explain how the first living cell able to start the process of natural selection came to be.

Well, I'm sure that you can think up all sorts of things that there isn't yet a well-supported natural explanation for. This doesn't change the fact that something being unknown does not automatically make it evidence of God - it is simply unknown.

No- that's only half of the equation- which is why the accidental creation of life is so improbable. First, you had to have matter. Then you somehow had to make that matter come alive- to becoming a living entity. But if that living entity was not just to live for a short while, die, and become dust once again, it had to be given the ability to reproduce itself- at exactly, precisely the same instant that it was first formed.

Please define "life" as you are using it.

 

[Servant of Jesus]

The interesting thing about this argument is that we will eventually know what the truth, the right answer, is.

Why do some of you continue to participate here if you think this faith-thing is all a bunch of nonsense.

If you are here because you want to promote anarchy, or because satan is your handler, you really ought to go elsewhere and leave us in peace. In other words, your conscience, whether God-given or formed by natural selection, should encourage you to think about your actions, do the right thing, and leave.

On the other hand, if you are here because within that denial is just a small glimmer of light that does not allow you to abandon the possibility that God is in fact real, then carry on.

 

[Servant of Jesus]

Well, Wikipedia has a good start at defining what life is; but most biology textbooks will also spell it out for you.

Life is a condition that distinguishes organisms from inorganic objects, i.e. non-life, and dead organisms, being manifested by growth through metabolism, reproduction, and the power of adaptation to environment through changes originating internally. A physical characteristic of life is that it feeds on negative entropy.[1][2] In more detail, according to physicists such as John Bernal, Erwin Schrödinger, Eugene Wigner, and John Avery, life is a member of the class of phenomena which are open or continuous systems able to decrease their internal entropy at the expense of substances or free energy taken in from the environment and subsequently rejected in a degraded form (see: entropy and life).[3][4]

 

[Wiccan_Child]

The interesting thing about this argument is that we will eventually know what the truth, the right answer, is.

Why do some of you continue to participate here if you think this faith-thing is all a bunch of nonsense.

Because this is a discussion and debate forum. I daresay most atheists are for the love of debate, and to learn more about other worldviews. Though I'm not atheist, my primary reason for being here is to understand why people have different opinions to me; as far as I can tell, I'm 100% right in all things!

If you are here because you want to promote anarchy, or because satan is your handler, you really ought to go elsewhere and leave us in peace.

And if they are neither Satanical nor anarchicle?

In other words, your conscience, whether God-given or formed by natural selection, should encourage you to think about your actions, do the right thing, and leave.

I agree with the first two, but why should they leave? This is a thread about atheism; surely atheists are more than welcome to post their views and opinions?

On the other hand, if you are here because within that denial is just a small glimmer of light that does not allow you to abandon the possibility that God is in fact real, then carry on.

As far as I can tell, noone here has affirmed their status as a strong atheists. Given the stats, it is likely that most (if not all) atheists here are weak atheists: they fully accept that deities may exist. They just don't believe in them as of yet.

 

[UncleHermit]

Well, Wikipedia has a good start at defining what life is; but most biology textbooks will also spell it out for you.

That definition includes reproduction as a characteristic of life, so it doesn't really make sense when inserted in your previous post.

I don't know how much of a discussion on abiogenesis we should get into in this subforum. Since you don't seem to mind wikipedia (some people don't trust it), here's the page on abiogenesis: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_life

 

[cantata]

I'm sorry- I don't understand your logic. When the very existence of the Universe is proof-positive of the reality of God then it is obvious, and not silly, that atheism is a state of mind, not a reality.

Ah, but that's different from saying that atheists are deliberately deluding themselves. Insofar as every false belief is a 'state of mind', if you believe that atheism is false then you are of course entitled to call it a state of mind, but it is not wilful ignorance, which is what you seem to be suggesting. When, as you say, the existence of the universe is proof-positive of the reality of God, it will be delusional of non-theists to deny the existence of God. Luckily, the existence of the universe is not proof-positive of the reality of God, so non-theists are not delusional.

Many atheists see theism as wilful self-delusion as well. I could easily argue that the complete absence of evidence for the existence of God shows that theists are deluding themselves because they want to believe in happy-clappy sky fairies, but I wouldn't do that because I am quite sure that most theists seriously and sincerely believe that God exists, just as I sincerely and seriously believe that there is inadequate evidence to conclude that he does.

Well first, thought and conscience are not something that I have ever seen a scientific paper show is a product of natural selection.

Then apparently you haven't been looking hard enough. Try Daniel Dennett and Stephen Pinker for starters.

But even if it is, it still doesn't explain how the first living cell able to start the process of natural selection came to be.

So you think we should just throw science out of the window and say "God did it"? Pretty much one thinks that a single cell popped into existence without there first being organic chemicals, incidentally. I'm not an expert, and I don't claim to be; try Wikipedia's extensive article on abiogenesis if you would like to understand current theories about the origins of life on earth.

No- that's less than half of the equation- which is why the accidental creation of life is so improbable.

Creation is, by definition, not accidental. Your language betrays your assumptions.

First, you had to have matter.

Yep.

Then you somehow had to make that matter come alive- to becoming a living entity.

Well, no. The matter simply had to combine in a particular way, and it had an awfully long time to do it.

But if that living entity was not just to live for a short while, die, and become dust once again, it had to be given the ability to reproduce itself- at exactly, precisely the same instant that it was first formed. I maintain that for all those things to happen is absolutely impossible without a Creator God.

Again, no. To the best of my understanding, at this basic, molecular level, the only characteristic that made 'life' different from non-living matter was its ability to reproduce. In other words, it reproduced itself: that's what made it 'alive', or at least what made it the precursor to it being alive. Perhaps you're imagining it having molecule-sex and making little molecule-babies, and that's where it's getting difficult to understand. It doesn't work like that. I am not an organic chemist so I can't tell you much more than that, but I would refer you again to the Wikipedia article and to other works on the subject by people with more expertise than I have.

Incidentally, I think it is very arrogant to assume that you know better than the vast majority of the scientific community.

The only mystery to me is why some people cannot see the obvious- in Matthew 13, Jesus addresses that:

Mm, your holy book says that people who ignore people written about in your holy book are silly. Amazing!

 

[cantata]

As far as I can tell, noone here has affirmed their status as a strong atheists. Given the stats, it is likely that most (if not all) atheists here are weak atheists: they fully accept that deities may exist. They just don't believe in them as of yet.

Indeed. I'm no anti-theist.

I find it very unlikely that anything said on this forum will convert me, though. If it does, it will be by the likes of someone like Moriah - not someone like Servant of Jesus.

 

[Eudaimonist]

When the very existence of the Universe is proof-positive of the reality of God, then it is obvious, and not silly, that atheism is a state of mind, not a reality.

But the existence of the Universe is not proof-positive of the reality of God. There are many reasons to interpret the universe differently than you do.

Regarding the rest of your post, do some reading into abiogenesis.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Servant of Jesus]

I find it very unlikely that anything said on this forum will convert me, though. If it does, it will be by the likes of someone like Moriah - not someone like Servant of Jesus.

Neither will; see 1 Thessalonians

4For we know, brothers loved by God, that He has chosen you, 5because our gospel came to you not simply with words, but also with power, with the Holy Spirit and with deep conviction.

 

[cantata]

Neither will; see 1 Thessalonians

And the spirit can't work through the words of believers?

 

[Servant of Jesus]

Regarding the rest of your post, do some reading into abiogenesis.

Been there, done that. Abiogenesis starts with the first cell- like a biologist, it doesn't try to answer the question of how that first cell was first formed, or who made it.

Science is there to explain how things work. It isn't supposed to stray beyond things that are not observable, or for which there is no evidence- so it has its limitations. Science may start with only a scant amount of evidence to support a theory- but that's fine- it can change as new evidence is found.

As a Christian, I find no conflict between science and religion- mainly because I am convinced that eventually, science will get it right, and correctly explain how God made the Universe.

 

[cantata]

Been there, done that. Abiogenesis starts with the first cell- like a biologist, it doesn't try to answer the question of how that first cell was first formed, or who made it.

Rubbish. Did you look at the Wikipedia page?

Science is there to explain how things work. It isn't supposed to stray beyond things that are not observable, or for which there is no evidence- so it has its limitations. Science may start with only a scant amount of evidence to support a theory- but that's fine- it can change as new evidence is found.

As a Christian, I find no conflict between science and religion- mainly because I am convinced that eventually, science will get it right, and correctly explain how God made the Universe.

So when you run out of science, it's okay to put up your hands and say 'God did it'? If Galileo or Newton had done that...

 

[ExistencePrecedesEssence]

Answer to the OP: I can't.

 

[Servant of Jesus]

Rubbish. Did you look at the Wikipedia page?

Yes. We have no way of knowing how inanimate material in the beginning was suddenly given the breath of life AND at the same time the ability to reproduce itself, and so this matter is not something that science, which requires evidence and observations, can deal with.

So when you run out of science, it's okay to put up your hands and say 'God did it'? If Galileo or Newton had done that...

Didn't they both believe in God- so they were great scientists, and also Godly men? I bet they felt, like me, that their science supported their faith.

I'm glad that you're exploring these very important questions that have to do with life- I can't think of anything that is more important to get right.

Ultimately, it is God who must call a person, and let them see what is the truth. When that happens, it is incredible how much more wonderful life becomes- how much peace, joy and understanding comes into a person's life when God is their guide.

Just to be clear, I believe the following:

1. That the Universe was created by God.
(Genesis 1:1)

2. That the Bible is divinely inspired by God, and is the unchangeable and inerrant word of God.
(Matthew 24:14)

3. That we are all sinners who are destined to go to hell.
(Romans 3:23)

4. That God came to earth as Jesus Christ and promised that if we repent of our sins, and ask God as the Holy Spirit to guide us for the rest of our existence, and to live according to His will, that we will have eternal life and a place with Him in Heaven.
(John 3:16)
----------------
What have you got to lose by asking God to give you some insights into this matter? And if that's the reason you're here, then keep an open mind and keep searching- you're on the right track.

 

[The Nihilist]

Yes. We have no way of knowing how inanimate material in the beginning was suddenly given the breath of life AND at the same time the ability to reproduce itself, and so this matter is not something that science, which requires evidence and observations, can deal with.



Didn't they both believe in God- so they were great scientists, and also Godly men? I bet they felt, like me, that their science supported their faith.

I'm glad that you're exploring these very important questions that have to do with life- I can't think of anything that is more important to get right.

Ultimately, it is God who must call a person, and let them see what is the truth. When that happens, it is incredible how much more wonderful life becomes- how much peace, joy and understanding comes into a person's life when God is their guide.

Just to be clear, I believe the following:

1. That the Universe was created by God.
(Genesis 1:1)

2. That the Bible is divinely inspired by God, and is the unchangeable and inerrant word of God.
(Matthew 24:14)

3. That we are all sinners who are destined to go to hell.
(Romans 3:23)

4. That God came to earth as Jesus Christ and promised that if we repent of our sins, and ask God as the Holy Spirit to guide us for the rest of our existence, and to live according to His will, that we will have eternal life and a place with Him in Heaven.
(John 3:16)
----------------
What have you got to lose by asking God to give you some insights into this matter? And if that's the reason you're here, then keep an open mind and keep searching- you're on the right track.

If it is God who must call us, as you say, then why should we bother looking? You make it sound as if it's hardly up to us at all.

 

[cantata]

Yes. We have no way of knowing how inanimate material in the beginning was suddenly given the breath of life AND at the same time the ability to reproduce itself, and so this matter is not something that science, which requires evidence and observations, can deal with.

You have now twice ignored my remarks on this subject...

Didn't they both believe in God- so they were great scientists, and also Godly men? I bet they felt, like me, that their science supported their faith.

They did. They also stopped at a certain point and said "God did it". They were wrong, of course; after them, someone else took up the mantle and pushed the boundaries of science yet further.

I'm glad that you're exploring these very important questions that have to do with life- I can't think of anything that is more important to get right.

Well, I can. I don't think it matters very much at all, really.

Ultimately, it is God who must call a person, and let them see what is the truth. When that happens, it is incredible how much more wonderful life becomes- how much peace, joy and understanding comes into a person's life when God is their guide.

My life is very happy at the moment. I know some ex-Christians who are also much happier now than they ever were before. It is very arrogant to assume that only your lifestyle can make people happy. I assure you that there are also many happy Buddhists, Hindus, Jains, Muslims, &c.

Just to be clear, I believe the following:

1. That the Universe was created by God.
(Genesis 1:1)

Genesis 1:1 does not, in my opinion, suggest creation ex nihilo, but of course you're entitled to your belief in that regard.

2. That the Bible is divinely inspired by God, and is the unchangeable and inerrant word of God.
(Matthew 24:14)

I'm inclined to find any argument for the infallibility of a book which is based on something written in the book itself to be wholly risible.

3. That we are all sinners who are destined to go to hell.
(Romans 3:23)

I have more respect for humanity than you do, apparently.

4. That God came to earth as Jesus Christ and promised that if we repent of our sins, and ask God as the Holy Spirit to guide us for the rest of our existence, and to live according to His will, that we will have eternal life and a place with Him in Heaven.
(John 3:16)

Okay! Enjoy that

What have you got to lose by asking God to give you some insights into this matter? And if that's the reason you're here, then keep an open mind and keep searching- you're on the right track.

I can't ask a god I don't believe in, any more than you can ask Zeus for some insights into Mount Olympus politics.

 

[Servant of Jesus]

Cantata:

Biology starts at the instant life started, not before. Just like astronomy starts at the instant of the Big Bang, not before.

Abiogenesis speculates on how life may have started, but is not science, per se, because there is no way that this question can ever be answered scientifically.

We've never been able to make a single sustainable living cell- the closest we've ever got is Stanley Miller's experiment where he was able to take gases, zap them with electricity, and come up with more complex matter. Big deal- it wasn't life, and it wasn't sustaining.

But even if this were ever done, all it would do is allow scientists to say "Hooray- we know now how God did it- Praise the Lord!"