What do you think of atheists

[Gishin]

If your definition in housing refugees after a hurricane, helping people with financial issues, volunteering to help build houses for Haiti (for free), going to Africa to build wells so the people there can have clean water, then yeah, they're just horrible people.

I'm just saying going to Church doesn't just up and make you a better person. As there are good people who go to Church, there are bad people, and some people who use Church as an excuse to be bad.

 

[GrayAngel]

Well, you do think it's ok for soldiers to kill innocent civilians, and you're down with Yahweh's commands for rape victims to marry their rapists. I wouldn't call you the embodiment of evil but I'm rather surprised that you support these positions.

(And you didn't respond to my super long post! It's ok that you didn't, we weren't really getting anywhere)

I might get to it later, but I'm reluctant to jump into a reply that could take over an hour to prepare. That, and I'm not really enjoying the debate much, anyway. Oh, and we were taking this completely off topic.

I'm just saying going to Church doesn't just up and make you a better person. As there are good people who go to Church, there are bad people, and some people who use Church as an excuse to be bad.

I agree with you. I'd probably say that about 90% of church goers go out of habit or to make them feel better. It's amazing to me that not even 10% of a church is at all involved in any ministry. It often takes a major event like the earthquake in Haiti to get them to feel guilty enough to do something.

But that 10% or less of the church that is actually devoted, I enjoy their company more than anything. I like to surround myself with people who inspire me to improve on myself.

 

[Eudaimonist]

When I first started going to church to see what the big deal was all about, I went with a opened mind

When I first considered atheism, I did so with an open mind.

because a friend of mine told me, I would rather believe in it then die and not believe and go to hell.

Because I would rather live my life with my eyes open and honest, rather than believing a comfortable fantasy.

Its not like its going to make you any worse of a person.

It's not like becoming an atheist is going to make you any worse of a person.

Most people dont go to church and then go and rob someone.

Most people don't become an atheist and then go and rob someone.

Its going to make you a better person.

Atheists are fully capable of becoming better persons. Being honest with oneself is a good first step.

I think atheists people are selfish. Because most of them just dont want to hear about it period. They already have there minds made up, and think they know the answers.

My irony meter just broke.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[sandwiches]

When I first started going to church to see what the big deal was all about, I went with a opened mind because a friend of mine told me, I would rather believe in it then die and not believe and go to hell. Its not like its going to make you any worse of a person. Most people dont go to church and then go and rob someone. Its going to make you a better person. I think atheists people are selfish. Because most of them just dont want to hear about it period. They already have there minds made up, and think they know the answers.

This a good example of what I was talking about, GrayAngel.

 

[Lion Hearted Man]

I might get to it later, but I'm reluctant to jump into a reply that could take over an hour to prepare. That, and I'm not really enjoying the debate much, anyway. Oh, and we were taking this completely off topic.

I would find it annoying to defend the deaths and weird laws in the OT, so I understand your apprehension.

 

[Deserae2011]

This a good example of what I was talking about, GrayAngel.

So let me ask you this.... This was also another question that got me thinking... Where do you think we came from? Earth had to start somewhere.. Someone or something created it. And yes before I looked into religion it felt like some sort of fantacy that ppl created to me as well... Until I was asked Where did we come from? and who created the world then......??? It all makes sense.. You just have to want to find the answers and search for them... And when you open your heart to the idea and ask god to help you find your way to him it will happen... God knows your heart.....

 

[brinny]

i have a dear friend in Australia who calls atheists his pre-Christian brothers and sisters

 

[Gishin]

So let me ask you this.... This was also another question that got me thinking... Where do you think we came from? Earth had to start somewhere.. Someone or something created it. And yes before I looked into religion it felt like some sort of fantacy that ppl created to me as well... Until I was asked Where did we come from? and who created the world then......??? It all makes sense.. You just have to want to find the answers and search for them... And when you open your heart to the idea and ask god to help you find your way to him it will happen... God knows your heart.....

Of course, how could I have been so wrong? Now I accept the earth was created from a body of a troll.

 

[Lion Hearted Man]

i have a dear friend in Australia who calls atheists his pre-Christian brothers and sisters

"Post-Christian" is probably more appropriate

 

[Eudaimonist]

Where do you think we came from?

Where do you think God came from?

Earth had to start somewhere.. Someone or something created it.

"Created" may be the wrong word. The Earth arose through natural processes.

History of the Earth - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And yes before I looked into religion it felt like some sort of fantacy that ppl created to me as well... Until I was asked Where did we come from? and who created the world then......??? It all makes sense..

Science makes more sense to me on this issue than religion.

You just have to want to find the answers and search for them...

That's exactly what I did!

And when you open your mind to reason and investigate with honesty, you may discover what I did, which is that we live in an amazing natural godless universe.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[GrayAngel]

I would find it annoying to defend the deaths and weird laws in the OT, so I understand your apprehension.

You remind me a lot of 3sigma.

Where do you think God came from?

Since you brought it up...

To me, God as the start of the universe makes more sense to me than the natural approach.

Assuming that the universe was created, then there would still have to be a logical starting point. There would have to be a point in time where nothing moved and nothing changed (no cause and effect). The only way this time before time could exist is with a limitless God, who never changes from one point of eternity to another.

The Christian God fits this profile very well. He has full control over all the universe, He's unbound by time, and the Bible describes Him as constant and never changing.

There are some naturalist approaches which I've become familiar with (even studied some, briefly) which attempt to explain possible scenarios where God would not be necessary, but I don't find any of them convincing.

One is the idea that the universe expands itself (the Big Bang), then it retracts to the center and starts over. But this doesn't tell us how the universe developed such convenient laws to operate by, giving our universe.

Why does the world have to operate the way it does? We know that if you drop an apple, it'll fall. But why does it fall? Because of gravity? Why does the apple have to listen to gravity? Why not just stay where it is?

Then there are some very creative ideas, which sound so profoundly mythical in nature, it seems hypocritical for them to call God a fantasy. Such as the idea that there is some kind of universe between universes, where all realities are created with their own sets of laws.

Sure, it's possible, but it seems like a rather far-fetched claim to make on a whim. Most people who don't believe in God say it's illogical to believe in something you cannot prove exists. There's no way to test this universe-creating machine, so how is this idea any more scientific than God?

Science makes more sense to me on this issue than religion.

I believe you. But everyone has their own interpretations and opinions. One person's logic is not necessarily weaker or stronger because it's different.

And when you open your mind to reason and investigate with honesty, you may discover what I did, which is that we live in an amazing natural godless universe.

Maybe. Or possibly they will come to a similar conclusion that I did, which is that we live in an amazing, harmonized, spirit-filled universe that must have been created.

 

[Lion Hearted Man]

You remind me a lot of 3sigma.

Is that a bad thing?

 

[GrayAngel]

Is that a bad thing?

I'm not a big fan of his, but you two would get along perfectly.

I'm not going to stick my neck out to tell you why, because I'm sure somebody will flag me for it, but I ended up blocking him because he got on my nerves a bit too much.

I haven't seen him around recently. I'm sure he hasn't left, though.

 

[Lion Hearted Man]

I'm not a big fan of his, but you two would get along perfectly.

I'm not going to stick my neck out to tell you why, because I'm sure somebody will flag me for it, but I ended up blocking him because he got on my nerves a bit too much.

I haven't seen him around recently. I'm sure he hasn't left, though.

Ah, so this is a polite way of you saying that you don't care for me? Eh, that's alright. Yeah people are pretty trigger-happy as far as flagging posts here.

Unfortunately our only interactions have been on the ethics of the OT (something I get very heated up over). I'll have you know I'm not a total jerk.

 

[GrayAngel]

Ah, so this is a polite way of you saying that you don't care for me? Eh, that's alright. Yeah people are pretty trigger-happy as far as flagging posts here.

Unfortunately our only interactions have been on the ethics of the OT (something I get very heated up over). I'll have you know I'm not a total jerk.

I'm sure you're not, otherwise you wouldn't have any friends.

Those last few sentences got me thinking, though. Maybe you're not so bad.

So why do you get so heated up when discussing the OT?

 

[Tinker Grey]

\
To me, God as the start of the universe makes more sense to me than the natural approach.

Assuming that the universe was created,

Why would you assume that? And, why should anyone agree to start with that assumption?

There would have to be a point in time where nothing moved and nothing changed (no cause and effect).

Why?

The only way this time before time could exist is with a limitless God, who never changes from one point of eternity to another.

A God who never changes cannot do anything since doing requires change. Hence, such a god cannot even decide to make a universe.

The Christian God fits this profile very well. He has full control over all the universe, He's unbound by time, and the Bible describes Him as constant and never changing.

He fits this profile very well because you are begging the question. That is, you've made a list of requirements that you assume is necessary because you believe in the god that has those requirements.

One is the idea that the universe expands itself (the Big Bang), then it retracts to the center and starts over. But this doesn't tell us how the universe developed such convenient laws to operate by, giving our universe.

This is the assumption that because we use the word laws that those laws must be given and hence given by somebody or something. But in reality what we call laws in physical sciences are those things that are observed to happen. That is, there is no such thing here is as "convenience", only what is.

Why does the world have to operate the way it does? We know that if you drop an apple, it'll fall. But why does it fall? Because of gravity? Why does the apple have to listen to gravity? Why not just stay where it is?

See above. The apple doesn't listen to gravity nor is it compelled to. We call it a law because apples always fall when dropped.

Then there are some very creative ideas, which sound so profoundly mythical in nature, it seems hypocritical for them to call God a fantasy. Such as the idea that there is some kind of universe between universes, where all realities are created with their own sets of laws.

Those fantasies have the advantage of relying on physical reality and, at least in principle, could someday be tested. The idea of God is not testable and hence useless for understanding the universe. The idea of God is useful only insomuch as it helps us understand believers.

Sure, it's possible, but it seems like a rather far-fetched claim to make on a whim. Most people who don't believe in God say it's illogical to believe in something you cannot prove exists. There's no way to test this universe-creating machine, so how is this idea any more scientific than God?

Let me repeat what so often must be repeated: Atheism is not a claim. It is a rejection of the claim of theism. That's it. There are, indeed, some atheists that go so far as to claim that God doesn't exist (rather than merely that there is no evidence that he does), but IME those atheists usually claim that all posited ideas of God are incoherent, or logically impossible.

But everyone has their own interpretations and opinions. One person's logic is not necessarily weaker or stronger because it's different.

Interpretations and opinions are not the same thing as logic. There aren't different logic(s). Either one's conclusions follow from one's premises or they don't. Either your premises can be substantiated or they cannot.

 

[GrayAngel]

Why would you assume that? And, why should anyone agree to start with that assumption?

I deal with some of the alternate opinions later in my post.

The reason I start with the assumption is to illustrate my reasoning. We all start with one assumption or another, whether we want to or not. But a common way people tackle these assumptions is by taking one at a time.

You're would probably start with the assumption that the world was not created, though you'd probably try to tell me that wouldn't be an assumption. If there are alternate possibilities, it is an assumption. This is true no matter how valuable you perceive that assumption to be.

Why?

Take the example of the Greek gods. Zeus and the others are not much different from people. They can be killed, they multiply, they wage wars, etc.. But the problem with these gods is that you cannot point to a specific point in time and say, "This is where it starts." There is no logical starting point with a god, or multiple gods, who change with time.

And if they're not completely infinite, even in respect to time, then they cannot exist in the period before time began.

A God who never changes cannot do anything since doing requires change. Hence, such a god cannot even decide to make a universe.

God doesn't operate the same way we do. We live from past to present. We're finite, and so we rely on the world acting on us to make us move.

The way the Bible describes God, however, is as a being that exists from beginning to end simultaneously. Time does not flow for Him. Although He acts in respect to time, He is infinite and does not rely on the universe acting on Him to cause Him to move.

I saw a video on YouTube once that explained the possibilities of dimensions beyond the 3rd dimension.

YouTube - Imagining the Tenth Dimension part 1 of 2

I really like this one, but there are multiple videos online which try to explain the same basic concept. Some other videos might be better at explaining it.

The way I figure it, we are beings which exist in the 3rd dimension, unable to see past and future, but only present. But God would be somewhere beyond that.

((I actually disagree with one point on the video it makes about "branching possibilities." I believe that the world is all cause and effect, no chance, though many of the causes are beyond our perception. But that's my opinion.))

He fits this profile very well because you are begging the question. That is, you've made a list of requirements that you assume is necessary because you believe in the god that has those requirements.

I honestly cannot imagine a world that could exist without those requirements. They seem absolutely necessary to me. I cannot imagine any other god being responsible for the start of the whole universe, if we cannot find a logical starting point for that god as well.

And if the god is not infinite, then it would have no power or conception for being able to start the universe. A god limited by time cannot be responsible for getting things started. Partly because they cannot have a starting point being non-infinite, partly for reasons I have trouble finding the words to describe (dealing with infinites is confusing).

This is the assumption that because we use the word laws that those laws must be given and hence given by somebody or something. But in reality what we call laws in physical sciences are those things that are observed to happen. That is, there is no such thing here is as "convenience", only what is.


See above. The apple doesn't listen to gravity nor is it compelled to. We call it a law because apples always fall when dropped.

Yeah, but why does the universe behave in such predictable ways? Why doesn't the universe have the ability to behave randomly, or even to not behave at all and just do nothing?

We know that electrons which are negatively charge are attracted to the nucleus, which is positively charged. We can say because we've seen it happen over and over again, that the electron will rotate around the nucleus because of this attraction. But who says it has do what it does? What prevents that electron from floating around freely?

Those fantasies have the advantage of relying on physical reality and, at least in principle, could someday be tested. The idea of God is not testable and hence useless for understanding the universe. The idea of God is useful only insomuch as it helps us understand believers.

Let me repeat what so often must be repeated: Atheism is not a claim. It is a rejection of the claim of theism. That's it. There are, indeed, some atheists that go so far as to claim that God doesn't exist (rather than merely that there is no evidence that he does), but IME those atheists usually claim that all posited ideas of God are incoherent, or logically impossible.

You don't need to repeat yourself. I already understand what you're trying to say. But if you're going to claim that there exists some universe-creating-machine which created our reality, as well as countless other realities with more chaotic systems, is no more scientific than to say God created it. It's hypocritical to say one is more deserving of attention than another.

Interpretations and opinions are not the same thing as logic. There aren't different logic(s). Either one's conclusions follow from one's premises or they don't. Either your premises can be substantiated or they cannot.

Logic is relative. Logic can lead us to make almost any conclusion, even if we approach it with as little bias as possible. All logic is dependent on our reactions to reality (interpretation), and the conclusions we make because of it (opinions). Even science relies on interpretation, though we have rules which prevent us from fudging the data.

EDIT: Actually, I think a better video, though less flashy, may be this one. It's a little different, but still tries to explain the possibilities of 4+ dimensions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIp57Z-Dkg0&feature=related

 

[plindboe]

Two observations from reading the discussion:

It's funny how quickly christians go from moral objectivism to moral subjectivism whenever someone brings up the OT laws. Suddenly genocide, rape, infanticide and slavery is viewed as being morally acceptable because of the societies in which they took place.

It's also funny how these apologists seem to consider their god subject to the immoral views of an archaic society. An omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent god suddenly has to comply with outdated customs when he issues his laws.

Peter

 

[plindboe]

i hug atheists...i gives big ol' squisssssshy huuuugz

Awwww! I love hugsies!

Peter

 

[plindboe]

I think atheists people are selfish.

What a judgemental thing to say. You aren't exactly doing a good job promoting your religion as a good thing.

Peter