Atheism; An Intellectual Dead End

[ding]

God is a man made concept.
We don't know if the BB even happened. It's all conjecture at this point. It's the best explanation we can come up with based on what we observe and understand.

I personally will reserve judgement on a supreme being there is not enough evidence one or the other at this point

So this is your current mythology then ?!

Very brilliant.

God and Gods are ancient concepts that predate history.

Therefore we do not know where the notion of God or Gods came from and therefore it is impossible to scientifically and logically determine where it came from and whether it is due to REAL God/Gods or not.

In the meantime if this personal mythology works for you then fine. So be it.

Sorry but no. Humans invented gods to explain what they couldn't

And yet we still believe.

And you will believe whatever you want regardless of anything anyone else says , whether there is evidence or not and that's your choice

I have made a different choice

Since the beginning of time, belief in a higher power has always existed and continues so today. The debate over the existence of God has always persisted too. You are not making a new argument.

Your belief that man believes in God because of man's inability to explain the physical world around him is wrong. It is man's ability to see order and connection which makes him believe in a higher power, not his inability to explain it.

I'm happy about your choice. You seem to have a need to validate your choice.

 

[Constructive Anarchy]

It must be difficult for you to think clearly with your knees jerking so hard. Post #63 was my first use of the word "faith". Yet somehow I keep saying it. You also evidently didn't read the post I was responding to either. The gentleman in question clearly stated that science would "explain everything eventually".
That sounds just exactly like a statement of faith. Doesn't it.

It does, and it would be ludicrous if anyone actually said that. But, while you accuse me of not reading clearly, it is you that is misquoting what Mohammed said. He didn't say that science would explain everything - as in some blind faith that science will, someday, have all the answers to life; after all, the very point of science is that for every answer, a whole new universe of questions to explore are revealed. Rather, he said that science can explain everything, eventually - as in, given time, every phenomenon has a rational explanation, grounded in science, physics, and mathematics; there is never any reason to ever resort to the supernatural to find explanations for events, and phenomena in the universe.

And I happen to agree with Mohammed 100%. Just because we haven't found an explanation for a phenomenon yet, I have no reason to believe that we won't. Now is this "faith"? I supposed. However, I would submit that this is an observation. Science has proven itself to unravel every "supernatural" event from "demon possession" to "The gods crying" in the past; I see no reason why that will not continue.

Oh I see, he said science"can" explain everything eventually. That's a nearly great distinction in his statement of faith.

It is a distinction with a difference. The distinction makes it not a statement of faith, but of fact. Science can explain everything, as demonstrated over centuries of...well...explaining everythin. Every single phenomenon that religion tried to insist was suernatural? Science expalined without resorting to myths, fables, and the supernatural. So, yeah. It's not a statement of faith; it is a statement of fact based on centuries of demonstrated evidence.

Uh huh, sounds so much different from : God can explain everything, eventually.

And, by all means, please demonstrate any monotheistic religion that says that. Not "will", when we "stand before him", but can and does now".

It's embarrassing to watch you go through these semantic contortions to no effect. I'm sure it's very difficult for you to hear that your primitive form of thought is based on the same kind of blind faith that has driven men for many centuries.

 

[hobelim]

Why is it that atheists never start these threads?

I started a couple of threads demonstrating the differences between atheism, and theism, and was attacked for "hating Christians".

When you throw water on someone in a deep sleep their reflex is to attack.

When you challenge those who maintain irrational beliefs with rational questions or well known facts, you become the enemy.

 

[Constructive Anarchy]

Why is it that atheists never start these threads?

I started a couple of threads demonstrating the differences between atheism, and theism, and was attacked for "hating Christians".

When you throw water on someone in a deep sleep their reflex is to attack.

When you challenge those who maintain irrational beliefs with rational questions or well known facts, you become the enemy.

Might have been more interesting if he could even begin to examine his own thought processes.

 

[ding]

So this is your current mythology then ?!

Very brilliant.

God and Gods are ancient concepts that predate history.

Therefore we do not know where the notion of God or Gods came from and therefore it is impossible to scientifically and logically determine where it came from and whether it is due to REAL God/Gods or not.

In the meantime if this personal mythology works for you then fine. So be it.

Sorry but no. Humans invented gods to explain what they couldn't

And yet we still believe.

And you will believe whatever you want regardless of anything anyone else says , whether there is evidence or not and that's your choice

I have made a different choice

I really do not see any evidence that you have made any choices, other than to engage in verbosity.

I would rather suspect that you were simply born an idiot.

And you believe everything you are told without question

You are a mindless sheep

I test everything.

 

[hobelim]

Why is it that atheists never start these threads?

I started a couple of threads demonstrating the differences between atheism, and theism, and was attacked for "hating Christians".

When you throw water on someone in a deep sleep their reflex is to attack.

When you challenge those who maintain irrational beliefs with rational questions or well known facts, you become the enemy.

Might have been more interesting if he could even begin to examine his own thought processes.

I know, he seems to be set in the position that unless God reveals himself on CNN or can be examined under a microscope in a laboratory he must not exist..

Pretty stupid for someone who likes to think that he is smarter than everyone else.

 

[ding]

Our spirituality is different, and many times stronger than theists.

What are you really saying? That you are more fanatical ?!

Me? I would say less so, as atheists behave so much like religious fundamentalists.

Painting a group of people with such a broad brush is a mistake. I guess theists do not think.

Sure, there's a distribution. So what? Humans have an innate need to worship something. Even atheists.

Not true. I worship nothing.

Alcoholics worship alcohol. Drug addicts worship drugs. Sex addicts worship sex. Control freaks worship dominance. I have yet to meet anyone who does not have some level of compulsion. We all worship something. It seems the only choice we have in the matter is in choosing what we worship.

 

[ding]

Spirituality does have one advantage over atheism..

It provides all the answers:

Where do we come from? God made us
Why does bad things happen to good people? God wants it that way
Why does the sun rise in the east? God wants it that way
Why is the sky blue? Because God made it that way

They might not be the right answers...but you get an answer

Ask an atheist and he will say....How the hell do I know?

And that is the advantage of Atheism. When one has all of the answers, there is no need for further exploration, or discovery, is there?

But, when one must respond with, "I don't know", that rather paves the way for the logical response of "Let's find out!", now doesn't it? I rather prefer a path that offers questions to explore, rather than answers to be accepted. Don't you?

Atheism does not have all the answers I have never heard that espoused by any atheist

Atheists IMO tend to be a more empirical sort

How so? How is not believing empirical?

Observable evidence is needed for one to e empirical

the mere existence of something is only empirical proof that that thing exists it is not proof of anything else

I agree. It can also mean it isn't. Other tests are required.

 

[hobelim]

What are you really saying? That you are more fanatical ?!

Me? I would say less so, as atheists behave so much like religious fundamentalists.

Painting a group of people with such a broad brush is a mistake. I guess theists do not think.

Sure, there's a distribution. So what? Humans have an innate need to worship something. Even atheists.

Not true. I worship nothing.

Alcoholics worship alcohol. Drug addicts worship drugs. Sex addicts worship sex. Control freaks worship dominance. I have yet to meet anyone who does not have some level of compulsion. We all worship something. It seems the only choice we have in the matter is in choosing what we worship.

Nonsense. No one gives gifts or offerings or prays to any of those things expecting an eternal reward.

 

[ding]

Why is it that atheists never start these threads?

I started a couple of threads demonstrating the differences between atheism, and theism, and was attacked for "hating Christians".

When you throw water on someone in a deep sleep their reflex is to attack.

When you challenge those who maintain irrational beliefs with rational questions or well known facts, you become the enemy.

Might have been more interesting if he could even begin to examine his own thought processes.

I find curiosity and objectivity to be extremely powerful tools at arriving at objective truth. That and diversity of thought.

 

[sealybobo]

Are Atheists able to use rational thought, deductive reasoning, and scrupulous logic to substantiate and legitimize their perceptions? Or are they simply lacking a perception that most people experience without the need for rationalization? Are they spiritually dumb?

So your belief doesn't need to be rational. Thanks.

 

[sealybobo]

I am an athiest. I simply do not believe in supernatural entities, gods, angels, demons supernatural events or anything of that sort. My attitude is that science can explain everything, eventually.

And some things science will never be able to explain.

 

[sealybobo]

I am an athiest. I simply do not believe in supernatural entities, gods, angels, demons supernatural events or anything of that sort. My attitude is that science can explain everything, eventually.

Ok so how do you explain the origin of the Big Bang then?

Apparently you are not a very good philosopher.

How do you explain it? By telling a story your ancestors made up?

 

[Czernobog]

It does, and it would be ludicrous if anyone actually said that. But, while you accuse me of not reading clearly, it is you that is misquoting what Mohammed said. He didn't say that science would explain everything - as in some blind faith that science will, someday, have all the answers to life; after all, the very point of science is that for every answer, a whole new universe of questions to explore are revealed. Rather, he said that science can explain everything, eventually - as in, given time, every phenomenon has a rational explanation, grounded in science, physics, and mathematics; there is never any reason to ever resort to the supernatural to find explanations for events, and phenomena in the universe.

And I happen to agree with Mohammed 100%. Just because we haven't found an explanation for a phenomenon yet, I have no reason to believe that we won't. Now is this "faith"? I supposed. However, I would submit that this is an observation. Science has proven itself to unravel every "supernatural" event from "demon possession" to "The gods crying" in the past; I see no reason why that will not continue.

Oh I see, he said science"can" explain everything eventually. That's a nearly great distinction in his statement of faith.

It is a distinction with a difference. The distinction makes it not a statement of faith, but of fact. Science can explain everything, as demonstrated over centuries of...well...explaining everythin. Every single phenomenon that religion tried to insist was suernatural? Science expalined without resorting to myths, fables, and the supernatural. So, yeah. It's not a statement of faith; it is a statement of fact based on centuries of demonstrated evidence.

Uh huh, sounds so much different from : God can explain everything, eventually.

And, by all means, please demonstrate any monotheistic religion that says that. Not "will", when we "stand before him", but can and does now".

It's embarrassing to watch you go through these semantic contortions to no effect. I'm sure it's very difficult for you to hear that your primitive form of thought is based on the same kind of blind faith that has driven men for many centuries.

It would be, if that were true. Since you cannot provide the examples that I asked for, one can only assume it is because you kinow you can't. That is the difference between faith, and observation. You have faith that your mythical God will answer all of your questions in your mythical afterlife, whereas I observe that actual science answers quetions we have about the universe here and now, given time, and resources.

 

[Czernobog]

Why is it that atheists never start these threads?

I started a couple of threads demonstrating the differences between atheism, and theism, and was attacked for "hating Christians".

When you throw water on someone in a deep sleep their reflex is to attack.

When you challenge those who maintain irrational beliefs with rational questions or well known facts, you become the enemy.

Might have been more interesting if he could even begin to examine his own thought processes.

You mean it might be more interesting if I would agree to your preconcieved notions? Sorry. I prefer logic, and reason.

 

[Czernobog]

Sorry but no. Humans invented gods to explain what they couldn't

And yet we still believe.

And you will believe whatever you want regardless of anything anyone else says , whether there is evidence or not and that's your choice

I have made a different choice

I really do not see any evidence that you have made any choices, other than to engage in verbosity.

I would rather suspect that you were simply born an idiot.

And you believe everything you are told without question

You are a mindless sheep

I test everything.

Except your preconceived notion of the existence of God.

 

[Constructive Anarchy]

Oh I see, he said science"can" explain everything eventually. That's a nearly great distinction in his statement of faith.

It is a distinction with a difference. The distinction makes it not a statement of faith, but of fact. Science can explain everything, as demonstrated over centuries of...well...explaining everythin. Every single phenomenon that religion tried to insist was suernatural? Science expalined without resorting to myths, fables, and the supernatural. So, yeah. It's not a statement of faith; it is a statement of fact based on centuries of demonstrated evidence.

Uh huh, sounds so much different from : God can explain everything, eventually.

And, by all means, please demonstrate any monotheistic religion that says that. Not "will", when we "stand before him", but can and does now".

It's embarrassing to watch you go through these semantic contortions to no effect. I'm sure it's very difficult for you to hear that your primitive form of thought is based on the same kind of blind faith that has driven men for many centuries.

It would be, if that were true. Since you cannot provide the examples that I asked for, one can only assume it is because you kinow you can't. That is the difference between faith, and observation. You have faith that your mythical God will answer all of your questions in your mythical afterlife, whereas I observe that actual science answers quetions we have about the universe here and now, given time, and resources.

Based on that simple logic: You have faith that science can answer every unresolved question, eventually.

 

[Czernobog]

Why is it that atheists never start these threads?

I started a couple of threads demonstrating the differences between atheism, and theism, and was attacked for "hating Christians".

When you throw water on someone in a deep sleep their reflex is to attack.

When you challenge those who maintain irrational beliefs with rational questions or well known facts, you become the enemy.

Might have been more interesting if he could even begin to examine his own thought processes.

I know, he seems to be set in the position that unless God reveals himself on CNN or can be examined under a microscope in a laboratory he must not exist..

Pretty stupid for someone who likes to think that he is smarter than everyone else.

I know. How stupid to expect evidence to accept the existence of a thing. Now, excuse me while I ride off on my pink unicorn, to go have lunch with queen of the fairies, and the Bandersnatch, with Harry, Hermoine, and Ron.

 

[sealybobo]

I am an athiest. I simply do not believe in supernatural entities, gods, angels, demons supernatural events or anything of that sort. My attitude is that science can explain everything, eventually.

Ok so how do you explain the origin of the Big Bang then?

Apparently you are not a very good philosopher.

for one thing the BB is just the most accepted theory that fits our observations of the Universe it is not a 100% proven fact yet if it ever will be.

Have you ever considered that people may not have the capability to completely understand the universe much like a dog is incapable of understanding algebra ?

Oh I agree with you Skull Pilot on that.

But it is just that there are both a whole lot of amateur scientists and also a few professional ones who have made Science their Religion.

That's my point.

If Muhammed digs deeply enough into his own Philosophy to deal with the dilemma of who created his BB then I think he will see he needs more than just Science in his life. At the very least he needs Philosophy. And this will lead him at least to Deism I think.

How could the BB create itself? If it can than IT is GOD.

It must be a God? That's what you've concluded with no evidence? How scientific of you. And when that wasn't enough you had to make up that it visited moses? If that's not true neither is Christianity.

Anyways, "must be a God" is a ridiculous conclusion. It could be yes but must be no.

This is God of the gaps. If we discovered how the big bang started we will just fill that hole in like we have 1000s of other holes and you would continue arguing because how the big bang started was a natural event.

 

[Constructive Anarchy]

And yet we still believe.

And you will believe whatever you want regardless of anything anyone else says , whether there is evidence or not and that's your choice

I have made a different choice

I really do not see any evidence that you have made any choices, other than to engage in verbosity.

I would rather suspect that you were simply born an idiot.

And you believe everything you are told without question

You are a mindless sheep

I test everything.

Except your preconceived notion of the existence of God.

You have no idea what I believe; I haven't said. You apparently have faith enough in your own perception to fill in the blanks.though.