Atheist here (Ask me anything)

[fm107]

Do you believe in hevean and/or hell?

What do you think happens to a person once they die?

 

[Tinker Grey]

Do you believe in hevean and/or hell?

What do you think happens to a person once they die?

Well, for this atheist the answer to your first question is an unqualified no. There is no evidence of such places, nor is the concept universal across religion. And even if it were, to believe on that basis would be to fall prey to argumentum ad populum.

Question 2: Nothing.

 

[fm107]

Does their need to be evidence to prove these places exist?

 

[Skeptic90]

Do you believe in hevean and/or hell?

What do you think happens to a person once they die?

Well like I said in one of my first responses, I don't. Although there is a minuscule chance there is one, but highly unlikely. I wish there was a heaven, it would be great!

So what happens to ourselves when we die, well we die and it over. Although for most christians this sounds a bit depressing, I don't it is at all. Its poetic. This is the reason we must be the best we can be in this lifetime. We can't waste one second, life is extremely valuable. This is one of the main reasons religion was created, to give hope to people. Hope that there is something waiting for you when you die, and also helps people through the suffering of death. Just the thought that their relatives are in a better place.

If you had no idea what was religion or god, and someone told you, that even though your life is not that good, if you choose to believe in (instert god and religion) you will get (enter reward). Who wouldn't take that offer? Religion breeds from our psychological needs we all have.


So back to heaven and hell. I don't think there is one, but I think it would be great if heaven existed or at least a reencarnation or something, but not logical.

 

[Skeptic90]

Does their need to be evidence to prove these places exist?

Well for heaven and hell, well yes there is, but it doesn't really matter really. You do not need to believe in them to be good. Same thing for god, you don't need to believe in a god(s) in order to be good. Also I believe its more humbling to just do things because of the goodness of the heart. You shouldn't expect a reward.

For hell, that idea was just created to keep people in line. I remember my parents told me that if I did something bad or if I don't follow the rules of god, then I will be sent to hell and the devil will come after me. Control by fear. Same way my parents told me to not do (so and so) or else they will spank me. Same logic. Its the boogie man for adults. I believe people would act good without the need of a hell or devil to keep them in line.

When I studied religions, this was one of the most common things all of them had. Like in christianity and islam, they both have the idea that god is a jealous god, and the idea of an antagonist, which is the devil. So if you lose your faith, you are pretty much doomed. So its a good preventer of doubt.

Well to summarize, do I need evidence to believe, yes. Is it really necessary, don't think so.

 

[Skeptic90]

Well I agree that the judeo christian god cannot be put under the microscope given the standards Christians give for their version of god.

Also in an atheist point of view, saying that god exists just because the bible says so is as valid as the Egyptians saying their gods exist because their tablets said so. Back in the day, if I remembered correctly, the only people who were allowed to read the bible were those who were educated enough to be able to read it. You must know Latin and able to read it.

This argument about proving the existence of god on the bible between an atheist and a christian would go something like this:

Atheist : How do you know god is real?
Christian : The bible says so.
Atheist : what makes the bible right?
Christian : The bible is the word of god.
Atheist : How do you know its the word of god?
Christian : In the bible it says that god said it is the word of god.
Atheist : How do you know someone didn't write it? I could make a book saying that the god I created wrote this book.
Christian : No, because the bible says that god wrote it,and he is the true god.

This can keep on going forever with references about Jesus, etc. So in an atheist point of view the bible is not a reliable and strong enough evidence to prove that god exists.

"We are all atheists about most of the gods humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just take it one god further"- Richard Dawkins

 

[MLEN]

Skeptic90,

Is there any particular set of beliefs or morals that you personally hold to on a consistent basis?

Is there a quote or saying that you adhere to or that inspires you in your everyday life?

 

[nicknack28]

Just putting Skeptic's last post in other terms, many times the following conversation will be had when discussing the Bible or one's beliefs.

What makes the Bible inspired by God?
The Bible says it is.

What makes what the Bible says true?
The Bible was inspired by God.

And these questions circle around and around indefinitely. If someone depends on the Bible to argue the validity of the Bible (like above) this is called circular reasoning and doesn't actually accomplish anything. Circular reasoning defies logic. It is arguments like this that skeptics cannot accept. In order to show that the Bible is true or that it is inspired by God we cannot then go look to the Bible for evidence of it, we have to look to outside sources instead. This is precisely why when someone says that the story of Creation or the divinity of Jesus, etc. are true and then consult the Bible in order to prove it (using verses), many people cannot take them seriously.

 

[Skeptic90]

Skeptic90,

Is there any particular set of beliefs or morals that you personally hold to on a consistent basis?

Is there a quote or saying that you adhere to or that inspires you in your everyday life?

Well I still hold a good portion of christian ethics that I was thought from a young age. This is part of being human, you have the freedom to choose what you want to live your life by. If its good and it works I take it. If I later find a better set of morals, then I replace my current beliefs if supplied with a good and logical argument. I also like the buddist philosophy, but I haven't taken much look into it. But as of right now, I act as any christian would. So to answer your question on morals, I adopt the christian morals.

Now on beliefs, I believe in humanity and the universe. After many years of studying our world and universe, its simply amazing what its out there. Because I do not know, and I do not have the answer for it, like the beggining of life, universe, and so many other things, it really excites me to go on an adventure to find out the truth. Its like a christmas present that you have no idea what it is, it makes it that much special.

There are a few quotes here are some that just blow my mind; some are a good read:

"Look again at that dot [picture of earth from saturn]. That's here, that's home, that's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam. The Earth is a very small stage in a vast cosmic arena. Think of the rivers of blood spilled by all those generals and emperors so that, in glory and triumph, they could become the momentary masters of a fraction of a dot. Think of the endless cruelties visited by the inhabitants of one corner of this pixel on the scarcely distinguishable inhabitants of some other corner, how frequent their misunderstandings, how eager they are to kill one another, how fervent their hatreds.
Our posturings, our imagined self-importance, the delusion that we have some privileged position in the Universe, are challenged by this point of pale light. Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. In our obscurity, in all this vastness, there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves.
The Earth is the only world known so far to harbor life. There is nowhere else, at least in the near future, to which our species could migrate. Visit, yes. Settle, not yet. Like it or not, for the moment the Earth is where we make our stand.
It has been said that astronomy is a humbling and character-building experience. There is perhaps no better demonstration of the folly of human conceits than this distant image of our tiny world. To me, it underscores our responsibility to deal more kindly with one another, and to preserve and cherish the pale blue dot, the only home we've ever known."- Carl Sagan


"We are going to die, and that makes us the lucky ones. Most people are never going to die because they are never going to be born. The potential people who could have been here in my place but who will in fact never see the light of day outnumber the sand grains of Arabia. Certainly those unborn ghosts include greater poets than Keats, scientists greater than Newton. We know this because the set of possible people allowed by our DNA so massively exceeds the set of actual people. In the teeth of these stupefying odds it is you and I, in our ordinariness, that are here." - Richard Dawkins

 

[Tinker Grey]

Does their need to be evidence to prove these places exist?

Yes.

Dreams, visions, and statements from "authority" are not evidence.

 

[brinny]

Well I agree that the judeo christian god cannot be put under the microscope given the standards Christians give for their version of god.

Also in an atheist point of view, saying that god exists just because the bible says so is as valid as the Egyptians saying their gods exist because their tablets said so. Back in the day, if I remembered correctly, the only people who were allowed to read the bible were those who were educated enough to be able to read it. You must know Latin and able to read it.

This argument about proving the existence of god on the bible between an atheist and a christian would go something like this:

Atheist : How do you know god is real?
Christian : The bible says so.
Atheist : what makes the bible right?
Christian : The bible is the word of god.
Atheist : How do you know its the word of god?
Christian : In the bible it says that god said it is the word of god.
Atheist : How do you know someone didn't write it? I could make a book saying that the god I created wrote this book.
Christian : No, because the bible says that god wrote it,and he is the true god.

This can keep on going forever with references about Jesus, etc. So in an atheist point of view the bible is not a reliable and strong enough evidence to prove that god exists.

"We are all atheists about most of the gods humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just take it one god further"- Richard Dawkins

Dawkins has stated there is a possibility of Intelligent Design.

 

[CoderHead]

Dawkins has stated there is a possibility of Intelligent Design.

Yes, yes. And Darwin recanted on his deathbed. Of course.

 

[brinny]

Originally Posted by brinny
Dawkins has stated there is a possibility of Intelligent Design.

Yes, yes. And Darwin recanted on his deathbed. Of course.

Getting back to Dawkins, i found it immensely interesting that he stated such a thing.

 

[CoderHead]

Getting back to Dawkins, i found it immensely interesting that he stated such a thing.

I find it immensely interesting that you haven't cited your source. Dawkins doesn't believe in Intelligent Design.

Ben Stein: What do think is the possibility that there then, intelligent design might turn out to be the answer to some issues in genetics... or in evolution?
Richard Dawkins: Well... it could come about in the following way: it could be that uh, at some earlier time somewhere in the universe a civilization e-evolved... by probably by some kind of Darwinian means to a very very high level of technology and designed a form of life that they seeded onto... perhaps this... this planet. Um, now that is a possibility. And uh, an intriguing possibility. And I suppose it's possible that you might find evidence for that if you look at the um, at the detail... details of our chemistry molecular biology you might find a signature of some sort of designer.
Ben Stein: [voice over] Wait a second. Richard Dawkins thought intelligent design might be a legitimate pursuit?
Richard Dawkins: Um, and that designer could well be a higher intelligence from elsewhere in the universe. But that higher intelligence would itself would have to come about by some explicable or ultimately explicable process. It couldn't have just jumped into existence spontaneously. That's the point.

 

[brinny]

Originally Posted by brinny
Dawkins has stated there is a possibility of Intelligent Design.

I find it immensely interesting that you haven't cited your source. Dawkins doesn't believe in Intelligent Design.

He stated there is a possibility of Intelligent Design. It was when he could not explain how a living cell or living anything or where it came from. He, in essence, was stating that Intelligent Design was possibly required to "begin" life, because as we now know, cells have the complexity of a galaxy. And that knowledge leaves antiquated theories and ideas like Darwin's, in the dust, where he is.

 

[CoderHead]

He stated there is a possibility of Intelligent Design.

He stated (when asked under which circumstances ID could be possible) that it's a remote possibility that life on this planet was designed by intelligent life from another planet that had evolved in much the same way as we observe life evolving on this planet.

'Lying for Jesus?' by Richard Dawkins - RichardDawkins.net

I'd argue that there is a possibility that I could eat a five-pound, fully-loaded pizza by myself in under 30 minutes. It's just not probable. See the difference?

 

[brinny]

Originally Posted by brinny
He stated there is a possibility of Intelligent Design.

He stated (when asked under which circumstances ID could be possible) that it's a remote possibility that life on this planet was designed by intelligent life from another planet that had evolved in much the same way as we observe life evolving on this planet.

'Lying for Jesus?' by Richard Dawkins - RichardDawkins.net

I'd argue that there is a possibility that I could eat a five-pound, fully-loaded pizza by myself in under 30 minutes. It's just not probable. See the difference?

well the "another planet" made it even more interesting.....yet, his saying there is the possibility that life was designed by an greater intelligence confirmed for me that he must not have had much evidence against creative design from the gitgo. i found the expression on his face especially interesting as he stated this. He looked stressed.

 

[nicknack28]

It's not difficult to understand... This has been repeated over and over. Dawkins, just like most other atheists, allows for the possibility of a god. However, he states that because there is a complete lack of compelling evidence for the existence of a god then the probability of a god is EXTREMELY low. He states many times that he must remain technically agnostic about the existence of god just has he must remain technically agnostic about the existence of fairies, unicorns, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, or a teapot that orbits the moon. If you've watched any other clips of him or have read his book he puts himself at a 6.9 on the 7-point scale ranging from gnostic theism (1.0) to gnostic atheism (7.0). That puts him in the agnostic atheism portion because you're only gnostic if you're a 1.0 or a 7.0. He's still fully atheistic of course -- he doesn't have a belief that there is a god. You won't find him saying anywhere that he's absolutely certain that a god does not exist because it can't be verified in any way. There always remains a possibility, no matter how minute it is. The same applies to intelligent design.

The clip that was mentioned is featured in the movie Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed (if you want to Youtube it and find related clips).

 

[brinny]

It's not difficult to understand... This has been repeated over and over. Dawkins, just like most other atheists, allows for the possibility of a god. However, he states that because there is a complete lack of compelling evidence for the existence of a god then the probability of a god is EXTREMELY low. He states many times that he must remain technically agnostic about the existence of god just has he must remain technically agnostic about the existence of fairies, unicorns, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, or a teapot that orbits the moon. If you've watched any other clips of him or have read his book he puts himself at a 6.9 on the 7-point scale ranging from gnostic theism (1.0) to gnostic atheism (7.0). That puts him in the agnostic atheism portion because you're only gnostic if you're a 1.0 or a 7.0. He's still fully atheistic of course -- he doesn't have a belief that there is a god. You won't find him saying anywhere that he's absolutely certain that a god does not exist because it can't be verified in any way. There always remains a possibility, no matter how minute it is. The same applies to intelligent design.

The clip that was mentioned is featured in the movie Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed (if you want to Youtube it and find related clips).

i was watching that. Thank you. Didn't watch the whole thing..fell asleep..will get back to it.

 

[Skeptic90]

Dawkins has stated there is a possibility of Intelligent Design.

I agree, there is a possibility, but infinitely small. Same with god, santa, unicorns, superman, pokemon, etc. Just because there is a chance it doesn't mean it is. This is why we must investigate. We must find out the truth. Saying that you are certain, I say you are not. If a scientist said he found the answer, I would say I don't think you have. Evidence, evidence, evidence.