An Observation of Atheists on CF

[feral]

myself am a convert from agnosticism, and in retrospect I can plainly see how God was reaching out to me - (some people call it a 'hole' that needed to be filled) So in observation of professed Atheists on this board, I wonder if they feel a 'hole', or if they wonder why "God" is so often at the forefront of their mind.
Why would an Atheist spend so much time discussing God with people?
If you die, and thats it; its over - why waste your precious minutes discussing theology?

I find it interesting to discuss religion and issues for a variety of reasons. One, I like to hear other opinions and occasionally learn new ways of doing things or looking at issues. I was once very pro-choice. After two years of looking into the issue a great deal I'm more pro-life for several reasons, although still somewhat approving of choice in certain instances. Learning other perspectives is important and educational.

Two...I don't need back patting or everyone to agree with me. I like defending my views and sharpening them, having to prove them or explain them helps me to understand and explore my opinons. I like challenge. It's dull when everyone agrees with me.

Three...I'm agnostic...and open to possibilities. Religion fascinates me. I'm drawn to studying, chatting, learning about it, etc...even when I'm bashing it's like an addiction. Is that god calling? Maybe. Is that me wanting meaning in a godless world? Maybe. Is that just a result of my particularly messed up history and life? Could be. Why not find out...?

 

[the_malevolent_milk_man]

You still don't disprove my point. Instinct is simply the word they used to label the knowledge that each animal is born with.

How did beavers "learn" that a dam needs to be concave to be the strongest? How do they know that water needs to be high engouh so it doesnt freeze all the way through during winter?

How do termites WHO ARE BLIND know how to construct skyscrapers with air conditionning tunnels and specialized chambers.

I covered beavers in the other thread, though I used spiders since they're a solitary animal and the only possibility for their web design is genetics. The same applies to termites. Their being blind has nothing to do with it. If you're in a dark tunnel you can't see anyways, eyes would just be a nuisance if you rarely if ever see light.

http://www.christianforums.com/t50768&page=14

Ya chimps have a good learning capacity, but they're copy catters, not inventors. Monkey see Monkey do! Yes?

The difference between humans and animal is that we can obtain all the skills that animals have inately by developing it with our intellect.

We're not close relatives tot he beaver cause we both build dams. And to say we're close relatives to the monkey is even worse.

Still doesn't change the fact that primates are very intelligent. It took our ancestors millions of years just to advance in the shape of their stone tools and they had larger brains and hands better suited to tool building. Nobody would say that beavers (a rodent) are smarter than the advanced primates. Rats, a rodent as well, build nests according to their genes. If it has to do with genes then it can be affected by evolution. Much like the spiders nest the shape of the dam is a result of successful design. Beavers who's instincts (genes) told them to build a convex dam probabbly didn't live long enough to reproduce, thus only the concave design was passed down.

Duh we're not close relatives to the beavars because we share a similar behavior. We're relatives to chimps because our DNA is almost identical and hominids can be traced back to primate origins.

And please don't say evolution is a fact. Every day there are hypotheses about how it works, they all come and go...We're still trying to finalize it and its jjust not happening.

Gravity is a Law of Physics. Just like Electro-Magnetism. They are immutable laws because you will always get the same results.

Where these forces come from or HOW they act is a totally different story...and yes, this part is theoretical...

Evolution itself is evolving, you're right. As more and more evidence comes to light some aspects of it may need to be revised. So what's your point? it's a work in progress, nobody has ever declared evolution a finished project because there is so much yet to know. However nothing has falsified it in it's entirity, there has been no fatal blow. Darwin didn't know about DNA and genetics when he wrote his original theory. Does that mean that evolution is untrue because he was wrong about that? No, it just means that an aspect of it was wrong but the theory still works (even better) with the new evidence.

That's the thing about evolution, it's not going to be exactly the same everytime. There are so many variables to consider. Mutations, viability of a variation, breeding paterns, enviroment changes, and yes, even pure dumb luck. Only a fool would try to understand evolution in a way that neglects it's variability.

We know the source of evolution (genetic variability), we know how it propogates (natural selection), and we've used it to alter animals thru selective breeding in a very short geological time span (every domestic animal and plant).

Your arguements, even in the other thread, rely solely on the concept of ignorance. Just because it's hard to explain or understand doesn't mean it falsifies a theory. It just leaves a big question mark that awaits evidence to either prove or falsify it.

 

[vajradhara]

Strawmen this strawmen that....I hear the word Strawmen coming out of atheists daily! Come on

Mikman, thanx for the welcome

[/font]

You still don't disprove my point. Instinct is simply the word they used to label the knowledge that each animal is born with.

How did beavers "learn" that a dam needs to be concave to be the strongest? How do they know that water needs to be high engouh so it doesnt freeze all the way through during winter?

How do termites WHO ARE BLIND know how to construct skyscrapers with air conditionning tunnels and specialized chambers.

Ya chimps have a good learning capacity, but they're copy catters, not inventors. Monkey see Monkey do! Yes?

The difference between humans and animal is that we can obtain all the skills that animals have inately by developing it with our intellect.

We're not close relatives tot he beaver cause we both build dams. And to say we're close relatives to the monkey is even worse.

And please don't say evolution is a fact. Every day there are hypotheses about how it works, they all come and go...We're still trying to finalize it and its jjust not happening.

Gravity is a Law of Physics. Just like Electro-Magnetism. They are immutable laws because you will always get the same results.

Where these forces come from or HOW they act is a totally different story...and yes, this part is theoretical...

Namaste mo.mentum,

thanks for the post.

gravity as well as all classical systems breaks at a singularity, ergo, they are not immutable laws. this is why Quantum Mechanical Theory has been put forth.. we can observe that the classical physics breaks down at the singularity... in essence, the classical systems all work on large bodies in the universe.. as we get smaller and smaller, we obeserve that the classical systems don't account for our observations correctly.. hence.. a new theory.

evolution is a valid scientific theory. it conforms to our obeservations, it makes definite predictions that can be tested and will be abandoned if falsified.

science is not in the business of proving anything, as that is beyond it's abitlity. science simply observes what's going on, generates a theory to explain it, tests the theory to see if it fails. should the theory fail at any time, it's abandonded. however, should it not fail, it can be accepted until such time as it's falsefied. pretty straight forward really.

as for humans being able to acquire all the skills that an animal has innately... i'm not sure what you mean here... to date, i've seen no human spinning a web to catch anything.. let alone insects to eat.

 

[TooCurious]

"So in observation of professed Atheists on this board, I wonder if they feel a 'hole',"

Nope; in fact, it actually feels better no longer having that Pascal's wager-esque anxiety hanging over my head, and knowing that I am responsible for what I do with my life, knowing that I don't have to play a guessing game with some omnipotent being with my eternal fate as the stakes. The cognitive dissonance between my own intuitions and conscience and what my former religion taught me must be true is gone. The only thing I feel like my life lacks is financial stability and a boyfriend, which will probably come in time. I've never regretted my lack of theism.

Coincidentally, as I write this response, Three Dog Night's "Heaven is in your mind" came up on my playlist... "guiding your vision to heaven, and heaven is in your mind..." Beautiful lyrics.

"or if they wonder why "God" is so often at the forefront of their mind."

It's not so much "God", per se, that is on my mind, as what religious people do with the idea. I don't want to hijack the thread with everyone's opinions of George W. Bush, but suffice it to say that I am concerned for the continued separation of church and state under his regime. I would think about religion a lot less if the religious didn't make it an issue in my life. The whole, "God, protect me from your followers!" schtick.


"Why would an Atheist spend so much time discussing God with people?"

Like so many of the other atheists here, I love to debate, to argue. It pushes me to refine my approaches to logical arguments, and keep my debating and analytical skills sharp.

Also, I've always been interested in mythologies and what people believe/d. I've studied Greco-Roman mythology in college, and taken an independent interest in Egyptian, Norse, Celtic, and native Central American beliefs. The sources of and motivations for these beliefs are fascinating to me, from a sociological perspective. As a person without god-belief, I see no practical distinction between ancient religions and modern ones, and thus pursue learning about people's beliefs regarding Christianity in a similar fashion.

Mostly, though, I like to argue.

"If you die, and thats it; its over - why waste your precious minutes discussing theology?"

It'd be awfully morbid to live one's life with the attitude of, "Yikes, only 57 years, 8 months, 23 days, and 7 hours until I die and cease to exist!" especially since we don't actually know when we're going to die. If there is no afterlife (a matter on which I'm still undecided), then this life is all that matters, and should be spent doing things which are enjoyable and worthwhile. I consider the debates and discussions here to be, at least occasionally, enjoyable and worthwhile. Shouldn't I?

Does that help answer your question? I don't speak for all the atheists here by any means, but for me, I'm here to have fun and hopefully contribute to thought-inspiring debate. I think about and discuss theism because it has an impact on my life through the actions of some theists, whether I want it to or not. I am content and secure in my atheism, but I see no reason to end all discussion because of that fact.

 

[Jet Black]

Strawmen this strawmen that....I hear the word Strawmen coming out of atheists daily! Come on

well I see strawmen being built by creationists daily, touché.

 

[mo.mentum]

Ugh. Ok here are the big guns.

"A religion old or new, that stressed the magnificence of the universe as revealed by modern science, might be able to draw forth reserves of reverence and awe hardly tapped by the conventional faiths. Sooner or later, such a religion will emerge."
Carl Sagan, Pale Blue Dot (1994)

Now let's see. I have just the faith that would fit this description! But wait, a few more quotations...

In its standard form, the big bang theory assumes that all parts of the universe began expanding simultaneously. But how could all the different parts of the universe synchronize the beginning of their expansion? Who gave the command?
Andre Linde, Professor of Cosmology
Andrei Linde, "The Self-Reproducing Inflationary Universe", Scientific American, vol. 271, 1994, p. 48

The explosive vigour of the universe is thus matched with almost unbelievable accuracy to its gravitating power. The big bang was not evidently, any old bang, but an explosion of exquisitely arranged magnitude.
Paul Davies, Professor of Theoretical Physics
Paul Davies, Superforce: The Search for a Grand Unified Theory of Nature, 1984, p. 184

Calculations by the British mathematician Roger Penrose have shown that the
probability of a universe conducive to life occurring by chance is in 10x10^123. The phrase "extremely unlikely" is inadequate to describe this possibility.

So now let's look at some Scripture that reflects all the viewpoints together. Let's do this with a spirit of sincerity. Yes?

"He (God) is the Originator of the heavens and the earth…" [Q6:101]

"It is We Who have built the universe with (Our creative) power, and, verily, it is We Who are steadily expanding it." [Q51:47]

"Do those who are disbelievers not see that the heavens and the earth were sewn together and then We unstitched them and that We made from water every living thing? So will they not have faith?" [Q21: 30]

"He makes night merge into day and day merge into night, and He has made the sun and moon subservient, each one running until a specified time. That is Allah, your Lord. The Kingdom is His. Those you call on besides Him have no power over even the smallest speck." [Q35: 13]

"He to whom the kingdom of the heavens and the earth belongs. He does not have a son and He has no partner in the Kingdom. He created everything and determined it most exactly." [Q25:2]

"The sun and the moon follow courses (exactly) computed. [Q55:5]

"We did not create heaven and earth and everything between them to no purpose. That is the opinion of those who are disbelievers." [Q38:27]

"In the creation of the heavens and earth, and the alternation of the night and day, and the ships which sail the seas to people's benefit, and the water which God sends down from the sky- by which He brings the earth to life when it was dead and scatters about in it creatures of every kind - and the varying direction of the winds, and the clouds subservient between heaven and earth, there are Signs for people who use their intellect." [Q2:164]

So ya, you guessed it. This Scripture is the Bible. OH WAIT NO. I meant the Qur'an. I included a very small fractrion of such verses which address man's power of reason and intellect. Want more?

Indeed, God is Greatest.

 

[Jet Black]

Ugh. Ok here are the big guns.

"A religion old or new, that stressed the magnificence of the universe as revealed by modern science, might be able to draw forth reserves of reverence and awe hardly tapped by the conventional faiths. Sooner or later, such a religion will emerge."
Carl Sagan, Pale Blue Dot (1994)

Now let's see. I have just the faith that would fit this description! But wait, a few more quotations...

In its standard form, the big bang theory assumes that all parts of the universe began expanding simultaneously. But how could all the different parts of the universe synchronize the beginning of their expansion? Who gave the command?
Andre Linde, Professor of Cosmology
Andrei Linde, "The Self-Reproducing Inflationary Universe", Scientific American, vol. 271, 1994, p. 48

The explosive vigour of the universe is thus matched with almost unbelievable accuracy to its gravitating power. The big bang was not evidently, any old bang, but an explosion of exquisitely arranged magnitude.
Paul Davies, Professor of Theoretical Physics
Paul Davies, Superforce: The Search for a Grand Unified Theory of Nature, 1984, p. 184

Calculations by the British mathematician Roger Penrose have shown that the
probability of a universe conducive to life occurring by chance is in 10x10^123. The phrase "extremely unlikely" is inadequate to describe this possibility.

So now let's look at some Scripture that reflects all the viewpoints together. Let's do this with a spirit of sincerity. Yes?

"He (God) is the Originator of the heavens and the earth…" [Q6:101]

"It is We Who have built the universe with (Our creative) power, and, verily, it is We Who are steadily expanding it." [Q51:47]


"Do those who are disbelievers not see that the heavens and the earth were sewn together and then We unstitched them and that We made from water every living thing? So will they not have faith?" [Q21: 30]


"He makes night merge into day and day merge into night, and He has made the sun and moon subservient, each one running until a specified time. That is Allah, your Lord. The Kingdom is His. Those you call on besides Him have no power over even the smallest speck." [Q35: 13]

"He to whom the kingdom of the heavens and the earth belongs. He does not have a son and He has no partner in the Kingdom. He created everything and determined it most exactly." [Q25:2]

"The sun and the moon follow courses (exactly) computed. [Q55:5]

"We did not create heaven and earth and everything between them to no purpose. That is the opinion of those who are disbelievers." [Q38:27]

"In the creation of the heavens and earth, and the alternation of the night and day, and the ships which sail the seas to people's benefit, and the water which God sends down from the sky- by which He brings the earth to life when it was dead and scatters about in it creatures of every kind - and the varying direction of the winds, and the clouds subservient between heaven and earth, there are Signs for people who use their intellect." [Q2:164]

So ya, you guessed it. This Scripture is the Bible. OH WAIT NO. I meant the Qur'an. I included a very small fractrion of such verses which address man's power of reason and intellect. Want more?

Indeed, God is Greatest.

it seems Allah has never heard of chaos theory or quantum mechanics then.

 

[Blindfaith]

Don't confuse the two Jet.

 

[Jet Black]

Don't confuse the two Jet.

Chaos and Quantum, or Allah and God? There are some physical errors in those Quran quotes, and it is those I am referring to. the mention of God at the end got me a bit as to which god exactly mo was talking about....

 

[mo.mentum]

Jet. The Qur'an isn't a book of science. It hints at natural phenomenon, it doesn't explain them. As our understanding of science grows, the verses become clearer.

Anyway, you didn't say how these two theories would invalidate the statements in the verses. Please explain

PS: Allah = God. It's the arabic word for "The God". Arab speaking Jews and Christians say Allah when referring to God in arabic. So it's not some other God.

 

[the_malevolent_milk_man]

Allah is a god, as the christian God is a god. They share some common points but also have many differences. The christian God is different from Allah and is different from the Jewish version. They originate from roughly the same being but the end product after each religion has added their own touch is very different.

 

[mo.mentum]

Yes indeed milk_man. Since each of these conceptions of God originated at a different time and in different socioeconomic/cultural settings, it's only natural that the idea of what God is changes.

The important thing is that He is constantly the Eternal, the Creator and the Merciful, among other things. We may disagree on His nature, but who are we to argue about such a thing if we cannot fully conceive of Him.

We leave it to God to judge between us in the end and do our best to work good deeds and live good lives with those around us.

 

[the_malevolent_milk_man]

I can agree with that, sounds like a logical and just God. I'm only 99.9999999% atheist. That 0.0000001% of me that is unsure thinks that if there is a god, or gods, they'd behave like you described.

However I have problems with literal accounts of religious creation stories and God constantly smiting people. The whole blind faith thing in christianity doesn't really jive with me either, don't know how Islam is on that.

 

[mo.mentum]

I can agree with that, sounds like a logical and just God. I'm only 99.9999999% atheist. That 0.0000001% of me that is unsure thinks that if there is a god, or gods, they'd behave like you described.

However I have problems with literal accounts of religious creation stories and God constantly smiting people. The whole blind faith thing in christianity doesn't really jive with me either, don't know how Islam is on that.

Well milk_man, let me tell you one thing. God doesn't expect us to believe in Him blindly. There is no concept of blind faith in Islam. There is a question of choice. You either believe or disbelieve, it's your choice.

And in order to stem any doubt, God provides Signs for us His creation by which we can recognize His presence. As i always say, God is in the details.

There are Qur'anic references to natural phenomenon that could not have been known to the nomadic arabs, or anyone really, at that time. These statements direct our attention to these phenomenon and when we study them, we see how miraculous and perfect they are. He shows us His Signs constantly. He has put His stamp on all of creation.

And those who have no knowledge say: "Why does God not speak to us (face to face) or why does not a Sign come to us?" Those who came before them said similar words of no importance. Their hearts are alike. For We have indeed made plain the Signs for people who believe with certainty. (Q2:118)

Have they not looked at the heaven above them, how We have made it and adorned it, and there are no rifts in it? (Q50:6)

God points our attention to different parts of His creation by questioning us about them. When you read the Qur'an, you fee like you're having a one on one debate with Him because of the kinds of questions that are asked, and the answers implied.

As for smiting people. In the Qur'an, God tells us of many peoples He has wiped off the face of the Earth, but not before sending them prophets and warners to make them see the Truth. Once they have refused His message, only then did He carry out punishment. Also this is not without reason, in order to redeem some of their sins of idolatry, He would punish them in this world in order to decrease their torment in the next. He is All-Merciful, Most Kind.

Just in the same way, whenever We sent a Warner before you (O Muhammad) to any people, the wealthy ones among them said: "We found our fathers following a certain religion, and we will certainly follow in their footsteps". (Q43:23)

But so is the arrogance of mankind. The same arrogance which got Satan expelled from Divine presence, that is true Hell.

What they spend in the life of this (material) world may be likened to a wind which brings a nipping frost: It strikes and destroys the harvest of men who have wronged their own souls: it is not God that has wronged them, but they wrong themselves.(Q3:117)

Another personal favourite:
"O assembly of Jinns and Men! Came there not unto you messengers from amongst yourselves, setting forth unto you My Signs, and warning you of the meeting of this (Judgement) Day of yours?" They will say: "We bear witness against ourselves." But it was the life of this world that deceived them. So against themselves will they bear witness that they rejected Faith. Thus the messengers were sent, for your Lord would not destroy any towns unjustly while their occupants were unwarned. To all are degrees (or ranks) according to their deeds: for your Lord is not unmindful of anything that they do. Your Lord is Self-sufficient, full of Mercy: if it were His Will, He could destroy you, and in your place appoint whom He wills as your successors, even as He raised you up from the posterity of other people, generation after generation. (Q6:130-133)

 

[the_malevolent_milk_man]

I wouldn't be so quick to discount ancient cultures knowledge, many of them had surprisingly advanced astronomy, mathematics, and medical knowledge. Granted it was mainly limited to observations and rarely answered "why?". What are some specific instances from the Qur'an? Only saw one that mentioned the sun and moon following courses which is vague to say the least. Is there an online Qur'an? Should be an interesting read to see how it compares to the bible.

 

[Jet Black]

For We have indeed made plain the Signs for people who believe with certainty. (Q2:118)

this is a prime example of standard religious thinking; things are obvious to those who believe. hence the "obvious things" are useless and meaningless to someone who does not believe.

 

[mo.mentum]

Milkman, a readily available version in multiple languages and audio is at http://www.islamicity.com or any other Islamic site. Google will return a few good results.

JetBlack. I was giving a small example, please review my post #46. I could spend the next hour explaining a couple of others but I'm too tired, so I'm referring you to this link:

http://www.harunyahya.com/A_tr4.php

 

[vajradhara]

Milkman, a readily available version in multiple languages and audio is at http://www.islamicity.com or any other Islamic site. Google will return a few good results.

JetBlack. I was giving a small example, please review my post #46. I could spend the next hour explaining a couple of others but I'm too tired, so I'm referring you to this link:

http://www.harunyahya.com/A_tr4.php

Namaste mo.mentum,

argh.. not harunyahya.... that guys interpetaion of Buddhism is so completely flawed that he might as well have been making it up and talking about his own imaginary version

 

[mo.mentum]

Hey Vaj,

Ya I know about that part. That is why after speaking to you, i disregard his analysis of Buddhism.

However, his approach to matters that only concern Islam and the Qur'an, he's pretty accurate and is generating shockwaves in the Muslim world.

He hasn't really brought anything new when he looks at the scientific statements in the Qur'an. These were known to be there for centuries, just with modern science, more of the verses have been uncovered.

I've undertaken my own study of the facts and have to agree with him. So i quote him on these.

But again, when he tries to interpert another religion, i stay away because it's not our place. But i cannot put aside everything he's said just cause of that.

As an anthropologist, i have an eye for cultural misconceptions.

 

[vajradhara]

Hey Vaj,

Ya I know about that part. That is why after speaking to you, i disregard his analysis of Buddhism.

However, his approach to matters that only concern Islam and the Qur'an, he's pretty accurate and is generating shockwaves in the Muslim world.

He hasn't really brought anything new when he looks at the scientific statements in the Qur'an. These were known to be there for centuries, just with modern science, more of the verses have been uncovered.

I've undertaken my own study of the facts and have to agree with him. So i quote him on these.

But again, when he tries to interpert another religion, i stay away because it's not our place. But i cannot put aside everything he's said just cause of that.

As an anthropologist, i have an eye for cultural misconceptions.

namaste mo.mentum,

well.. since you're grounded enough in your tradition to spot when he's wrong.. you should have no issues.... my worries are for folks that are so strong..