The Ever Present Problem of Atheism (HOF thread)

[One Eyed Jack]

Originally posted by shima
Why do you like to start arguments with religionists? And is it most religionists you like to start arguments with, or is it just Christians in particular?<<

I like to argue with them, mostly because otherwise very smart and reasonable people start throwing logic/rationality out the window when it comes to their faith.

How so? What's so illogical or irrational about believing in God? We could discuss a particular faith if you wish, but you didn't really answer my question regarding that topic.

I am simply trying to understand WHY they do so.

Perhaps they don't, and you only think they do because their views don't align with yours.

So far, theism has never been able to convince me that their faiths are true. Atheism does have the awnsers that are convincing.

What sort of answers are you talking about? What have you found the most convincing?

 

[Zakath]

Originally posted by Z Man
Another thing that puzzles me about the athesits is how they constantly ask for evidence. But when we tell them about the Bible, they reject it's truth. Yet they use the same documented kind of evidence to teach/believe/learn about history. :think:

And we have the same kind of evidence to support the other major world religions... :think:

What do you think the problem might be, Z Man?

 

[Heathen]

These are some impressive dialogues. I am curious however. Why, with the obvious intellects being displayed, are no specifics are being debated? There appears to be sincere desire for answers, but what is the true question. If it is to merely prove or disprove the existence of God, then no one will be able to convince the unwilling. Shouldn't the discussion turn to historical evidences. This cat and mouse game of human reasoning and philosophical tactics, coming from imperfect humans, in an attempt to explain or discredit the existence of a supposedly perfect being only displays the greatest human trait of all...free will to believe...in whatever makes the belly of the mind full of itself.

 

[Zakath]

Originally posted by Heathen
These are some impressive dialogues. I am curious however. Why, with the obvious intellects being displayed, are no specifics are being debated? There appears to be sincere desire for answers, but what is the true question. If it is to merely prove or disprove the existence of God, then no one will be able to convince the unwilling. Shouldn't the discussion turn to historical evidences. This cat and mouse game of human reasoning and philosophical tactics, coming from imperfect humans, in an attempt to explain or discredit the existence of a supposedly perfect being only displays the greatest human trait of all...free will to believe...in whatever makes the belly of the mind full of itself.

Heathen,

Generally that line of argument here follows two possible paths: evidence from religious writings or evidence from personal experience. I'll summarize, leaving out a lot of the side issues, to explain my point.

The first argument can be essentially distilled into this:

• Christian: God exists, because the Bible says so.
  
  Atheist: But why should I believe your religious texts are true and all the other world religions are false?
  
  Christian: Because the Bible says it's true.
  
  Atheist: But how do you know the Bible is accurate?
  
  Christian: Because the Bible says so...

It is essentially a circular argument based on the point that the Christians accept (to some degree or other) that their religious writings come (in some essentially undescribable fashion) from their deity. They have placed their faith in the contents of a collection of writings of which none of the originals exist, all the copies are written in languages that the vast majority of them cannot read, and the translations are so subjective that there are more than forty different translations into English versions of the Bible alone. After twenty centuries, there is not even uniform agreement on which texts make up the entirety of their scriptures...

Unfortuantely, many of the other world religions make similar claims about their religious writings, yet the Christians have yet to demonstrate anything concrete to place their claim in any position of greater validity.

The second argument can be essentially distilled into this:

• Christian: I know God exists because he communicates to me in some subjective fashion.
  
  Atheist: How do you know it's "God" doing the communicating and not some other source?
  
  Christian: If you were a True Believer™, you'd know the answer to that question.

Again, there is nothing to set the Christian apart from the devout Hindu or Muslim, many of whom claim to receive communication from their deities as well. Additionally, since I am not a True Believer™, I cannot experience this revelational communication.

That's why, as an atheist, I continue ask for empirical evidence as contrasted to subjective evidence.


Once one or both of these themes have been played out, the debates rapidly lapse into petty ad hominem sniping and philological gymnastics...

 

[shima]

>>How so? What's so illogical or irrational about believing in God? <<

Their reasons for doing so. Most never come up with a better arguement than "its simply true" or "faith". Neither are logical/reasonable arguements for me. When asked to produce proof, they either say that "faith" equals proof (which is impossible considdering all other religions) or that I have to become a believer myself. That isn't proof either, because "belief" shapes your world just as much as anything else does. Therefore, to "believe" is to see evidence, however, the "evidence" is only in the mind of the believer.

>> What sort of answers are you talking about?<<

I'm talking about questions like: what is the meaning of life, why are we here, where do we come from, what happens to us when we die.

 

[One Eyed Jack]

Originally posted by shima
>>How so? What's so illogical or irrational about believing in God? <<

Their reasons for doing so.

How do you know their reasons? I'm sure plenty of people have different reasons for believing in God, and I seriously doubt you've explored them all.

Most never come up with a better arguement than "its simply true" or "faith".

I've heard a lot better arguments than that. Have you ever listened to any debates on this subject, and if so, what are some that you consider good? I'd like to check them out.

Neither are logical/reasonable arguements for me.

It's always possible that you're not being logical or reasonable yourself. Have you considered that?

When asked to produce proof, they either say that "faith" equals proof (which is impossible considdering all other religions)

You could investigate the other religions for yourself if you'd like. I'm sure it wouldn't take long to come to the conclusion that they're missing something.

or that I have to become a believer myself. That isn't proof either, because "belief" shapes your world just as much as anything else does. Therefore, to "believe" is to see evidence, however, the "evidence" is only in the mind of the believer.

Not necessarily. Sometimes the evidence is there for all to see. It just depends on what you're looking at.

>> What sort of answers are you talking about?<<

I'm talking about questions like: what is the meaning of life, why are we here, where do we come from, what happens to us when we die.

And what do you believe are the answers to these questions?

 

[shima]

>>How do you know their reasons<<

Because I ASKED them why they believed.

>>I've heard a lot better arguments than that.<<

I've heard a LOT of arguements, but somehow they always boiled down to either "faith" or "truth". The problem is: we aren't born with a sense of the truth. The truth is hard to discover, and its very easy for people to fool themselves.

>>It's always possible that you're not being logical or reasonable yourself. Have you considered that?<<

I did considder that.

>>You could investigate the other religions for yourself if you'd like. I'm sure it wouldn't take long to come to the conclusion that they're missing something. <<

Actually, I concluded that they don't miss anything MORE than christianity does. The reason why YOU conclude that they "miss" something is because you are a christian. From my perspective, christianity is no different than any other religion. All religions claim to be the "One TRUE religion", yet when asked to provide evidence, NONE of them can produce anything better than "faith in their holy book". So, from that perspective, christianity misses the same things all other religions miss: evidence.

>>Not necessarily. Sometimes the evidence is there for all to see.<<

And sometimes it isn't. When evidence is there "for all to see", you can simply point to it and say: that is the evidence. So everyone should be able to see it, regardless of religious convictions. However, NONE of the christians I have spoken to can point to something that would be evidence for the correctness of their faith.

Some say "faith", and I point towards other religions and say "what about them? They have faith, so their religion must be true as well".

Some say "The universe" and I say "What about it?". Then they try pseudo-scientific mumbo-jumbo to argue that the universe MUST be created. Unfortunately, all their arguements fail because they are based on scientific laws that apply only WITHIN our universe. They do not apply to the stuff the universe itself floats around in.

Some say "life". I say "Evolution has a pretty good, concistent explanation". They then argue something along the lines of "yeah, but it doesn't explain this and that" which is something evolution never MEANT to explain. Ofcourse, when pointing out all the flaws in the Intelligent Design theory, they suddenly start to back out of the discussion.

Some say "love", or "souls" or "Emotions" or anything they can come up with. None of those arguements are in any way proof of God, because I can usually pick out the flaw after the first post/conversation.

>>It just depends on what you're looking at.<<

Indeed. I look at the Big Picture, try to see as much of the "evidence" as possible. Its no different from any other religion.

>>And what do you believe are the answers to these questions?<<

Meaning of life: Life has NO intrinsic meaning, other than procreation. Therefore, we are free to devote our lives to whatever purpose we feel strongly about. Some devote their life to work, others to travelling, yet others to their family.

Where do we come from: evolution has some good awnsers. We are, after all, biologically not very different or unique.

Why are we here: the parents had sex (always hard to grasp that one). We are NOT here to fullfill some kind of "grand purpose". "You are the same decaying organic matter as everyone else".

What happens to us when we die: this is a hard one (its not hard to come up with some kind of awnser, but its very hard to find one that is convincing). I personally believe that when we die, we die. There is no afterlife, no nirvana, no tir-na-nog, no asgard, no heaven, no reincarnation, no second chance. So, better make the most of THIS life while it lasts. Which I fully intend to do.

So, what do you think about them?

 

[One Eyed Jack]

I think it sounds utterly nihilistic. I hope you enjoy your empty, meaningless life. As for the evidence for Christianity, there's plenty of that-- you just don't want to look at it.

 

[shima]

>>I think it sounds utterly nihilistic. <<

Yes, from your perspective it probably does. Just like a kid thinks that being an adult is the same as simply telling kids what to do. There is much more to it than nihilism.

>>I hope you enjoy your empty, meaningless life. <<

My life is neither empty nor meaningless.

>>As for the evidence for Christianity, there's plenty of that-- you just don't want to look at it.<<

Well, I've looked at things that people called "evidence" before. So, why don't you show me some evidence and I'll go and look at it.

 

[One Eyed Jack]

Because I don't think you really want to see it. Of course if you are interested, here's as good a place as any to start looking.

 

[shima]

>>Because I don't think you really want to see it. <<

If I didn't want to see it, I wouldn't be asking you for it. I want to understand why some people would view this as evidence.

 

[LightSon]

Originally posted by shima

What happens to us when we die: this is a hard one (its not hard to come up with some kind of awnser, but its very hard to find one that is convincing). I personally believe that when we die, we die. There is no afterlife, no nirvana, no tir-na-nog, no asgard, no heaven, no reincarnation, no second chance. So, better make the most of THIS life while it lasts. Which I fully intend to do.

Shima,
Let me see if I understand what you are saying. You have a total of maybe 80 or 90 years (if natural forces permit) of breath to "make the most of THIS life..".

Since this is your stated intent, I must conclude that hanging out in this forum with a bunch of religious polemicists is what you consider pursuing that goal. After LIFE you will turn back to dust and vanish into oblivion.

I like being on this board. I like talking about my faith. My goals are to hone my thinking and writing skills and maybe (just maybe) affect someone for good. Aside from just enjoying a good debate, do you ever hope (beyond reason) that God does exist and that there is meaning to your existence beyond just hanging out here?

 

[Heathen]

Zakath,
Thanks for showing me the ropes as you wish them to be. So, I suppose I'll now play along and try to state my experiencial ignorance first. Please feel free to confound me.

I state my basis for my Christian faith upon the factual, historical person and acts of Jesus Christ, who stated himself to be The God. Having begun as a devout agnostic, and still so in many areas, I can only say that my search for the origins of life and the existence of God abruptly stopped on Him. I don't recall anyone else having made such a lasting impression upon history in the manner in which he lived, taught and died. Most other world religions require a fulfillment of rites or regulations upon which to base their faith. Jesus demonstrated how faith works.
[Josh McDowell's, Evidence That Demands A Verdict, is available for research, (and sadly to the unbelieving, the Bible is also involved).]
I believe man has the innate capability to know or merely sense of something greater than himself. Man's ability and hunger for dominance in areas of power, wealth, conquest, knowledge and inner peace point to an ultimate state of existence for that which he seeks. Could the perfection and omnipotence of God be the void which the mind desires to have settled? As for me, I say yes. But the unbelieving may not. Faith, (a trusting belief in something to be true), based upon experiencial and/or empirical evidences is useless to the one who does not wish to be subjected to it and the limitations on their humanity which it might inflict. I am guilty of being incomplete/unholy/unwhole based upon my own recognition of the ultimate and my inability to achieve it by my own hands. But then we are speaking of invisible spiritual things aren't we?

 

[shima]

Lightson:
>>Let me see if I understand what you are saying. You have a total of maybe 80 or 90 years (if natural forces permit) of breath to "make the most of THIS life..".<<

That is EXACTLY what I am saying, yes.

>>Since this is your stated intent, I must conclude that hanging out in this forum with a bunch of religious polemicists is what you consider pursuing that goal. <<

ONE of my goals, but yes that is true. Strange as it may seem, but I'm curious about other people. So, I come here.

>>After LIFE you will turn back to dust and vanish into oblivion.<<

Correct.

>>I like being on this board. I like talking about my faith. My goals are to hone my thinking and writing skills and maybe (just maybe) affect someone for good.<<

Well, we agree on some of the reasons for being here. I like talking about what I believe, argueing with people who hold different views (perhaps they will change my mind, perhaps I will change theirs).

>>Aside from just enjoying a good debate, do you ever hope (beyond reason) that God does exist and that there is meaning to your existence beyond just hanging out here?<<

Well, I woulnd't mind if life lasted longer than just 80 years, but that is not my decision to make. I don't believe in God because of the inconsistency in the bible and several other reasons, but that doesn't mean there is no "afterlife". I personally like the ideas that Hinduism has about reincarnation and Karma. Perhaps we're all here to learn, and to be born again untill we get it right. Perhaps Jezus was the first such person to get it "right" and was therefore reincarnated.

 

[RogerB]

Jezus

What does spelling it that way do for you? Does it add to your life's fulfillment? Is it something you chalk up to "Good Deed For The Day"?

Or are you really just 9 years old?

 

[Zakath]

Originally posted by Heathen
Zakath,
Thanks for showing me the ropes as you wish them to be.

I posted my observations distilled over time. If you don't like the way they look, well then, don't use those same old arguments and post something along a different tack...

So, I suppose I'll now play along and try to state my experiencial ignorance first. Please feel free to confound .

Starting off with such a wonderful attitude, I'm certain we'll be dazzled and amazed.

I state my basis for my Christian faith upon the factual, historical person and acts of Jesus Christ, who stated himself to be The God.

I concur there was very likely an individual who can be identified as Jesus of Nazareth. Whether he was the Jewish Christ, or messiah, is an article of debate for almost twenty centuries.

Having begun as a devout agnostic, and still so in many areas, I can only say that my search for the origins of life and the existence of God abruptly stopped on Him.

Why abruptly?

I don't recall anyone else having made such a lasting impression upon history in the manner in which he lived, taught and died.

The image of Jesus of Nazareth that has been promulgated by the Christian church has indeed has a long impact on European society and their colonial empires. In the rest of the world the impact is much less impressive.

Most other world religions require a fulfillment of rites or regulations upon which to base their faith. Jesus demonstrated how faith works.

Could you please elaborate on your beliefs about what this means? With the thousands of sects of Christianity in the world it's hard to tell what you believe unless you share it with us...

[Josh McDowell's, Evidence That Demands A Verdict, is available for research, (and sadly to the unbelieving, the Bible is also involved).]

I have used McDowell's first edition (the one that I used almost three decades ago) with students as an excellent demonstration of of shoddy scholarship and poor editorial oversight. I find it less than impressive as an apologetic tool for the Christian cause. Perhaps if you had specific elements of the tome you wished to discuss, we could do so...

I believe man has the innate capability to know or merely sense of something greater than himself. Man's ability and hunger for dominance in areas of power, wealth, conquest, knowledge and inner peace point to an ultimate state of existence for that which he seeks. Could the perfection and omnipotence of God be the void which the mind desires to have settled? As for me, I say yes. But the unbelieving may not.

You have, perhaps unwittingly, stumbled upon a major point of difference between the theist and atheist. The theist honestly believes that humans need some sort of deity to meet their internal needs, the atheist does not believe this.

Faith, (a trusting belief in something to be true), based upon experiencial and/or empirical evidences is useless to the one who does not wish to be subjected to it and the limitations on their humanity which it might inflict.

This definition is self-contradictory, isn't it? A trusting belief in the veracity of something cannot exist if one does not accept either the belief or the object of the belief. It has little to do with the humanity of the individual and much to do with the existence (or lack thereof) of the object of the faith. In this case, the existence or non-existence of deity.

I am guilty of being incomplete/unholy/unwhole based upon my own recognition of the ultimate and my inability to achieve it by my own hands. But then we are speaking of invisible spiritual things aren't we?

No need for self-effacing shuffling here, lad. We're all adults (or should be). Hold up your head, stand up for what you believe, and try your best to explain it. I may agree, or I may not. Time will tell...

 

[Zakath]

Originally posted by RogerB
What does spelling it that way do for you? Does it add to your life's fulfillment? Is it something you chalk up to "Good Deed For The Day"?

Or are you really just 9 years old?

What are you getting all steamed about, Roger? You surely don't think that the individual he's speaking actually about spelled his name "Jesus"? Or do you? :doh:

 

[aikido7]

One thing Christians rarely do with atheists is engage them--actually "fellowship" with them. This does not mean cracking open our big bag of scriptural fortune cookies and quoting them verses. It means encountering them on the road, the same journey, the long step between a dusty porch and the threshold of a peasant in first-century Galilee.

We might take our cues from Jesus. We might ask them to tell us what this god is like--the one that they "don't believe in." We might listen and understand why their god IS unbelievable. We might open our hearts and find common ground in the reality of human problems. We might "take them in"--like the stranger on the same path as ourselves. We might talk and listen, loving God and the neighbor beside us.

 

[LightSon]

Well said!

Well said!

Originally posted by aikido7
We might take our cues from Jesus. We might ask them to tell us what this god is like--the one that they "don't believe in." We might listen and understand why their god IS unbelievable. We might open our hearts and find common ground in the reality of human problems. We might "take them in"--like the stranger on the same path as ourselves. We might talk and listen, loving God and the neighbor beside us.

Very well said aikido7. May God be glorified in all we do.

 

[quip]

Re: The question of evil.

Re: The question of evil.

Originally posted by Husband&Father
THE QUESTION OF EVIL ADMITS MORAL ABSOLUTES AND THUS PRESUPPOSES GOD.

H&F

All arguments regarding moral absolutes, presuppose god's existence and yours is no different.
Yet, the very question of evil as a being the providence of an existing god, is the essence of the argument from evil.

The onus of divine presupposition is on the believer not the unbeliever. the argument from evil is simply using acts of evil to demonstrate the logic (or lack thereof) behind the presupposition of god and his moral absolutisms.

Such logic questions the veracity of an omnipotent and omnibenovolent god which will not, or cannot remove evil from his creation.

Your argument presupposes an unprovable presupposition!