The origins of atheism

[Chriliman]

When you don't know, it's never reasonable to believe anything either way. And that goes for "other universes" as well as your god.

But is it reasonable to assume?

That is the question and the point I'm trying to make.

If we don't know something, then we have no choice but to assume a possible truth. This is the only way progress is made.

 

[AirPo]

if i was what do you care your an athiest remember? you dont even believe in God
and saying the burden of proof is on God isnt telling God what to do its acknowledging the fact that only God can convince an unbeliever.

It just an interesting version of God that I haven't seen before.

 

[Goonie]

Translation:

Biology is not a religion, it is a branch of one.

 

[AirPo]

True, I do not know. But i have a very good idea that you have not. Are you saying that you have?

Fair enough, but it would be nice to see an admission of the pre judgement about my alledged pre judgement.

Surely you would have refuted my assumption if it were wrong.

I did.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

You are projecting your own habit of contempt prior to investigation onto me. Run of the mill knee-jerk atheist.

"The scientist, as such, is limited to the discovery of the relatedness of material facts. Technically, he has no right to assert that he is either materialist or idealist, for in so doing he has assumed to forsake the attitude of a true scientist since any and all such assertions of attitude are the very essence of philosophy." UB 1955​

You keep posting quotes from the Urantia Book as though it's supposed to impress us? Why should we care what the UB has to say about anything?

 

[AirPo]

We even see the effects of those who try to imitate their own ideas of God.

Now that I can agree with!

 

[AirPo]

That is a really specious argument. The logic would be "How can a creation exist without a Creator?" Look all around you and ask yourself the same question:
1. How can a house be built without an architect or designer?
2. How can a car exist without a designer and manufacturer?
3. How can a city exist without city planners and developers?

Since NOTHING CREATES ITSELF, simple rational logic demands that a Creator be behind His creation.

Of course this depends on the unsupported assertion that the universe was "created."

 

[Archaeopteryx]

One of the two testimonies is wrong.

How do we determine which?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

No one strongly believes or disbelieves anything if they think they might be wrong. But anyone might be wrong. Religious belief (and disbelief) is mostly a choice which comes from deep motivations ... so we believe what we want to believe. If you don't want there to be a God, then you won't believe in one. There is enough evidence for those who want to believe but not enough to force others to believe who don't want to. That is how the spiritual universe is set up by God. He is allowing us to be who we really are. And of course, there are consequences to our choices. Perhaps eternal consequences.

Perhaps that's how you think. But you shouldn't project your faults onto others.

 

[DZoolander]

Well, like I said before, atheism to me is quite simple to understand. It's nothing more than saying "Hey, heard about this thing called 'God' today. Sounded bogus to me."

Really there's no more to it than that.

As for "accepting" all of the various scientific theories as "true" - I don't think most atheists I know accept various scientific theories with the same degree of unquestioned certainty that religious people approach "God".

I spent a good percentage of my life as an atheist - and I can tell you that certain theories give me more problems than others. The Big Bang is one of them. Something about that theory (and I'm not going to go into all of the details as to why) doesn't ring as true to me. It's my hunch that it's a mistake to try and find a "beginning" and an "end" to everything. While a natural thing to do - I just don't think the universe works that way. Talking about a big bang in order to satisfy that desire for there to be a beginning is really no different than believing in a God in order to satisfy the desire for there to be a beginning.

While I had a hard time accepting the big bang as being "true", that doesn't mean that I had to leap to the other option presented, which is believing that some benevolent sky fairy created everything. That seemed just as (if not more) problematic.

In short - I didn't need to *know* the answer. I was perfectly fine with hunches, suspicions of how things are, etc...and if I went my entire life without anyone giving me an answer that I was happy with or that made absolute sense to me - that was no skin off my tuchus. I've got other things to worry about. School, family, community, work, etc. Those are the real things in life that one ought to be focused on. The absolute answers to other esoteric questions are nice, but not something I need to get through life.

Most atheists I know are like that. The only thing they "know" (or rather "feel" to be true) is that God, or at least the way people describe God, just doesn't make sense to them as being true. Every other theory out there is subject to refinement, replacement, etc...as evidence becomes available. Some theories make more sense than others - and can be accepted/rejected without effecting the others. Like, believing evolution makes sense is not predicated on believing the big bang makes sense. You can have a higher degree of certainty/belief about one than the other. One isn't contingent upon the other the way that "faith" issues are.

 

[DZoolander]

Interesting...let me ask you, how small of a percentage of chance is it that this universe exists in the way that it does? If we consider the multiverse it would seem our existence is an infinitely small probability. However, inside the universe, our existence is 100% probable because it's true that we exist in this universe. What does this tell you about relying on percentages for truth? I think it should tell you that percentages can tell us nothing about what is actually true in regards to how or why this universe exists.

So the fact that only .003%(roughly) of the world's population believes in the Christian God should tell you nothing about the reality of this God existing.

If anything it should tell you to look at these scriptures a little closer:

Matthew 7:13
"Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it."

Matthew 22:14
"For many are invited, but few are chosen."

I think you were misreading what I was getting at in my post

The world's Christian population is far more than that. What I was getting at was when someone said "what about the millions that have had God speak to them? The majority who have?"

Not every Christian has had God speak to them. Most of the people I know are "Christian", and really the number who claim to have had any "direct" feeling from God are few and far between. Generally they're also the most devout and (I hate to say it) the kookiest of the bunch. Most I know believe simply because it's the thing to do in their minds, they're hedging their bets, etc. "Better to be safe than sorry" kind of people, ya know?

But those that have spoken to God and had God give an answer back? Within the realm of my experience - they're definitely in the minority.

 

[AirPo]

If that is what you think you know nothing about autistic people but it is always interesting to read what people think they know about autistic people and even though they are not autistic they somehow know more about them than the person who is autistic.

We've had this conversation once already. Your comments proved my point. And for the record, I have an autistic child. So your latest comment proves my point again.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Thank you for sharing what you believe in.

Yes, I "believe" in dictionaries and the meaning of words.

You do too, how else would you understand this sentence?

 

[DogmaHunter]

Translation:

Biology is not a religion, it is a branch of one.

Haha.

The fact that Brinny marked that post as "liked", says everything we need to know.

Please........

You people should go live in a cave somewhere and take your distance from anything that science has provided for you. Which is just about everything you have in this 21st century technological society.

 

[brinny]

Yes, I "believe" in dictionaries and the meaning of words.

You do too, how else would you understand this sentence?

I've always valued dictionaries/encyclopedias.

Nevertheless, i was referring to your religion and what you believe in. It differs from my belief.

Yet you are entitled to believe in whatever you wish, even if you believe that you are an animal, and i do not believe i am an animal, based on my belief that i am made in the image of God, Who is not an animal, but Creator.

Nevertheless you are entitled to any beliefs that you wish.

 

[DogmaHunter]

But is it reasonable to assume?

No.

That is the question and the point I'm trying to make.

And I have repeatedly explained why the only rational position is "i don't know" when one doesn't know.

If we don't know something, then we have no choice but to assume a possible truth

No. YOU don't have a choice, because you have created this black-and-white bubble for yourself in which you are allergic to the words "i don't know".

This is the only way progress is made.

No. Progress is never made by simply assuming or believing things.

 

[DogmaHunter]

I've always valued dictionaries/encyclopedias.

Clearly, you do not. Otherwise, you would have no problem with the fact that Homo Sapiens belongs to the kingdom of animalia.

Nevertheless, i was referring to your religion and what you believe in. It differs from my belief.

I'm an atheist. I don't have a religion.

Yet you are entitled to believe in whatever you wish, even if you believe that you are an animal, and i do not believe i am an animal, based on my belief that i am made in the image of God, Who is not an animal, but Creator.

Homo Sapiens is a mammal, belonging to the kingdom of animalia. Fact.

Nevertheless you are entitled to any beliefs that you wish.

Thank you.
You are too. But you are NOT entitled to your "own" facts.

 

[brinny]

Clearly, you do not. Otherwise, you would have no problem with the fact that Homo Sapiens belongs to the kingdom of animalia.



I'm an atheist. I don't have a religion.



Homo Sapiens is a mammal, belonging to the kingdom of animalia. Fact.



Thank you.
You are too. But you are NOT entitled to your "own" facts.

I have no objection to your opinion based on what you believe.

My belief differs.

 

[DogmaHunter]

I have no objection to your opinion based on what you believe.
My belief differs.

I've decided that you are intellectualy dishonest and/or incapable of comprehending the difference between a fact, an opinion and a religious belief.

Sleep tight.


EDIT: I just noticed that your profile picture says "Trump for President".
I see now how futile it is to try and engage you in an adult conversation.

 

[brinny]

I've decided that you are intellectualy dishonest and/or incapable of comprehending the difference between a fact, an opinion and a religious belief.

Sleep tight.

You are entitled to your opinion.