Question to Atheists:

[chusteczka]

Originally posted by: bignateyk
Why bother contemplating something that the human mind simply cannot, and will not EVER be abe to understand? Just as a dog doesnt know that it is going to die, a human cannot possibly comprehend its own existence.

It is possible to gain further understanding of a subject by approaching it at a meta-level, or a higher level, than is immediately observed. This further understanding of our life is what is provided to us by contemplating the existence of a god.

Animals are fully aware of their own life and death. Humans just need to pay attention to animals to be able to understand methods of communication other than verbal or written human languages. A sheep will cry before its slaughter while a dog will either become fearful or extremely complacent at the veterinarian when it is put to sleep.

People with empathy can realize further understanding of an animal's actions beyond the human label for 'instinct'.

 

[irishScott]

Originally posted by: CKent

Originally posted by: irishScott

Originally posted by: CKent
I just don't see how it requires the existence of a deity. How is it any different from looking up at the sun, the moon or a thunderstorm and, not knowing how they work, assuming they too must be the work of a deity, as people did in millenia past?

Deism has many (albeit mostly underpopulated) variants, but the majority believe that God does not play an active role in nature or anything else. To a Deist, the fact that the thunderstorm's nature can be understood, even on the most empirical level (Caveman logic: "Big flash with Big Boom), proves there is a god; not because of the thunderstorm itself, but because of the order that it behaves with.

God didn't directly create the thunderstorm, nature did. But the Universe whose laws are responsible for the creation of the thunderstorm was most likely (with confidence) created by God.

That may be how YOU see it... but to someone a thousand years ago, those things were just as indicative of a controlling deity as the universe is to you now. And a thousand years FROM now, we may well understand many things about the universe which you now consider godlike. And if we still have our god gene then, there'll probably be some new unknown to attribute to Him Same sh!t, different millenia.

Not really. Deists don't look at unexplainable phenomena for evidence of a god. They look at the presence of order, and reason the existence of a god.

A Deist doesn't apply god to every unexplainable detail, only to the nature of the Universe, as achieved through logical human reasoning. And even then, this is only confident circumstantial evidence. A Deist says god exists with confidence. Not certainty.

 

[senseamp]

Originally posted by: irishScott

Originally posted by: senseamp
The list of things that were once unexplained and attributed to "God" is so long, that people should really stop attributing the unexplained to the supernatural.

I'm not talking about the fact that some woman awoke from a coma or that a gun goes "boom". I'm talking the nature of the Universe here.

That's not what I am talking about either. But plagues, famines, earthquakes, volcanoes, motion of the planets, etc were all once attributed to gods only to be supplanted by a natural explanation. So I would be careful of saying anything can only be explained by the presence of a deity simply because it hasn't been scientifically explained yet.

 

[irishScott]

Originally posted by: chusteczka

Originally posted by: irishScott

Originally posted by: chusteczka

Originally posted by: irishScott
How can you look at something like the Universe, with it's laws, rules, dimensions, shapes, and ORDER and deny, with absolute certainty, that there isn't a higher being behind it?

... Just in the general "God concept" sense, how can you deny it?

It is not so much the situation that a "God concept" is denied since this concept provides little relevance to life the way I live it. I do not deny any god's existence. I just do not give the thought any importance in my life.

To deny a god's existence, I would first have to consider such a concept to be important.

That would make you agnostic?

I live my life by reason as well. This reason leads me to be confident in the existance of a God who wishes us to be moral, among a FEW other things (check out my wiki link).

This is interesting.

agnostic
?noun

1. a person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience.
2. a person who denies or doubts the possibility of ultimate knowledge in some area of study.

atheist
?noun
a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.


These definitions have never seemed to apply to my lack of understanding of the concept of a god. To me, it seems as if these definitions were created by someone who believes in a god and must find a method to classify those who do not likewise believe. For me, the concept of god is not a binary concept with only two possibilities; belief or disbelief.

I suppose, my lack of validating the concept would most likely represent a NULL value. That is, neither equal nor unequal. I, personally, neither believe nor disbelieve in the concept of a god.

I further suppose the first definition of an agnostic would classify me but it still does not feel right to me. Without a believer telling me that I should believe, I do not really care about the issue much at all.


EDIT:
I have found that Buddhism and Shintoism come closest to my more educated understanding of life. The concentration more on life's energy and man's philosophic understanding of life rather than a belief in a higher being. However, one who believes in the concept of a god would probably define life's energy as a higher, god-like being.

My term, "more educated understanding", refers to my own understanding of life in comparison of before learning about religious philosophy to after learning about religious philosophy.

Interesting. So you take the 3rd route so to speak. But then how do you comprehend your own nature, the nature of man, the universe and such? Maybe I'm misinterpreting, but it seems to me that you believe that man rose from nothing.

To me, God created the Universe that created man. The presence of order means that it's creation, for what else produces order and purpose?

 

[irishScott]

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: irishScott

Originally posted by: senseamp
The list of things that were once unexplained and attributed to "God" is so long, that people should really stop attributing the unexplained to the supernatural.

I'm not talking about the fact that some woman awoke from a coma or that a gun goes "boom". I'm talking the nature of the Universe here.

That's not what I am talking about either. But plagues, famines, earthquakes, volcanoes, motion of the planets, etc were all once attributed to gods only to be supplanted by a natural explanation. So I would be careful of saying anything can only be explained by the presence of a deity simply because it hasn't been scientifically explained yet.

Once again, all of those primitive comprehensions were based on the behavior of the phenomena, not the presence of order within and around them.

Once science can explain the presence of order in our Universe, and why it's laws are what they are, and how that can come out of a non-being, I'll drop the existence of a supreme being.

 

[senseamp]

Originally posted by: irishScott

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: irishScott

Originally posted by: senseamp
The list of things that were once unexplained and attributed to "God" is so long, that people should really stop attributing the unexplained to the supernatural.

I'm not talking about the fact that some woman awoke from a coma or that a gun goes "boom". I'm talking the nature of the Universe here.

That's not what I am talking about either. But plagues, famines, earthquakes, volcanoes, motion of the planets, etc were all once attributed to gods only to be supplanted by a natural explanation. So I would be careful of saying anything can only be explained by the presence of a deity simply because it hasn't been scientifically explained yet.

Once again, all of those primitive comprehensions were based on the behavior of the phenomena, not the presence of order within and around them.

Once science can explain the presence of order in our Universe, and why it's laws are what they are, and how that can come out of a non-being, I'll drop the existence of a supreme being.

So you are a deist out of impatience?

 

[irishScott]

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: irishScott

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: irishScott

Originally posted by: senseamp
The list of things that were once unexplained and attributed to "God" is so long, that people should really stop attributing the unexplained to the supernatural.

I'm not talking about the fact that some woman awoke from a coma or that a gun goes "boom". I'm talking the nature of the Universe here.

That's not what I am talking about either. But plagues, famines, earthquakes, volcanoes, motion of the planets, etc were all once attributed to gods only to be supplanted by a natural explanation. So I would be careful of saying anything can only be explained by the presence of a deity simply because it hasn't been scientifically explained yet.

Once again, all of those primitive comprehensions were based on the behavior of the phenomena, not the presence of order within and around them.

Once science can explain the presence of order in our Universe, and why it's laws are what they are, and how that can come out of a non-being, I'll drop the existence of a supreme being.

So you are a deist out of impatience?

No, as I am confident that I am right. My belief is that it is impossible for order to rise from a non-being.

Take for example, the fact that the Universe is governed by laws. What if these laws did not exist. Not that they're in a different from, but they don't exist. Period.

All that would exist would be pure chaos, or nothing. The fact that our universe has order means that absolute chaos is impossible, which means nothing is truly random. But if something is not random, then it must have a purpose. That purpose is dictated by a heiarchy of laws that ascend all the way to the creator of the laws. Who but a being can create a core law? Where else would these laws come from?

The only other answer is that they came from non-being materials, yet what determined these materials to from laws? You can create an infinite hierarchy of order out of this argument. Since the Universe is not infinite, there must be some supreme being.

Even infinite limits have solutions.

 

[HigherGround]

to the OP, I suggest you read Read God Delusion by R. Dawkins . That will answer quite a few of your questions.

 

[senseamp]

Originally posted by: irishScott

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: irishScott

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: irishScott

Originally posted by: senseamp
The list of things that were once unexplained and attributed to "God" is so long, that people should really stop attributing the unexplained to the supernatural.

I'm not talking about the fact that some woman awoke from a coma or that a gun goes "boom". I'm talking the nature of the Universe here.

That's not what I am talking about either. But plagues, famines, earthquakes, volcanoes, motion of the planets, etc were all once attributed to gods only to be supplanted by a natural explanation. So I would be careful of saying anything can only be explained by the presence of a deity simply because it hasn't been scientifically explained yet.

Once again, all of those primitive comprehensions were based on the behavior of the phenomena, not the presence of order within and around them.

Once science can explain the presence of order in our Universe, and why it's laws are what they are, and how that can come out of a non-being, I'll drop the existence of a supreme being.

So you are a deist out of impatience?

No, as I am confident that I am right. My belief is that it is impossible for order to rise from a non-being.

Take for example, the fact that the Universe is governed by laws. What if these laws did not exist. Not that they're in a different from, but they don't exist. Period.

All that would exist would be pure chaos, or nothing. The fact that our universe has order means that absolute chaos is impossible, which means nothing is truly random. But if something is not random, then it must have a purpose. That purpose is dictated by a heiarchy of laws that ascend all the way to the creator of the laws. Who but a being can create a core law? Where else would these laws come from?

The only other answer is that they came from non-being materials, yet what determined these materials to from laws? You can create an infinite hierarchy of order out of this argument. Since the Universe is not infinite, there must be some supreme being.

Even infinite limits have solutions.

You aren't making any sense, because you connect dots that simply aren't there. If the laws didn't exist, there would just be a different universe, but it would still be there. You have no way of knowing if the laws we have are themselves a result of a random outcome. It's like looking at a coin on the ground, if it is heads, you can assume that someone placed it that way on purpose, or maybe that it simply fell that way.

 

[sandorski]

Why is a Universe of Order a more compelling argument of "God(s)" than a Universe of Disorder?

 

[EvilRage]

Personally, I believe the idea of a god is a man-made concept; its original design was to manipulate the masses. Give them a god to fear and that will keep them in line.

No one can prove or disprove the existence of a god. That is completely unknowable for the forseeable future. One cannot discount the possibility (however infinitely small) that someday there may be a way to prove it one way or another, but until then, the answer is up in the air.

Still, the question isn't about what can be proven, the question is about belief. I do not believe in any kind of god. The fact that the universe has any kind of order is not evidence to me that some being is responsible for creating order; only that the universe as we know it is only capable of functioning as a system with fundamental rules governing its behavior. Without these rules, the universe would collapse into chaos. It's certainly feasible that before our theorized big bang there were other similar explosions that resulted in flawed systems, which either immediately collapsed or collapsed over some indeterminable amount of time. (Or perhaps they didn't collapse, and there are parallel universes out there with different rules than our own system, which we are currently unable to detect. But I'm getting side-tracked here...) The fact that our universe WORKS is not the result of any special influence from some supreme being. I think it's more likely that the set of rules that are enforced by nature allow the system to exist without collapsing, and have done so long enough for intelligent life to spring up and have a debate about it.

 

[mobobuff]

Originally posted by: Conky
What I've never understood about religious people is that they simply hate that others have any belief besides theirs.

Why do they care about making everyone theists too if they are certain that their God does exist? I'm an atheist and could care less if others believe in God or not but Christians are not happy unless they can ridicule and belittle others who don't share their belief system.

A real Christian would not care if others believed in God or not. People who insist that those who don't believe in God are sinners and are going to hell suck worse than any person I've ever seen.

I fixed your statement to show that it's ridiculous that you are under the impression that the traits you gave are not shared by everyone from every side. And personally, I've never seen an athiest press his or her opinions as much as a religious person.

I'm agnostic, by the way. Agnostic with a hint of apathy.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: irishScott
How can you look at something like the Universe, with it's laws, rules, dimensions, shapes, and ORDER and deny, with absolute certainty, that there isn't a higher being behind it?

Because the belief in a Higher Being is a human concept, one used to answer the unanswerable. As Humans it's in out nature to have an answer to all things and when we don't we make answers up and the Higher Being BS is one of those.

 

[Lonyo]

Originally posted by: irishScott

Originally posted by: senseamp

Originally posted by: irishScott

Originally posted by: senseamp
The list of things that were once unexplained and attributed to "God" is so long, that people should really stop attributing the unexplained to the supernatural.

I'm not talking about the fact that some woman awoke from a coma or that a gun goes "boom". I'm talking the nature of the Universe here.

That's not what I am talking about either. But plagues, famines, earthquakes, volcanoes, motion of the planets, etc were all once attributed to gods only to be supplanted by a natural explanation. So I would be careful of saying anything can only be explained by the presence of a deity simply because it hasn't been scientifically explained yet.

Once again, all of those primitive comprehensions were based on the behavior of the phenomena, not the presence of order within and around them.

Once science can explain the presence of order in our Universe, and why it's laws are what they are, and how that can come out of a non-being, I'll drop the existence of a supreme being.

This is why I am an atheist. I don't need science to explain the existence of the universe for me to believe it can exist without god. I just assume that it will eventually be discovered and explained. Maybe not in out lifetimes, but there are still a hell of a lot of unexplained and unexplored things, and the formation of the universe should not be one that's a concern of ours in this day and age. There are many processes we don't understand etc etc.

Consider the big-bang theory. If the entirety of our Universe was compressed into something smaller then the head of a pin, and exploded, what are the chances that everything slid neatly into the organized universe we know and love on it's own?

I would contend that the universe is not "neatly ordered", since it's in a constant state of change. Earth alone is definitely not neatly ordered, it's in a constant state of change. Warming/cooling cycles, plate tectonics etc. Jupiter has a huge storm. Random solar flares from the sun etc etc. I would say it's not really all that organised, it's a pretty unstable mess. Add in the still expanding universe. If God created it, why wouldn't he create it in a finished state? Sure, the things that happen happen due to certain rules, but everything has specific properties that govern these rules, and that's just the way they exist.

By all the laws of nature, we should all be ultimately selfish and not give something without asking for something in return. Yet there are many people throughout history (and even more today) who give with no thought of a reward, save the good feeling that comes from doing something good. And where does that feeling come from praetell? Once again it violates the laws of nature.

Humans have advanced brains, and when you give, you get a warm fuzzy feeling inside, and I'd say maybe that's a reward.
And if we're thinking "selfish" do you mean personally, or for survival of the species?

 

[Norris]

This is off the original question but how in the hell can people believe in the Christian beliefs? I was raised a Catholic and had Christianity crammed down my throat for my whole life...it wasn't until I was in my thirties that I started to think for myself and stopped believing that silliness! I get so annoyed with my family that is still so obscessed with the Christian beliefs...one sister is married to a preacher and everything is "I pray about it" "I pray and ask 'Jesus God' for the answer and he always tells me what to do"..."WHATEVER!" I used to pray all the time and never...not once did I ever have a prayer answered! I only wish it were that easy!

You ask how someone can be Athiest...I ask how can someone be Christian? How can someone believe in a fairy tale? Noah's Ark?...yeah that's believable...NOT!!!!!

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: irishScott
How can you look at something like the Universe, with it's laws, rules, dimensions, shapes, and ORDER and deny, with absolute certainty, that there isn't a higher being behind it?[/L]

Because it doesn't answer any questions. It just shifts the question over by one step.

Instead of "who created the universe?", it's "who created the being that created the universe?"

I don't consider it to be a sign of rational thought if you accept that God created the universe and leave it at that, because that doesn't address the underlying question that you were trying to answer, namely, "Where did it all begin?"

 

[NeoSolo]

Don't stress yourself over this, just wait and at the end you will find out.

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: NeoSolo
Don't stress yourself over this, just wait and at the end you will find out.

No you won't, you'll be wormfood at that point.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: NeoSolo
Don't stress yourself over this, just wait and at the end you will find out.

...or not, but if it's "not" you'll never know so it still wouldn't matter.

 

[mattocs]

Originally posted by: irishScott
How can you look at something like the Universe, with it's laws, rules, dimensions, shapes, and ORDER and deny, with absolute certainty, that there isn't a higher being behind it?

How can't you?

And how can you think there is a 'God' with all the hate and suffering in this world?

 

[911paramedic]

Answer: Science explains how those things happened. (Referring to OP's post.)

Question: Why does the religious answer keep changing when new things are discovered or brought to light. (Like now there were dinosaurs on the Ark? (When it was pointed out how large the ark must have been for two of everything the story changed to "Well, not two of everything, but two dogs... from them came wolves, foxes, etc.) The Grand Canyon took months to create? The earth is only 6K years old? (Carbon dating folks, carbon dating.) Two thousand years ago people weren't the sharpest tools in the shed. I myself have seen somebody with the sheet pulled over them, only to see the sheet breathing later. Or stories of people being sent to the morgue only to be found alive.

They wanted to believe, needed to believe.

I'm just not buying it.

 

[judasmachine]

Originally posted by: irishScott
How can you look at something like the Universe, with it's laws, rules, dimensions, shapes, and ORDER and deny, with absolute certainty, that there isn't a higher being behind it?

Pretty much the same way you look at it with absolute certainty that there is a higher power behind it.

 

[zoiks]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: irishScott
As for Jesus, Mohammad (sp? no insult intended), and every other religious icon, they definitely existed, and they were definitely great philosophers with a lot of good points to make. As for them being divinely inspired/influenced, I am seriously skeptical. And their magic tricks (walking on water and such) were utter bullsh!t.

great philosophers? thats a stretch, especially in mohammeds case. a few grains of obvious and preexisting "widsom" in a haystack of harmful arbitrary senseless garbage is what their teachings were about. great manipulators of the people, thats what they were.

What a troll.
Don't pretend that you know everything about Mohammed since you obviously don't know anything about Islam. It's people like you who willingly spread poison trying to incite hatred. Its obvious with your posts of what kind of agenda you possess.

 

[IntrinsicValue]

Are you really trying to find out other people's ideas, or are you just trying to explain your own? You've already indicated several times in this thread that you are not open to new ideas.

Originally posted by: irishScott
No, as I am confident that I am right. My belief is that it is impossible for order to rise from a non-being.

Originally posted by: irishScott
I'll accept that there is no God when you can prove 100% that there isn't one.

These are not comments from someone who is willing to explore other avenues and possibilities. The fact is, you don't know. I don't know. Nobody knows. We all have our beliefs. This is covered in Philosophy 101. There's not much to gain from this topic unless you have an open mind, which you've already proven you do not.

 

[Anubis]

Originally posted by: Conky
What I've never understood about atheists is that they simply hate that others have any belief besides theirs.

Why do they care about making everyone atheists too if they are certain that God doesn't exist? I'm a Christian and could care less if others believe in God or not but Atheists are not happy unless they can ridicule and belittle others who don't share their belief system.

A real atheist would not care if others believed in God or not. People who insist that others must not believe in God suck worse than any biblethumper I've ever seen.

ummm wow yea i dont hate people for beleiving in whatever religion they do, i honestly dont give a fvck what you beleive as long as you dont get all pissy when i tell you i dont beleive in a higher power

ive never had a prob with anyones beleifs, however people always seem to have issues with mine