Atheism's Burden of Proof

Shadow · Dec 19, 2017

In my understanding, Atheism is the positive denial of the existence of god/a deity and I believe this is in fact the understanding of the majority of Christians as well. This is not a widely accepted view amongst atheists on online communities even if it has a long history with philosophers such as Ludwig Feuerbach, Karl Marx and Frederich Nietzsche to its name. This has admittedly been the cause of a great deal of frustration and confusion and my beliefs are therefore not as fully developed as I would want them to be because there are few, if any, people who I can discuss this understanding of atheism with.

I am, if you wish, a militant atheist and want to know how best to deal with the challenge of proving that Atheism- the cliam that there is no god- is true. It would seem reasonable to ask religious believers, especially Christians given it is the worlds largest religion, what they imagine such a position would look like and what it would have to do to compete effectively in a online discussion.

To my knowledge, this view of Atheism relies on at least two assumptions: a) that it is possible to know god does not exist and b) that it is possible to demonstrate it. I would therefore like to ask:

1) What Christians would expect Atheists to offer as arguments or evidence that disproving the existence of God is possible, either philosophically or scientifically, rather than saying it is impossible (i.e. Strong Agnosticism).

2) What Christians would expect Atheists to offer as arguments or evidence that disproving the existence of God is a statement of fact about the objective world, rather than Atheism being subjective belief, (or faith/dogma/religion) of a single individual.

3) Are there any specific elements of Christian Belief and Theology that would have to be shown to be false to demonstrate that Christianity, is in its entirety, based on natural causes and was not authored by a deity but by man himself.

4) What elements of Christian Belief, such as historical accounts of the bible, the historical existence of Jesus, the legacy of scientific and philosophical christian thought or christian morals, would you say could be independently verified as true regardless as to whether God exists and would therefore continue to have value to an Atheist?

I'm hoping that the "wisdom of crowds" means that collectively Christians drawing on their own experiences and knowledge will be able to give me a picture of areas I will need to research offline to better understand and clarify my own beliefs. I hope the exchange that follows is mutually beneficial and I look forward to your responses. Long and detailed responses are very welcome.

MyGivenNameIsKeith · Dec 19, 2017

This is what the Bible says on the matter.
Psalms 14:1 To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David. The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
While it is pertinent to understand why we, as Christians, believe in God, his Son Jesus, and the Holy Spirit, it is not a mystery, nor is it unknown to you. We go through the same things, the Bible is available to you, the same as it is to us.
It is more pertinent in this instance to ask, why don't you, the atheist, believe in God?

Tom 1 · Dec 19, 2017

Red Economist said:
In my understanding, Atheism is the positive denial of the existence of god/a deity and I believe this is in fact the understanding of the majority of Christians as well. This is not a widely accepted view amongst atheists on online communities even if it has a long history with philosophers such as Ludwig Feuerbach, Karl Marx and Frederich Nietzsche to its name. This has admittedly been the cause of a great deal of frustration and confusion and my beliefs are therefore not as fully developed as I would want them to be because there are few, if any, people who I can discuss this understanding of atheism with.

I am, if you wish, a militant atheist and want to know how best to deal with the challenge of proving that Atheism- the cliam that there is no god- is true. It would seem reasonable to ask religious believers, especially Christians given it is the worlds largest religion, what they imagine such a position would look like and what it would have to do to compete effectively in a online discussion.

To my knowledge, this view of Atheism relies on at least two assumptions: a) that it is possible to know god does not exist and b) that it is possible to demonstrate it. I would therefore like to ask:

1) What Christians would expect Atheists to offer as arguments or evidence that disproving the existence of God is possible, either philosophically or scientifically, rather than saying it is impossible (i.e. Strong Agnosticism).

2) What Christians would expect Atheists to offer as arguments or evidence that disproving the existence of God is a statement of fact about the objective world, rather than Atheism being subjective belief, (or faith/dogma/religion) of a single individual.

3) Are there any specific elements of Christian Belief and Theology that would have to be shown to be false to demonstrate that Christianity, is in its entirety, based on natural causes and was not authored by a deity but by man himself.

4) What elements of Christian Belief, such as historical accounts of the bible, the historical existence of Jesus, the legacy of scientific and philosophical christian thought or christian morals, would you say could be independently verified as true regardless as to whether God exists and would therefore continue to have value to an Atheist?

I'm hoping that the "wisdom of crowds" means that collectively Christians drawing on their own experiences and knowledge will be able to give me a picture of areas I will need to research offline to better understand and clarify my own beliefs. I hope the exchange that follows is mutually beneficial and I look forward to your responses. Long and detailed responses are very welcome.

I would suggest defining types of proof and using these to build separate arguments. I’m hoping you have a lot of time on your hands lol as you’ll be doing a lot of research! ;-)

Tolworth John · Dec 19, 2017

Red Economist said:
What Christians would expect Atheists to offer as arguments or evidence that disproving the existence of God is possible

I would expect scientific evidence as to how the universe came into being or philisophical ideas that show that it is possible for 'nothing' to cause'something' to exists.

If you are talking about disproving Christianity.
Then to demonstrate that Jesus did not rise from the dead.

Conversly the inability to do either of these should make the atheist re examine his/her position on atheism as without a rational bases for it, it is merely wishfull thinking or at best a faith based belief.

Shadow · Dec 19, 2017

MyGivenNameIsKeith said:
This is what the Bible says on the matter.
Psalms 14:1 To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David. The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
While it is pertinent to understand why we, as Christians, believe in God, his Son Jesus, and the Holy Spirit, it is not a mystery, nor is it unknown to you. We go through the same things, the Bible is available to you, the same as it is to us.
It is more pertinent in this instance to ask, why don't you, the atheist, believe in God?

Because even if God was real I probably wouldn't submit to a higher power. Proving that there is no god would be a liberation from the fear of punishment by either organised religion in this life or eternal punishment in the next. It would be contrary to my interests to believe that I only have value as God's creation and exist to serve god rather than myself (or perhaps "humanity" in general). In my experience, and it is a very primitive and instinctual sensation than a rational argument, my pursuit of Freedom has more value than God's will, purpose or creation.

Tom Farebrother said:
I would suggest defining types of proof and using these to build separate arguments. I’m hoping you have a lot of time on your hands lol as you’ll be doing a lot of research! ;-)

Lol. Yes, I have quite a bit of time on my hands but I need to find a way to use it wisely.

Tom 1 · Dec 19, 2017

Red Economist said:
In my understanding, Atheism is the positive denial of the existence of god/a deity and I believe this is in fact the understanding of the majority of Christians as well. This is not a widely accepted view amongst atheists on online communities even if it has a long history with philosophers such as Ludwig Feuerbach, Karl Marx and Frederich Nietzsche to its name. This has admittedly been the cause of a great deal of frustration and confusion and my beliefs are therefore not as fully developed as I would want them to be because there are few, if any, people who I can discuss this understanding of atheism with.

I am, if you wish, a militant atheist and want to know how best to deal with the challenge of proving that Atheism- the cliam that there is no god- is true. It would seem reasonable to ask religious believers, especially Christians given it is the worlds largest religion, what they imagine such a position would look like and what it would have to do to compete effectively in a online discussion.

To my knowledge, this view of Atheism relies on at least two assumptions: a) that it is possible to know god does not exist and b) that it is possible to demonstrate it. I would therefore like to ask:

1) What Christians would expect Atheists to offer as arguments or evidence that disproving the existence of God is possible, either philosophically or scientifically, rather than saying it is impossible (i.e. Strong Agnosticism).

2) What Christians would expect Atheists to offer as arguments or evidence that disproving the existence of God is a statement of fact about the objective world, rather than Atheism being subjective belief, (or faith/dogma/religion) of a single individual.

3) Are there any specific elements of Christian Belief and Theology that would have to be shown to be false to demonstrate that Christianity, is in its entirety, based on natural causes and was not authored by a deity but by man himself.

4) What elements of Christian Belief, such as historical accounts of the bible, the historical existence of Jesus, the legacy of scientific and philosophical christian thought or christian morals, would you say could be independently verified as true regardless as to whether God exists and would therefore continue to have value to an Atheist?

I'm hoping that the "wisdom of crowds" means that collectively Christians drawing on their own experiences and knowledge will be able to give me a picture of areas I will need to research offline to better understand and clarify my own beliefs. I hope the exchange that follows is mutually beneficial and I look forward to your responses. Long and detailed responses are very welcome.

If you have the time research into the historical development of the church and the recording and transmission of the gospels, e.g arguments on early and late dating of the gospels, would provide a lot of background info. There’s a lot of material to get through though, and the books that really take this stuff seriously are pretty dense with info

Halbhh · Dec 19, 2017

Red Economist said:
In my understanding, Atheism is the positive denial of the existence of god/a deity and I believe this is in fact the understanding of the majority of Christians as well. This is not a widely accepted view amongst atheists on online communities even if it has a long history with philosophers such as Ludwig Feuerbach, Karl Marx and Frederich Nietzsche to its name. This has admittedly been the cause of a great deal of frustration and confusion and my beliefs are therefore not as fully developed as I would want them to be because there are few, if any, people who I can discuss this understanding of atheism with.

I am, if you wish, a militant atheist and want to know how best to deal with the challenge of proving that Atheism- the cliam that there is no god- is true. It would seem reasonable to ask religious believers, especially Christians given it is the worlds largest religion, what they imagine such a position would look like and what it would have to do to compete effectively in a online discussion.

To my knowledge, this view of Atheism relies on at least two assumptions: a) that it is possible to know god does not exist and b) that it is possible to demonstrate it. I would therefore like to ask:

1) What Christians would expect Atheists to offer as arguments or evidence that disproving the existence of God is possible, either philosophically or scientifically, rather than saying it is impossible (i.e. Strong Agnosticism).

2) What Christians would expect Atheists to offer as arguments or evidence that disproving the existence of God is a statement of fact about the objective world, rather than Atheism being subjective belief, (or faith/dogma/religion) of a single individual.

3) Are there any specific elements of Christian Belief and Theology that would have to be shown to be false to demonstrate that Christianity, is in its entirety, based on natural causes and was not authored by a deity but by man himself.

4) What elements of Christian Belief, such as historical accounts of the bible, the historical existence of Jesus, the legacy of scientific and philosophical christian thought or christian morals, would you say could be independently verified as true regardless as to whether God exists and would therefore continue to have value to an Atheist?

I'm hoping that the "wisdom of crowds" means that collectively Christians drawing on their own experiences and knowledge will be able to give me a picture of areas I will need to research offline to better understand and clarify my own beliefs. I hope the exchange that follows is mutually beneficial and I look forward to your responses. Long and detailed responses are very welcome.

If you haven't observed "dark matter" -- the unknown cause of galaxies rotating faster than the ordinary matter in them can account for, by a large factor -- then you'd be like the many astronomers and physicists that have tried to find direct evidence of it.

It's never been found, despite much effort.

You could postively assert it does not exist.

But that would not be a scientific attitude.

MyGivenNameIsKeith · Dec 19, 2017

But, if I may, expand on my reply a bit with a few more verses that clarify the beliefs of someone like myself.
Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
We all ask questions about things that are unknown. One that primarily comes up in religious conversations is what happens after we die? What do you think will happen? What do you hope for?
Another that can be brought up is things like love. We can't see love. But we know it exists because of what people do out of love. This is a decent parallel to "evidence of things not seen".

Though this may sound strange and confusing, I ask you to bear with me and ponder this.
Don't look for things that you can see, look for things that you can't see. Ever heard the expression "Read between the lines"? Same principle. If you look for reasons NOT to believe, you'll find millions of them. I'm asking you to step outside the box and look with "spiritual eyes" for JUST ONE reason to believe. If you find one, then you are making one step in the right direction.
No Christian was born a Christian. They at some point in their lives, were non-believers. Something happened to all of us that changed our lives. The something that happened, while different in form, still had the same effect. Maybe someone got in a near death experience, lost a child, got heart broken, even a kid growing up and realizing they are going to die someday. The effect being, these are things that make you ask the hard questions I brought up. This day and age people tend to ignore the concept of death all their lives, which if you think about it, is a rather unhealthy way to go through life. Why do you think people drink and do drugs to the proportions they do and live miserable unfulfilled lives? There is a spiritual void we are all born with. We go through life attempting to fill it. As a Christian, God fills that void. That's why the Bible says all of creation is without excuse. We all feel that void.

Tom 1 · Dec 19, 2017

Red Economist said:
In my understanding, Atheism is the positive denial of the existence of god/a deity and I believe this is in fact the understanding of the majority of Christians as well. This is not a widely accepted view amongst atheists on online communities even if it has a long history with philosophers such as Ludwig Feuerbach, Karl Marx and Frederich Nietzsche to its name. This has admittedly been the cause of a great deal of frustration and confusion and my beliefs are therefore not as fully developed as I would want them to be because there are few, if any, people who I can discuss this understanding of atheism with.

I am, if you wish, a militant atheist and want to know how best to deal with the challenge of proving that Atheism- the cliam that there is no god- is true. It would seem reasonable to ask religious believers, especially Christians given it is the worlds largest religion, what they imagine such a position would look like and what it would have to do to compete effectively in a online discussion.

To my knowledge, this view of Atheism relies on at least two assumptions: a) that it is possible to know god does not exist and b) that it is possible to demonstrate it. I would therefore like to ask:

1) What Christians would expect Atheists to offer as arguments or evidence that disproving the existence of God is possible, either philosophically or scientifically, rather than saying it is impossible (i.e. Strong Agnosticism).

2) What Christians would expect Atheists to offer as arguments or evidence that disproving the existence of God is a statement of fact about the objective world, rather than Atheism being subjective belief, (or faith/dogma/religion) of a single individual.

3) Are there any specific elements of Christian Belief and Theology that would have to be shown to be false to demonstrate that Christianity, is in its entirety, based on natural causes and was not authored by a deity but by man himself.

4) What elements of Christian Belief, such as historical accounts of the bible, the historical existence of Jesus, the legacy of scientific and philosophical christian thought or christian morals, would you say could be independently verified as true regardless as to whether God exists and would therefore continue to have value to an Atheist?

I'm hoping that the "wisdom of crowds" means that collectively Christians drawing on their own experiences and knowledge will be able to give me a picture of areas I will need to research offline to better understand and clarify my own beliefs. I hope the exchange that follows is mutually beneficial and I look forward to your responses. Long and detailed responses are very welcome.

I would say that both the content of any argument and how you present it are equally important. The content as in it’ll need to be fairly watertight - for example Bart Erham uses info very selectively to present his arguments, and that quickly becomes very obvious to anyone who has any familiarity with the issues. In terms of presentation taking the subject seriously is important, whether you believe it or not. E.g Bertrand-Russell’s ‘why I am not a Christian’ is a good read, I don’t agree with him obviously but it’s evident that he really thought it through. Richard Dawkins on the other hand, although he’s fascinating when talking about biology, doesn’t show any evidence of any serious attempt to understand the other side of the argument, so his arguments seem superficial and one-sided. Picture having been convinced, through evidence that you think is reasonable, that there is intelligent life on Venus. Then imagine the difference between someone listening to you and presenting their own contrary evidence and arguing their point, and someone who refuses to listen to anything you say and just calls you an idiot.

Almost there · Dec 19, 2017

Red Economist said:
In my understanding, Atheism is the positive denial of the existence of god/a deity and I believe this is in fact the understanding of the majority of Christians as well. This is not a widely accepted view amongst atheists on online communities even if it has a long history with philosophers such as Ludwig Feuerbach, Karl Marx and Frederich Nietzsche to its name. This has admittedly been the cause of a great deal of frustration and confusion and my beliefs are therefore not as fully developed as I would want them to be because there are few, if any, people who I can discuss this understanding of atheism with.

I am, if you wish, a militant atheist and want to know how best to deal with the challenge of proving that Atheism- the cliam that there is no god- is true. It would seem reasonable to ask religious believers, especially Christians given it is the worlds largest religion, what they imagine such a position would look like and what it would have to do to compete effectively in a online discussion.

To my knowledge, this view of Atheism relies on at least two assumptions: a) that it is possible to know god does not exist and b) that it is possible to demonstrate it. I would therefore like to ask:

1) What Christians would expect Atheists to offer as arguments or evidence that disproving the existence of God is possible, either philosophically or scientifically, rather than saying it is impossible (i.e. Strong Agnosticism).

2) What Christians would expect Atheists to offer as arguments or evidence that disproving the existence of God is a statement of fact about the objective world, rather than Atheism being subjective belief, (or faith/dogma/religion) of a single individual.

3) Are there any specific elements of Christian Belief and Theology that would have to be shown to be false to demonstrate that Christianity, is in its entirety, based on natural causes and was not authored by a deity but by man himself.

4) What elements of Christian Belief, such as historical accounts of the bible, the historical existence of Jesus, the legacy of scientific and philosophical christian thought or christian morals, would you say could be independently verified as true regardless as to whether God exists and would therefore continue to have value to an Atheist?

I'm hoping that the "wisdom of crowds" means that collectively Christians drawing on their own experiences and knowledge will be able to give me a picture of areas I will need to research offline to better understand and clarify my own beliefs. I hope the exchange that follows is mutually beneficial and I look forward to your responses. Long and detailed responses are very welcome.

A lot of agnostics call themselves atheists. There are very few real atheists in the world. You know them by their actions. Stalin, for one.

Shadow · Dec 19, 2017

MyGivenNameIsKeith said:
But, if I may, expand on my reply a bit with a few more verses that clarify the beliefs of someone like myself.
Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
We all ask questions about things that are unknown. One that primarily comes up in religious conversations is what happens after we die? What do you think will happen? What do you hope for?
Another that can be brought up is things like love. We can't see love. But we know it exists because of what people do out of love. This is a decent parallel to "evidence of things not seen".

Though this may sound strange and confusing, I ask you to bear with me and ponder this.
Don't look for things that you can see, look for things that you can't see. Ever heard the expression "Read between the lines"? Same principle. If you look for reasons NOT to believe, you'll find millions of them. I'm asking you to step outside the box and look with "spiritual eyes" for JUST ONE reason to believe. If you find one, then you are making one step in the right direction.

Love can be explained (potentially) as a bio-chemical process of the brain and the body. Explaining in that way doesn't mean the feeling of being in love any less meaningful. We are not reduced because love is physical. The meaning of kissing your own child good night when you put them to bed does not stop being any less real. Or at least, I have no reason to believe it does.

Human beings are necessarily limited, so our ability to perceive is limited. We gain knowledge of things by observing them (or else their consequences). It then begs the question as to how we can have "evidence of things not seen" if we can't see them, or at least observe them in some way. We chose to believe in something, so if we go back far enough to the original person who came up with that belief, cutting out all the social conditioning, there must necessarily have been something within their experience which made them belief in it. I believe there was a reason why people came up with the idea of God, or the miracles of Jesus, even if I don't know it and can't ask them because there is thousands of years of history getting in the way.

I think by now you may know that I do have "spiritual eyes" but that they are focused on what I can observe. It is not simply the surface of things, but also finding meaning beyond mere appearances. We can infer things from what we see, such as the blowing of the wind from leaves moving through the air, but that does not mean we can believe something we cannot see by the act of will alone. There has to be a reason to believe in such things and that reason obviously is a "human" one. Our need to believe says as much about who we are as what we believe.

What I see are people who believe in God and I can't deny that they are people who are capable of great courage, conviction and happiness, as qualities which I admire and pursue. I don't believe that is necessarily a consequence of their faith but a consequence of their humanity. It was already a potential within them that their beliefs gave birth to if you will.

MyGivenNameIsKeith said:
No Christian was born a Christian. They at some point in their lives, were non-believers. Something happened to all of us that changed our lives. The something that happened, while different in form, still had the same effect. Maybe someone got in a near death experience, lost a child, got heart broken, even a kid growing up and realizing they are going to die someday. The effect being, these are things that make you ask the hard questions I brought up. This day and age people tend to ignore the concept of death all their lives, which if you think about it, is a rather unhealthy way to go through life. Why do you think people drink and do drugs to the proportions they do and live miserable unfulfilled lives? There is a spiritual void we are all born with. We go through life attempting to fill it. As a Christian, God fills that void. That's why the Bible says all of creation is without excuse. We all feel that void.

I have had depression and been suicidal and have, regrettably, had plenty of time to think about Death. The way I found to deal with the suicidal thoughts was to think of a "natural" death as the longest route to suicide. suicide is an illusion based on wanting to take control over a situation by thinking that death is an escape. It isn't of course but it takes time to accept that. When you are in that mental state there is so much unreality at play that you have to assert your own interests in spite of your own reason. you have to believe that you are meaningful even as your mind whispers vicious nonsense at you about how you didn't live up to your expectations or how everyone secretly hates you or become the "perfect" person you hoped for. Life is imperfect and you learn to love that imperfection because it is where we are most human.

I am ready to die, although obviously I would prefer it to be in circumstances more of my choosing after a long and fulfilling life. I am not actively seeking it out but that acceptance is very much a part of my life and my thinking. I am of the opinion that I only need one life and if I were perhaps to be immortal (maybe with some eternal youth thrown in) I could well be a burden as it would mean imposing myself on others. It doesn't seem right or fair. Some people live more in a year than others could live in a lifetime. I don't need or want to live my life needing second chances. I prefer to be fulfilled in my imperfection.

Shadow · Dec 19, 2017

Tom Farebrother said:
I would say that both the content of any argument and how you present it are equally important. The content as in it’ll need to be fairly watertight - for example Bart Erham uses info very selectively to present his arguments, and that quickly becomes very obvious to anyone who has any familiarity with the issues. In terms of presentation taking the subject seriously is important, whether you believe it or not. E.g Bertrand-Russell’s ‘why I am not a Christian’ is a good read, I don’t agree with him obviously but it’s evident that he really thought it through. Richard Dawkins on the other hand, although he’s fascinating when talking about biology, doesn’t show any evidence of any serious attempt to understand the other side of the argument, so his arguments seem superficial and one-sided. Picture having been convinced, through evidence that you think is reasonable, that there is intelligent life on Venus. Then imagine the difference between someone listening to you and presenting their own contrary evidence and arguing their point, and someone who refuses to listen to anything you say and just calls you an idiot.

I'm in agreement with you on Dawkins. Although I haven't read much of their books, the impression I have had of them is the "New Atheists" have a very limited understanding of what they are talking about. They ignore historical and theological argument and reduce some of the most complex and controversial problems in human existence to "lack of evidence". That doesn't seem right and it seems very much preconditioned on accepting the scientific method as valid (even though it is itself the product of a long historical evolution). Overall, I'm of the opinion they have done great damage to Atheism, even if I should perhaps read some of their books before coming to a firm opinion on that.

I have tried to think about how someone could support the idea of a flat earth, because it is obviously something that is confirmed by our immediate experience. The horizon is flat and finite, so clearly this involves saying we should go "beyond" our immediate impression. It is perfectly logical for early tribes to believe that the world is flat/finite because they didn't have the mobility to cross the horizon, and perhaps they didn't have the capacity to reason that there was something "beyond" the horizon. It is remarkable how much we take for granted when in reality many of ideas are part of a collective inheritance of generations of hard, patient work of people figuring things out, gradually expanding our range and reach of knowledge of time. I'm of the opinion that you could probably present any position in a way that is "convincing" and "believable" but that doesn't necessarily make it true. Honestly, my ideas about truth are quite a muddle because so much of my own experience directly contradicts my expectations or the "official" version of how things are/should be.

Shadow · Dec 19, 2017

Almost there said:
A lot of agnostics call themselves atheists. There are very few real atheists in the world. You know them by their actions. Stalin, for one.

Yep. I have no problems agreeing with you there.

Shadow · Dec 19, 2017

Halbhh said:
If you haven't observed "dark matter" -- the unknown cause of galaxies rotating faster than the ordinary matter in them can account for, by a large factor -- then you'd be like the many astronomers and physicists that have tried to find direct evidence of it.

It's never been found, despite much effort.

You could postively assert it does not exist.

But that would not be a scientific attitude.

I find the existence of dark matter at least counter-intuitive, because claiming the existence of something you cannot observe, when observation is the primary source for knowing what exists, is self-evidently contradictory. I am not beyond disagreeing with science if I think there is a good case to be made for it. Dark matter hasn't been on my list of priorities though even if I may need to think about the relationship between Materialism and Physics at some point. I have similar "unease" with the idea of the "Big Bang" as the begininng of the Universe, or the idea that there is no causality at work on a Quantum level. I'm still with Einstein that "God doesn't play dice".

I am willing to go along with it only to the extent that I respect science, and am willing to suspend my disbelief as I am probably much like a peasant looking up Galileo's telescope and thinking that shrinking the moon in to the size this tube with glass at both ends is witchcraft. Other explanations are possible before I start burning people at the stake for their sorcery.

It is worth the effort of looking like a fool because you will not learn anything any other than by taking your preconceived ideas and weighing them against new ones to see if they are a better fit for the evidence or more "useful" somehow. Though admittedly, it can be very humiliating given the way science is weaponised as an "authority" that cannot be questioned such as in online debates. Its not conducive to honest doubt or learning.

MyGivenNameIsKeith · Dec 19, 2017

Red Economist said:
Love can be explained (potentially) as a bio-chemical process of the brain and the body. Explaining in that way doesn't mean the feeling of being in love any less meaningful. We are not reduced because love is physical. The meaning of kissing your own child good night when you put them to bed does not stop being any less real. Or at least, I have no reason to believe it does.

Human beings are necessarily limited, so our ability to perceive is limited. We gain knowledge of things by observing them (or else their consequences). It then begs the question as to how we can have "evidence of things not seen" if we can't see them, or at least observe them in some way. We chose to believe in something, so if we go back far enough to the original person who came up with that belief, cutting out all the social conditioning, there must necessarily have been something within their experience which made them belief in it. I believe there was a reason why people came up with the idea of God, or the miracles of Jesus, even if I don't know it and can't ask them because there is thousands of years of history getting in the way.

I think by now you may know that I do have "spiritual eyes" but that they are focused on what I can observe. It is not simply the surface of things, but also finding meaning beyond mere appearances. We can infer things from what we see, such as the blowing of the wind from leaves moving through the air, but that does not mean we can believe something we cannot see by the act of will alone. There has to be a reason to believe in such things and that reason obviously is a "human" one. Our need to believe says as much about who we are as what we believe.

What I see are people who believe in God and I can't deny that they are people who are capable of great courage, conviction and happiness, as qualities which I admire and pursue. I don't believe that is necessarily a consequence of their faith but a consequence of their humanity. It was already a potential within them that their beliefs gave birth to if you will.

I have had depression and been suicidal and have, regrettably, had plenty of time to think about Death. The way I found to deal with the suicidal thoughts was to think of a "natural" death as the longest route to suicide. suicide is an illusion based on wanting to take control over a situation by thinking that death is an escape. It isn't of course but it takes time to accept that. When you are in that mental state there is so much unreality at play that you have to assert your own interests in spite of your own reason. you have to believe that you are meaningful even as your mind whispers vicious nonsense at you about how you didn't live up to your expectations or how everyone secretly hates you or become the "perfect" person you hoped for. Life is imperfect and you learn to love that imperfection because it is where we are most human.

I am ready to die, although obviously I would prefer it to be in circumstances more of my choosing after a long and fulfilling life. I am not actively seeking it out but that acceptance is very much a part of my life and my thinking. I am of the opinion that I only need one life and if I were perhaps to be immortal (maybe with some eternal youth thrown in) I could well be a burden as it would mean imposing myself on others. It doesn't seem right or fair. Some people live more in a year than others could live in a lifetime. I don't need or want to live my life needing second chances. I prefer to be fulfilled in my imperfection.

Let's play a role playing game.
Assume you were looking for meaning as your title suggests. And meaning (of life I assume) could only be found in the one who created life.
Would you pursue that path and all that it entails to seek the meaning?

Shadow · Dec 19, 2017

MyGivenNameIsKeith said:
Let's play a role playing game.
Assume you were looking for meaning as your title suggests. And meaning (of life I assume) could only be found in the one who created life.
Would you pursue that path and all that it entails to seek the meaning?

Yes. I'm a Communist sympathiser so I've got used to following my own convictions in spite of everyone else's insistence that I'm wrong, wasting my time and should shut up and stop asking questions. Its horrible, but you do it any way.

Point me in a direction and I will certainly give it a look.

Halbhh · Dec 19, 2017

Red Economist said:
In my understanding, Atheism is the positive denial of the existence of god/a deity and I believe this is in fact the understanding of the majority of Christians as well. This is not a widely accepted view amongst atheists on online communities even if it has a long history with philosophers such as Ludwig Feuerbach, Karl Marx and Frederich Nietzsche to its name. This has admittedly been the cause of a great deal of frustration and confusion and my beliefs are therefore not as fully developed as I would want them to be because there are few, if any, people who I can discuss this understanding of atheism with.

I am, if you wish, a militant atheist and want to know how best to deal with the challenge of proving that Atheism- the cliam that there is no god- is true. It would seem reasonable to ask religious believers, especially Christians given it is the worlds largest religion, what they imagine such a position would look like and what it would have to do to compete effectively in a online discussion.

To my knowledge, this view of Atheism relies on at least two assumptions: a) that it is possible to know god does not exist and b) that it is possible to demonstrate it. I would therefore like to ask:

1) What Christians would expect Atheists to offer as arguments or evidence that disproving the existence of God is possible, either philosophically or scientifically, rather than saying it is impossible (i.e. Strong Agnosticism).

2) What Christians would expect Atheists to offer as arguments or evidence that disproving the existence of God is a statement of fact about the objective world, rather than Atheism being subjective belief, (or faith/dogma/religion) of a single individual.

3) Are there any specific elements of Christian Belief and Theology that would have to be shown to be false to demonstrate that Christianity, is in its entirety, based on natural causes and was not authored by a deity but by man himself.

4) What elements of Christian Belief, such as historical accounts of the bible, the historical existence of Jesus, the legacy of scientific and philosophical christian thought or christian morals, would you say could be independently verified as true regardless as to whether God exists and would therefore continue to have value to an Atheist?

I'm hoping that the "wisdom of crowds" means that collectively Christians drawing on their own experiences and knowledge will be able to give me a picture of areas I will need to research offline to better understand and clarify my own beliefs. I hope the exchange that follows is mutually beneficial and I look forward to your responses. Long and detailed responses are very welcome.

When I was an atheist, eventually I realized it wasn't logical to be sure something I didn't yet find could not exist.

So I was forced by logic to become agnostic instead.

It finally became a matter of integrity really. It wasn't consistent to my attitude to have an unprovable belief like beliving God could not exist. It was not a scientific attitude.

Shadow · Dec 19, 2017

Halbhh said:
When I was an atheist, eventually I realized it wasn't logical to be sure something I didn't yet find could not exist.

So I was forced by logic to become agnostic instead.

It finally became a matter of integrity really. It wasn't consistent to my attitude to have an unprovable belief like beliving God could not exist.

To continue as an atheist would be to be religous then.

Man ultimately creates logic to an extent. logic is a set of ideas and conceptions about the world. Now, it is true that logic can correspond to real processes such as cause and effect, but logic is still a set of ideas. If i had to chose between being illogical or dismissing evidence, I would chose being illogical. logic is a means to finding knowledge but I don't think it constitutes knowledge independent of observation. The observations have to over-rule what it logical in the end. I would make the assumption that I need to find a new argument to deal with the evidence.

I need to qualify that to some extent because I have already said in this thread that I would reject rational arguments for god because they do not serve my interests (post #5). So knowledge is ultimately something that serves my interests in a sense and has practical value. Hence relying on observation.(At this point you can probably tell I prefer to be illogical because there is a self-contradiction in what I've just said which I can't resolve without really thinking about it ).

If I had an immediate observation of God in the sense he was standing in front of me waving- it would be very difficult for me to dismiss that without very good reason. It might take time to accept, but I would be a theist in all probability. I would go through the check list of thinking I'm crazy and just hallucinating but, I'd need some kind of proof to think I was crazy. Its admittedly a tricky area to prove your own sanity.

MyGivenNameIsKeith · Dec 19, 2017

Red Economist said:
Yes. I'm a Communist sympathiser so I've got used to following my own convictions in spite of everyone else's insistence that I'm wrong, wasting my time and should shut up and stop asking questions. Its horrible, but you do it any way.

Point me in a direction and I will certainly give it a look.

All life is subject to the one who created it. And being the created life, to seek meaning, we would need to ask the creator of life what it was about. The Bible (in the Book of Isaiah) uses the illustration of the potter and the clay.
Personally, I wrestled with meaning for a long time. It was mainly to do with career choices and things like that. Nonetheless, it was this illustration that helped to enlighten me.
The Book of Job was also good with illustrating points like these.
Job 9:12 "Were He to snatch away, who could restrain Him? Who could say to Him, 'What are You doing?'
It's not a matter of questioning why this or why that in the manner of Him having to answer to us. If we do ask, it's so that we can fulfill what he made us to be. If he made you to be a doctor, and you became a radio disc jockey, something would be off, and you would know it. The same applies when seeking meaning. We're inevitably looking for that niche that has been made for us. But to truly understand the meaning of life, as it were, you have to give that spot to the one who created it.
That is why the Bible says The beginning of wisdom is the fear of the Lord. It is why it says to love God with all your body, mind, and soul. You're just putting things in the proper place.
I mean honestly, I am not God. You are not God. Who else but God would know the answers to the questions we have?

Assuming all this has been read and hits home, and you have contemplated crazier things than prayer....
Pray and have a conversation with a God who made you to have a personal relationship with him.

Shadow · Dec 19, 2017

MyGivenNameIsKeith said:
All life is subject to the one who created it. And being the created life, to seek meaning, we would need to ask the creator of life what it was about. The Bible (in the Book of Isaiah) uses the illustration of the potter and the clay.

That does make some sense, in that in order to know who you are you have to know where you come from and why you became the person you are today.

MyGivenNameIsKeith said:
Personally, I wrestled with meaning for a long time. It was mainly to do with career choices and things like that. Nonetheless, it was this illustration that helped to enlighten me.
The Book of Job was also good with illustrating points like these.
Job 9:12 "Were He to snatch away, who could restrain Him? Who could say to Him, 'What are You doing?'
It's not a matter of questioning why this or why that in the manner of Him having to answer to us. If we do ask, it's so that we can fulfill what he made us to be. If he made you to be a doctor, and you became a radio disc jockey, something would be off, and you would know it. The same applies when seeking meaning. We're inevitably looking for that niche that has been made for us. But to truly understand the meaning of life, as it were, you have to give that spot to the one who created it.
That is why the Bible says The beginning of wisdom is the fear of the Lord. It is why it says to love God with all your body, mind, and soul. You're just putting things in the proper place.
I mean honestly, I am not God. You are not God. Who else but God would know the answers to the questions we have?

I think this may be becoming quite personal, and I'm obviously not in a position to question your faith. Nor would it really be fair to and there aren't easy answers to these kind of questions and I couldn't necessarily say my answers are better than yours, etc.

I am someone who habitually thinks they are wrong or crazy and whilst it isn't necessarily healthy, it has its uses. I may can well imagine how you would need faith in God to answer these things, that there is some absolute that can give us the confidence and assurance to think I can do this. But for me, it is having "faith" in myself that I can find the answers eventually even if I am going to make lots of mistakes along the way. That faith is more emotional, and is a sense of drawing on reserves of thinking "I can get through this". I wouldn't call it pleasant by any means but it has been what works for me.

MyGivenNameIsKeith said:
Assuming all this has been read and hits home, and you have contemplated crazier things than prayer....
Pray and have a conversation with a God who made you to have a personal relationship with him.

Yeah, I have contemplated crazier things than prayer. I was religious for a bit when I was very young (maybe 4-6 years old). I went to school and they talked about God a lot and we prayed in school assembly. I was extremely lonely and a large part of my childhood was me talking to god because I didn't have anyone else to talk to. Eventually, I prayed to god for "friends". It didn't happen, and for a kid that was enough to put thoughts that god existed aside. It wasn't anything particularly rational but when your 6 it doesn't need to be.

The last time I prayed was five years ago because I was in a situation where it just couldn't hurt and there were things I needed to say even if God wasn't listening. I was in love with my best friend and he rejected me as I tried to intervene to stop him getting involved in the arms trade. I wanted to know he would get out of it ok and he was a good person, but I couldn't convince myself of that at that particular moment. I was angry at him and myself and very confused and disturbed that someone I had loved so much could do that. I don't believe or know if anyone was listening, but that little bit of uncertainty meant that it was worth a go.

Now I'm older of course, I can look at prayer and god again but it does mean looking at things in ways that are unfamiliar or alien. Its not necessarily the fact it doesn't make sense but that there isn't a pressing need for it even if there have been moments I really doubted myself. my current beliefs do fulfil me but some of them are self-limiting and need to be challenged if I am to keep growing as a person.

Atheism's Burden of Proof

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Optimistic sceptic

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Optimistic sceptic

Everything You say is Life to me

Well-Known Member

Optimistic sceptic

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Everything You say is Life to me

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency