What do atheists believe?

I tend to be leery of "Believing" in anything that doesn't have a convincing body of evidence to support it. That doesn't mean I'm not open to look at new evidence if it becomes available, but until such evidence becomes available I just don't see the value of "Faith".

I think you're being somewhat disingenious with your remark that disbelieving in something you can't disprove is irrational. Disproving the existence of ANYTHING is virtually impossible. You can no more disprove the existance of the Flying Spaghetti monster or Cthulhu than I can disprove the Christian God. The burden of proof lies with the person claiming something DOES exist.

As for Spiritual experiences, all that tells us is that the Human nervous system is fairly easily manipulated into providing certain experiences. These spiritual experiences can be found almost equally among all flavors of religion, and perhaps even more among partakes of certain phsycoactive substances. I'm sorry, but no matter how convinced you are that you've experienced "God", the evidence suggests your brain is just playing tricks on you.

by jardinier Jan 29, 2008

Religious faith is a personal matter. You have no way of knowing or proving that mystical experiences are functions of the physical brain.

By starting off with a skeptical attitude, not only are you unlikely to have a supernatural experience yourself, but you would not presumably bother to read material in which such experiences are supported by collaborative accounts by individuals.

In the Bible Jesus is reported as having said: [Matthew 7:7] Ask, and it shall be given you; [b][u]seek, and ye shall find; [/b][/u]knock, and it shall be opened unto you.

Obviously if you do not seek, you will not find. The evidence is there, even if it is just a person who believes his life has been changed or enhanced by his religious faith.

Has your atheism (rejection of the possibility of religious truth) enhanced your life? Do you feel liberated because you are not shackled with the commitment to follow the tenets of some religion?

You must have some system of personal ethics. From whence did these ethics come? Were you born with them? Did your parents teach them to you? Or perhaps you just learned by experience the Golden Rule: "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you."

I am seriously interested to learn the source of your system of ethics, whatever they might be.

I did not intend to be disingenuous with my remark about disproving, but I stand by it. If you cannot disprove that there is a god, then you are not in a position to judge or assess the validity of religious faith.

As I said such mystical experiences have been recorded by people of all different religions and spiritual systems, they have also been recorded by Agnostics and Atheists even if they might assign different meanings to them. I have had my share of mystical experiences through many years of experimenting with the techniques (if not beliefs) of various forms of mysticism.

Being a skeptic doesn't mean you can't seek, it just means that you carefully analyze what you find. I am willing to hazard that I have read more accounts of people with spiritual experiences than you.

Atheism, or at least deep, abiding Agnosticism has indeed enriched my life immensly, it has allowed me to life my life free of what I consider the drawbacks of most organized belief systems, such as irrational Guilt, Fear of divine retribution or punishment, the notion of Sin (original or otherwise) etc.

I do have a system of ethics. It largely revolves around the (rational) notion that my life will be more enjoyable if I show respect and consideration to my fellow human beings than it would be if I went through life being a sociopathic monster. I favor a live and let live approach that seems beneficial in the long-term.

I find your closing remark curious. Think about what you're saying. We have established that it is next-to impossible to disprove the existance of ANYTHING. What you are saying is that since we can't disprove the existance of ANYTHING we are not in a position to judge or assess the exsitance of anything.

by charliespencer Jan 29, 2008

"...seek, and ye shall find..."

I have absolutely no idea what I would be looking for, how to go about seeking it, or how I would recognize it if I found it. At least the blind hog knows it's acorns he's looking for. There are so many other things I am interested in pursuing and that I know I can accomplish. Why spend my limited time looking for something that may not exist?

"Do you feel liberated because you are not shackled with the commitment to follow the tenets of some religion?"

Yeah, that's probably part of it. I don't have to worry about losing part of my time to a weekly ceremony to stroke the ego of a vindictive entity; or my money to a cause others often pervert; or associate with hypocrites who stop observing the tenets of their faith as soon as the service is over; or more time to reconciling the internal conflicts within a religious body of writings; or the external conflicts between religions, all of which claim to the correct and only path.

Personal ethics? Mine are driven by the belief that we only get one shot at this life on this planet, so it's immoral to deprive others of their opportunity to be happy during their short stay. The Golden Rule makes even more sense if you believe there is no afterlife, since you're not adhering to it in the hopes of an otherworldly reward.

"If you cannot disprove that there is a god, then you are not in a position to judge or assess the validity of religious faith."

Frankly, at times I find many of the actions taken by believers in the name of their religion to be disgusting: persecution, murder, mutilation, suppression, denial of rights; how am I doing so far? Since religion is a personal issue, I cannot prove they are not doing the work of their god. The only evidence I have of their faith is their actions. But so much harm is done to others in violation of the Golden Rule, I feel I am in a position to assess religious faith as not valid for the way I want to live my life and be treated by others.

Edited so often I've lost track; mostly for additions and clarifications.

by delbertpgh Jan 31, 2008

It certainly makes no sense to look for reasons to believe in unseen powers. Faith is God's most essential gift, and if you have it, it makes no sense not to acknowledge it. Valuing good sense above all else, I therefore believe in intelligent forces I cannot see or touch.

On the other hand, being completely rational and modern, I cannot impute to God any particular interest in me as an individual. As you go through the catalog of misfortunes from crop failure to malaria to spina bifida, it's pretty hard not to reach the conclusion that God's looking at something other than his people. Although I am obliged to love and honor God, it doesn't seem to have resulted in a mutuality of interests. I think we may be a puzzle for him, something he created to help him figure out his own nature. But that's a hunch, not a belief. My "belief system" essentially revolves around the importance of being moral, humble, and honest; and advancing justice, truth, and happiness. That's all faith-based stuff, which is quite real to me, real as the stones and air and interest rates and the theory of relativity.

Being that I don't expect I'll ever get any instructions or relief from my problems from forces above, and that my death will be as random as the death of a mosquito; and that I yet struggle to understand what is best and right and how to do good; how, then, am I different from an atheist with his own ideas of principled living?

by tig2 Jan 29, 2008

But my partner is.

He went to a Catholic college. In a class, the priest sad that, "Man makes God in his own image". That was all it took.

For the very left brained, it does not require a personal experience to "prove" the non-existence of God. At least for my partner, the belief of a non-existence was already present. It only required a watershed moment. But I would say equally that for a person with faith, no such proof is required either.

I believe that no matter what you call yourself, if you are not tolerant of all of those around you and are unwilling to respect their viewpoint as much as you would like to have yours respected, you are less than what you would like to have believed about you.

Through mere tolerance, I am able to have conversations with anyone around me. I do not have to defend or promote my beliefs, nor does anyone else.

by forum surfer Jan 29, 2008

personally don't like it when a person of faith (or non-faith) immediately deems your opinion inappropriate or somehow biased because you are different. I have faith, and feel that life without it would be much less substantial. I don't look down on people who think different, I like to hear their viewpoint. Not necessarily to defend, just to learn. Tolerance is key regardless of your religion or beliefs.

I totally agree. I will admit I went through a rather "Zealous" Atheistic phase in my youth where I felt it was somehow my duty to disprove the "evils" of Religion. Luckily age and experience have mellowed me out and I have come to realize that Religion can add value to people's lives even if I don't believe in the tenets of Religion. Therefore I have no need to push my viewpoints on others. I will engage in discussion and debate about the subject, but try to do so in a respectful and non-hostile manner.

Of course Religion can be a touchy subject and I will admit that occasionbally things heat up. Some people (both religious and non-religious) can get very agressive about their viewpoint and I will admit I occasionally get baited into heated exchanges, but as Tigger said, if people of differing viewpoints show respect for my views, I will grant them the same courtesy.

by john.a.wills Jan 29, 2008

Just as the outcastes of India manage to have subcastes, atheists manage to have sects: Solipsism, Marxism, Objective Self-Realization, Secular (In)Humanism, etc. Each of these has its own beliefs. The Solipsist is not interested in sharing his belief(after all, he thinks the rest of us don't exist), but the others may be, even to the extent of writing fantastic trilogies to impress the young with the beliefs. But I doubt that a Marxist or Objectivist would be in agreement with His Dark Materials.

by mjd420nova Jan 29, 2008

As a scientist, my beliefs are somewhat skewed. Being a believer means committed faith in a higher power. A believer can be such without having a religion. I see so many pastors, preachers, ministers and leaders of religion making their own interpretations of what the Bible says. Each one is different and guided by their particular churches doctrine. Who's right, who's wrong. If indeed there is a God who sits in judgement of all of us, He must be very upset. One minister believes that Jesus died for our sins and that ALL are saved already and no faith is thereby required. In the future we may indeed encounter beings who may appear to have goddly powers and that would surely kick off a new faith. Who's to say that this is right or wrong?

by fregeus Jan 29, 2008

My personal beliefs are as follows;
- There is no such thing as a God or Gods.
- There is a powerful natural force in the universe, but we cannot communicate with it at a sentient level.
- The only Constance is balance, with balance, you have everything you need to live and be happy.
- The purpose of life is to achieve this balance and to keep it as long as possible.
- When you die, you die. Period. You cease to exist, no soul or consciousness. At most, your life energy is recycled within nature itself.
- I believe in most of the teaching of the bible as it helps me achieve my life balance.
- "Hell" is nothing more than regret for things you can no longer change but you still wish to. No devil, demons, fire or whatever.

I believe that should there be a great being looking and "watching" over us, well, it's doing a lousy job of it. If it does exist, it does not deserve my devotion to it. I found that every time the bible or religious people cannot explain something, they use the simple explanation that it?s Gods will, Gods plan and such. Well guess what. The plan sucks and I am not buying it. I am sorry if I offend with that statement, but that's the way I feel.

Believing in something is nothing more than finding something you are comfortable with and give you purpose in life. There are no wrong or right beliefs. Atheist are not superior or inferior to anyone, they just have a different belief.

Some words I live by;

- True wealth can only be measured at a man's funeral by how many people showed up and what they are saying.

- The perfect state of Chi, or balance, is unobtainable. But that's ok, because the pursuit of it is the fun part.

- Life is like a box of chocolates, you never know what you're going to get.

- No matter how rotten you feel, no matter how bad things are going, no matter how down or depressed you are. Tomorrow is another day and a clear canvas to work on.

Chi everyone!

TCB

Edited for grammar

by forum surfer Jan 29, 2008

"- True wealth can only be measured at a man's funeral by how many people showed up and what they are saying"

Do you really beleive that? Or do you mean it's more about what you leave behind, like how you've lived your life and treated those around you?

I can think of a few people off hand who may show up at my funeral with nothing good to say unless I have a casket full of ice and a free beer sign on my lid, lol. I've known some good people that died and lived a very good life, but as such very few people showed up for the funeral. I knew an older gentleman who left his entire estate (a considerable value) to charities for children, because his own turned out to be rather ruthless. They were successful people but were obsessed with such and started bickering over his belongings b4 he was gone.

Not many people showed up, nor spoke...but he was a good man none the less.

by fregeus Jan 29, 2008

My personal definition of true wealth is how people liked you and appreciated you while you were alive. A wake to me should be a celebration of a life, not the mourning of a death.

You can be a great person and still have no one show up at your funeral. It will probably happen to me as I am a nice person but I, unfortunately, lack in the social scene. But if just a few people show up and say good things about me, then I was truly appreciated and therefore wealthy with good friends and good company.

True wealth is measure in the love others show to you because of the love you showed them. If your "friends" wouldn't show up unless you had beer at your funeral, maybe they are not the kind of "friends" you should have.... don't you think?

BTW, that person who gave away his estate to the charity made a sound investment in his "true" wealth. His own family were not showing any love for him, so he gave his material wealth to people who could give him true wealth in return!!!

TCB

by nicknielsen Feb 9, 2008

Cool. Date and time? ;)

I don't think it's how many show up to see you off that's important, but how many have good memories of you after you're gone. One of the best people I've ever known had less than 15 people at her funeral, but she is still remembered and missed today by more than just me. On the other hand, one of the least likable people I've ever known had hundreds show up, a good percentage of whom probably wanted to make sure it was actually him who died. Aside: Talk about bringing back memories; until I read your post, I hadn't thought of the ba$tard since the day of his funeral.

by charliespencer Jan 29, 2008

I believe there is no supreme being responsible for the creation of this physical universe or corporeal life. I believe there is no object often called a 'soul'. Since there isn't, it doesn't continue life on another plane of existence after the death of the physical body, and it is not judged by a supreme being on the actions of it's physical incarnation.

Why? I am not aware of any physical evidence that can be replicated by scientific methods that provides proof of any of these concepts. I find the scientific explanation of the 'Big Bang' origin of the universe, and the theory of evolution explanation of differing species, to be more logical than any religious explanation I've been exposed to regarding either topic. For whatever reason, I find myself incapable of what others call 'faith', the unsupported belief in an undemonstrated higher consciousness.

I'm aware it is generally regarded as impossible to prove a negative, so my beliefs are just those, beliefs.

I'll probably add more to this, but I also believe that if I don't get to work, my employment is in jeopardy. Well, that's not a belief, since I've seen this concept demonstrated.

If we are to believe your assertion that your employment is in jeopardy, we're going to need you to recreate the result in a controlled environment ;)

by darwinfundy Jan 29, 2008

Each level of intelligence has its sphere of awarability if I am permitted to use such a word. Us lot have the biggest sphere that we know of. We are limited to 5 senses. It is not for us to know what lies beyond our sphere and so the god idea will exist only as a human can describe. The descriptions I've encountered range from inane to demented. The pretense of the reality and the power and wealth it bestows on the pedlars grants the notion will stay alive far longer than the equally fanciful spent trace gas warming of the atmosphere dogma, despite there being marked similarities.
You want ppl you liked to be somewhere better, rather than the atheist kaput, that's it. The same dogma causes otherwise intelligent ppl to kill or suicide destructively.
Personally, I think we would be better off without ambassadors of the hypothesis and the associated pomp, tithing and politics. Ppl should be allowed to form their own superstitions without being brainwashed into one aspect. That the business of religion is largely tax exempt is criminal in my view. Indoctrination is just that whether done by small cult or a big one, the end is the same. Money flowing from an earner to a burden on society. Renouncing muslimism is punishable by death, though not commonly practiced. The hysterical fighting between religions over whose belief is more valid is a mere fraction of the homogenized infantile ludicrousness. That we evolved and are evolving is undeniable. That all brain activity ceases when the brain is dust equally so. The notion that we're 'spirits' in a host body is so far from indemonstrable it is surprising it has persisted so long.
Even so, my computer's name is Doris. She's a tempermental sod.
:-) each to their own.

by imonroe Mar 10, 2008

Is opium legal in Turkey? If not, you should be arrested for being so high.

PS: Darwin's theory, as stated by himself has been disproved. See "irreducible complexity." It is a huge disservice to our children that this is still taught in schools, as a fact no less.

by kjell_andorsen Mar 10, 2008

The Theory of Evolution has certainly not been disproved and let's be clear, Darwin was the first Scientist to put forth the theory of Evolution, but since his time the theory has been expanded upon and added to by the works of subsequent researchers who have compiled massive amounts of evidence.

by ontheropes Jan 29, 2008

I have a hard time believing that you can search for "the truth" for 40 years without knowing what atheists believe. To me it looks like all you're trying to do is stir things up a bit and have another controversial discussion. I'll bite.

I'll admit to doing a little trolling as far as you're concerned. You kind of creep me out. Maybe you picked up on that. Maybe you just plain don't like me and/or think I'm an a$$hole. Join the club. For whatever reason I never did receive an answer in another thread on what 40 years of sacrifice has taught you. That was a semi-serious question. Save me some trouble and tell me what you've learned. If it's too personal that's cool. My own beliefs are rather personal too.

What do I believe?

I think that religions and their importance in modern society as they're currently practiced are a curse to mankind and yet I live for the day when people everywhere are free to openly study any religion and science without persecution. I would like to see ID and evolution studied in our schools. Intelligent ideas of all stripes are worthy of review including the idea of atheism.

I'll never live long enough to see the day when all people are free from religion.

To my way of thinking right now we're not too far from the dark ages. We talk about living in a civilized society and yet most of us who have homes lock the doors because in our hearts we know that someone could come in and kill us or steal out shlt. In my mind a civilized society wouldn't need locks of any kind so we're a long way from being civilized.

What else do I believe? First of all, I'm not an atheist. I have a faith in something greater than my understanding due to personal experiences that aren't easily explained. I worship no deity and don't feel a need to start. That doesn't mean that I don't believe in God. I just have a personal relationship that may or may not be like anyone else's experience. My beliefs are more along the lines of Aleister Crowleys simple statement, "do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law". Does that make me an anarchist or Satan worshiper? In some minds maybe it does. So what?

I may be totally messed up in the head when it comes to God (and everything else) but it gives me peace and that's worth something. I don't know how your search progresses but I travel far and wide beyond religion to get my answers.

I think that religions are for those too lazy to think for themselves.

Perhaps scientists and atheists are right and my brain will just fire off a few last synapses when the cells no longer receive enough oxygen and shortly after that there will be nothing. No soul, no rising above the scene, no bright white light, zip, zilch nada. To me that's kind of a peaceful thought too. At least I won't be bothered by this damn ringing in my ears anymore.

Life is short Mr. Jardinier. I recommend that you give up searching for the truth if you don't have any peace from doing it.

I basically don't care what the truth is for anyone else anymore so I guess you can ignore this post too. I think I have my answers, enough to get me thru the day, and that's all that matters.

by darwinfundy Jan 29, 2008

to my mind. Eternal life, that is purgatory. Imagine when you've been everywhere, done everything, what then? Scrabble?
I think contentment is an ambitious but achievable condition, if believers get it their way, it's a cop out but good luck to them.
If our PM and the enviro-fruitcakes have their way with our disposable income, we won't have any and so be able to leave our doors unlocked because we won't have any shIt to call our own worth stealing. Except the pope will still want his 10%!
:-)

by charliespencer Jan 29, 2008

In some ways it is kind of scary to think about how I would try to keep occupied for eternity. I do know that I don't want to spend it in the constant adoration of another being. I don't want to spend it deflowering eternal virgins. Reincarnation might not be bad, but I don't see the point if I don't retain the knowledge I gained in the previous trips. I also know I do not want to spend it on one side forever separated from those I cherished in life on the other. Finally, trivial as it may seem to some, an eternity with only human-based entities is not worth spending. No pets? Don't call me, and don't wait on me to call you.

None of this should be interpreted as meaning I believe in an afterlife; it's just random musings.

by jackofalltech Feb 1, 2008

While you are certainly entitled to your opinions and beliefs, I would like to point out one thing. The age of reason was brought about by brilliant men who believed the God of the Bible created everything and, because of that, there is order in everything (physical) and therefore it can be known. The Bible says we are to love God with our minds as well as the other things and we are encouraged to think about why we believe what we believe.

I admit, there are too many people who are too lazy to think for themselves, but they are not supposed to be the norm.

by ontheropes Feb 1, 2008

Whatever.
I can provide similar enlightenment by using random quotes from Mad magazine. If you choose to believe that the Bible was divinely inspired it's not my fault. You're on your own there. You and a few million other sheep.

Religion was created as a way to control masses of people thru fear. It was true way back when and it's true today.

That comment makes you sound like a self righteous bigot, much like what you're saying about the very people you're pointing your finger at. So having faith in something makes someone somehow mentally lazy or less intelligent? That's about as close minded as you can get yet you preach on open mindedness and tolerance of ideas. That's no different than lumping people of a certain race into their stereotype. Bigotry is bigotry, no matter if it's on a race or religion basis.

by ontheropes Feb 1, 2008

If that's what you want to believe knock yourself out. I stand by my statement.

by charliespencer Feb 1, 2008

"...I live for the day when people everywhere are free to openly study any religion and science without persecution. ... I think that religions are for those too lazy to think for themselves."

Initially I thought these statements were contradictory, but I've decided they're not.

OTR is expressing his opinion in a discussion that expressly asked atheists for their opinions. He didn't open a new discussion and ask others to rebut his position. He's not trying to convince others to give up their beliefs. While he say religion is for those to lazy to think (I would have opted for the word 'misguided'), he supports their right to think or not as they wish.

While I don't agree with everything he's said (I think intelligent design is creationism with a coat of paint, and that a religious belief is not the sign of lazy mind), I don't see anything in his post that requires rebuttal. Again, jardinier asked, OTR answered.

I did not deliberately avoid addressing your question. The fact is I spend very little time at TR. Normally I will only appear when I come across some news item which I think will stimulate discussion. I do not have time for the trivial repartee that tends to dominate most discussions.

I started this particular discussion because I am not aware of this topic ever being addressed.

What I have learnt in my 40 years is too detailed to list here. However the most important thing I have learnt is to distinguish between facts and beliefs. I have a lot of beliefs, but will not acknowledge these as facts until either I have experienced them myself, or they have been proven scientifically, or they are supported by collaborative accounts from persons who have experienced them.

I created a ruckus at a Christian website to which I post by stating that I am an agnostic in the sense that I believe, but do not know. This was not acceptable to the Christians and I copped so much flak that I deleted my profile and created a new profile so that I could contribute plausibly to discussions.

The major milestones in my search were:

1. "God" did not have a plan for creation but set in motion a number of laws without having a clue as to the outcome.

2. Yin and Yang. Everything in the universe [b][u]including the universe itself [/b][/u] has its equal and complementary opposite.

Thus both law and chaos (chance) are functioning throughout the universe concurrently.

That was where my search ended. I have a lot of beliefs but any of them are open to change.

The primary reason I prefer posting to meetchristians.com rather than TR is that the members stick to the point. I am baffled by the amount of time wasted in TR discussions by meaningless banter.

I would suggest to those who thrive on this: "Get a life."

Much as I love repartee myself, I get plenty of opportunity for that in real life with corporeal people.

I will be happy to answer any further questions you might like to put to me, but don't expect an immediate reply.

by ontheropes Feb 4, 2008

by imonroe Mar 10, 2008

So let me get this straight. You believe that God created laws and possibly the universe, but had no idea what he was doing?

Is he/she a juevenile God learning a craft? Is God still vested in this creation or are we in his waste basket? Why only one planet with life? He didn't feel like trying again? Did God create Yin and Yang? Sorry for the sarcasm, I can't help myself. Maybe instead of visit Christian forums, you make a personal visit and speak with someone with credibility. Trust me, God has a plan and he knew what he was doing. Keep up the search.

by charliespencer Jan 30, 2008

Did any of us adequately explain where we're coming from?

Yes I am most happy with the outcome of the discussion.

Reading the various posts I am pleased to find that many people acknowledge the notion of a natural force in the universe, but find most aspects of religion counter-productive.

I believe it was at TR some time ago that I started a discussion: "Has religion done more harm than good?"

Whatever the answer to that question may be, the fact remains that the vast majority of people throughout the world need to believe in something "out there" with which they interact, and which has considerable control over their lives.

by absolutely Jan 31, 2008

[i]In my personal experience I have found many times that if you "scratch" an atheist, they will say that they were turned off religion by the "old man in the sky" image which they were taught as a child. Scratch a little bit harder and many will acknowledge the possibility/likelihood of some kind of natural intelligence which pervades the universe.[/i]

Go scratch yourself.

[i]Many religious people claim to have had experiences of a higher power or spiritual force. I have had such experiences. What experiences have atheists had which have proved to them that there is no "other" intelligence or anything supernatural?[/i]

None; that is, none of my experiences persuade me to disbelieve my own experiences, and take yours on faith.

by jamesrl Feb 1, 2008

How and why should I respect your beliefs if you don't do the same to others?

I don't share religion with the Dalai Lama, but I respect him for his beliefs. He doesn't slam others for what they believe, he encourages people of all faiths to think about the issues near and dear to him.

And frankly I was always taught that the lesson of the good samaritan parable was that someone (who was of a faith considered to be heretical to judaism) could be of a different faith and demonstrate "christian" virtues of love and charity for a stranger, while all the priests and rabbis did not.

You have no idea of Neil's journey or that of other aethists and to submit that they came to their positions out of irrational thought is immensely arrogant, ignorant and hubristic. That speaks to me much more about your real faith than what you profess.

James

by charliespencer Feb 1, 2008

I remember when the word 'values' was a strong and healthy philosophical concept. In the U.S. it has apparently been crippled and no longer capable of standing on it's own. Now it's rarely seen without at least one crutch constantly propping it up, either 'Christian values' or 'family values'. Some days it's so feeble it requires both.

The problem with "Christian values" is few values are exclusive to Christianity. The problem with "family values" is most people who use the term are more concerned with defining 'family' than they are with the 'values'.

by nicknielsen Feb 9, 2008

[i]The problem with "Christian values" is few values are exclusive to Christianity. The problem with "family values" is most people who use the term are more concerned with defining 'family' than they are with the 'values'.[/i]

I tend to leave the area when I hear one of these phrases; they are most often used by those without values to justify hatred or exclusion.

by shellbot Feb 1, 2008

Yet another thread where we can turn on each other and start the name calling....

Some of us just do what we can to get through the day..who gives a cr@p what religions or god we believe in.....

"What experiences have atheists had which have proved to them that there is no "other" intelligence or anything supernatural? "

Maybe the whole point is that there are no expereinces for Atheists..........

We each have our own things..Frankly I wouldn't have the balls to ask you to detail your beliefs and experiences to me....

by charliespencer Feb 1, 2008

I wouldn't have asked either, not because of a lack of testicular manhood but because of complete lack of concern. I'm just argumentative enough to enjoy yanking a fundamentalist's robe up to see if he's wearing boxers, briefs, Depends, or nada.

by shellbot Feb 5, 2008

it would actually never enter my mind to ask someone to talk about thier religion..its thier business..
plus as you, i just wouldn't care enough..

the above post about values was good..
i'm more of a "values" person..if i burn in h*ll for doing my best to be a good decent honest person..well..then so be it..i'll have a lot of freinds to spend eternity with

your statement degrades other people for their beliefs being different from your personal beliefs. That's being incredibly narrow minded.

by jamesrl Feb 1, 2008

James

He stated what has happened to him in past experiences. Then there was this statement:

"Personally I consider that disbelieving in something you cannot disprove is at best no more rational than believing in something which you cannot prove."

That statement in particular doesn't show disrespect of others or insult their intelligence based on personal beliefs. That is why I spoke up, OnTheRopes' comments were narrow minded and bigoted...regardless of his belief.

I personaly could care less what anybody else beleives and I welcome their opinon, but I'm not going to disrespect or degrade them for it...nor should anyone else.

by ontheropes Feb 1, 2008

It's my opinion. If you want to put me in a box labeled bigot and narrow minded how is that going to impact my life. I don't even know who in hell you are. Do you think I care?

But you put the majority of the people on the planet in a box with your statement questioning their intelligence. Your opinion doesn't offend me, but your views towards others who feel differently is nothing short of intolerance. Not that I care, I just pointed it out.

by absolutely Feb 1, 2008

[i]Religion was created as a way to control masses of people thru fear. It was true way back when and it's true today.[/i]

Funny how nobody has in any way replied to that part of your post yet. They're all just "offended," quite consistent with mentally lazy and other descriptions they claim to find "offensive." It's really too bad the sheep are all too stupid to appreciate the irony! It's a hoot!

[i]Whatever. I can provide similar enlightenment by using random quotes from Mad magazine.[/i]

Priceless!

by forum surfer Feb 4, 2008

"Religion was created as a way to control masses of people thru fear. It was true way back when and it's true today."

I did happen to disagree with that statement, but it is his opinion and he is entitled to it. He didn't go out of his way in that statement to insult someone's intelligence or refer to them as sheep. I'm not too "stupid" to appreciate the irony. If the fact that people don't agree with you makes them sheep, I guess I have some grass to graze. Just respect other's opinions without insulting them.

by absolutely Feb 4, 2008

I respect [i]your right[/i] to your stupid opinions. You have no right to my respect, and will never have it with stupid beliefs like those.

by formerly callpete.com Feb 4, 2008

MESSAGE DELETED

"This creator must be greater than myself."

Precisely. This is exactly where a logical approach starts.

by kjell_andorsen Feb 5, 2008

setting aside the muisuse of the word "logic" in this instance. The problem with the idea presented here is that it immediatly begets the question "Who created the creator?"

There is inherently nothing more miraculous about the universe being self-created than there is about some Creator deity being self-created.

Why must this supposed creator be greater than myself? Why not an equal, or even an inferior? Basic genetics says those with physical deformities can often have children with the physical, non-deformed traits of previous generations.

What standards of "greatness" are we using?

by tig2 Feb 5, 2008

The question of faith is an easy one- it is just as much a part of me as my DNA
is. Because it is so intrinsic, I do not question it, nor do I find it necessary to
look at it any more deeply than my personal intellectual curiosity requires.

More importantly, I do not find it necessary to share the result of my
intellectual curiosity with anyone unless asked. I am not compelled to know
the state of your faith, nor do I consider it my responsibility to share my
"wisdom" with the world at random.

I think that many people of faith are similar to me. I think that there are many
Atheists who at least appreciate me leaving them alone. Many agree with me
that one's faith is a personal matter.

I did not create myself. I have a Mother and a Father who had a hand in it.
Despite my Father's belief, he is not greater than me. How I got here is a
matter of simple reproductive biology. My view of God is none of your
business.

by shellbot Feb 5, 2008

i may not be a believer..but at least I am tolerant of others religions..

i have a certain amount of respect for the faithful, especially the dedicated ones..but in my eyes..it could be any faith.

"wow.."

Now THAT was funny! :D

MESSAGE DELETED

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States

"Logic dictates that at some point, every man must look at his reflection in a pool of water, and ask himself some questions ..."

** How does logic dictate this? Curiosity, maybe, but logic?

"...and come to some sort of conclusions: "I am here. I did not create myself. I must have a creator. This creator must be greater than myself."

** Why "must" this creator be greater than myself? What evidence is there of any involvement in my creation other than the mingling of my parents' genetic material?

"To worship (unconditionally love) a being greater than one's self is the next logical step."

** Why does superiority require love? Many view superiority as the target of resentment; others view it with indifference. What degree of superiority requires worship? The ability to create self-replicating life? The ability to create metallic alloys? The ability to create those watch parts you mention later?

** If we follow this through from the other side of the relationship, is the next step "I am superior and therefore should be worshipped."? This strikes me as arrogant. If the creation of other sentient entities to require their worship under threat of eternal penalty isn't self-worshipping and narcissistic, what is it? What does it say about the superior being that it is concerned with how it is regarded by inferiors?

"To me, to suggest that our creation is a result of chance "big bang, evolution, etc" is similar to shaking a box of watch parts and pulling out a watch."

** Watch parts don't change or evolve due to environmental changes, radiation, exposure to other organic materials.

"Human, plant, and animal physiology is so much more complex than a watch, and more complex that any scientific lab could EVER produce, ..."

** "EVER"? Let's watch the use of our superlative adverbs.

"...that we must come to the conclusion that our Creator is an intelligent being of a much higher order than man."

** Knowing how to do something doesn't make one more or less intelligent than others, only that one possesses a different skill set. A CNC programmer isn't more or less intelligent than a tax accountant; they just have different knowledge. Each could learn to do the other's job.

"Virtually all religions (Judeo-Christian, Hindu, Muslim, Buddhism, Scientology, etc) acknowledge that there is a Creator."

** Virtually all religions once acknowledged the universe revolved around the Earth and women were inferior to men. Now we know better. Just because "virtually" everyone acknowledges something doesn't mean it's true.

"Since the axiom exists in logic that no truth can conflict with other truth ... and none of those mentioned religions have completely the same beliefs from beginning to end, then obviously they cannot all be true."

** You assume one of them is true. They could all be false. Or two or more of them could be the same but expressed in different terms (GPS coordinates vs. latitude and longitude vs. 42 Main Street vs. "Across from the McDonald's on Main St.").

"The modern scientific explanations of self-worship that have made so-called atheism or agnosticism so chic in the past 40 years don't really teach a lot about morality, except for moral relativity,..."

** Science isn't about worship or morality. You've mistaken it for philosophy and ethics.

"...the educated masses who have spent their life trying to disprove God's existence mostly don't seem to be looking for a moral code. They want to decide for themselves that killing unborn babies is okay. Inconsequential sex, drug use, killing, lying, and stealing all in the name of self worship are what the academically elite seem to be trying to prove."

** While I don't view Wikipedia as a reliable resource, it's a good starting place.

shows 15% of the 2001 U.S. population considers itself non-religious; hardly "the educated masses". If the masses are the ones who are engaged in "killing unborn babies, ... Inconsequential sex, drug use, killing, lying, and stealing all in the name of self worship", well, 88% of the U.S. population considers it self some variety of Christian. Those are your "masses". Most of those of us in atheistic minority aren't interested in disproving God as much as we wish to be left alone by the religious majority.

"If you aren't believing the truth, it doesn't really matter what you believe."

** Truth doesn't require "believing". Faith requires believing. They aren't interchangeable.

"The Bible is the true and complete word of God. It is comprised of 66 books by over 40 authors over 1600 years, with no conflicts."

** The Bible is a collection of works written, compiled, and edited over centuries by humans with a variety of human motivations for a variety of human purposes. Please provide any evidence that any entity other than humans was involved in it's creation. Most of your position is based on it. Earlier you noted that if multiple religions conflict, only one can be true. How do KNOW yours is the "true" one? Believers in other faiths are just as convinced as you are that their's is the "true" faith. How can you PROVE yours to someone of a different faith, or to someone of no faith?

"..you eventually have to look in that mirror and decide for yourself what you are looking at."

** That's easy. I'm looking at me. I think how I got here is of far less importance than my being here and what I do while I'm here.

"If my statements offended you, ..."

** Nope. If no offense is intended, none is taken. None of my responses are intended to dissuade you from your faith, only to explain why I don't subscribe to it.

MESSAGE DELETED

[i]"I am willing to hazard that I have read more accounts of people with spiritual experiences than you."[/i]

I have no idea how you would come to such a conclusion, but if it makes you feel good, that's OK by me.

[i]"What you are saying is that since we can't disprove the existance of ANYTHING we are not in a position to judge or assess the exsitance of anything."[/i]

I didn't say we can't disprove the existence of "anything." I said we can't disprove the existence of a god. I am unable to follow your train of thought in the above quoted remark.

by kjell_andorsen Feb 5, 2008

It's not you who said we can't disprove the existance of ANYthing. It's simply a virtually impossible thing to do. Disproving the existence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster is jhust as impossible as disproving the Existance of "God". It's also impossible to disprove the existance of Zeus, Ishtar, Odin, Legba, or any other deity, spirit, demon, ghost, angel or mythical creature ever conceived by humanity. We can't PROVE that these beings don't exist, but we CAN say there is little to no evidence that they DO exist and therefore we have little cause to believe that they do. Once again, the burden of proof always rests with the person making the claim that something DOES exist.

You are trying to make a special case for God, saying that since we can't disprove his existance we are in no position to make any judgement about his validity, but by logical extension this also applies to all the other entities I mentioned. You can't PROVE the Flying Spaghetti monster doesn't exist so therefore you are not in a position to pass judgement about the validity of Pastafarians.

So going to the extreme, by your logic we would need to believe in every single religion ever invented by anyone since none of them can be disproven. Of course, due to the overwhelming contraditions in doctrine implied by this chances are your head would probably explode.

by jardinier Feb 5, 2008

You are just being argumentative for the sake of it. You like the "sound of your own voice" so to speak.

There is no "burden of proof" on anyone. Certainly not by myself. I don't care what you believe or don't believe.

Once again I say religion can only be vindicated by personal experience or collaborative experience by a number of people. It appears to me that you are just a windbag trying to make a case for atheism.

Most people in this discussion have made an honest statement about their beliefs. You do not appear to be able to commit yourself to any viewpoint other than perhaps nihilism -- if that is indeed a viewpoint.

by jackofalltech Feb 5, 2008

I wasn't talking about one. The Bible says God has not given us a spirit of fear but of "... and self-discipline." Don't close your mind to something just because someone lied to you, check it out yourself.

show me that you can read a little and assume a lot.

If you choose to believe that the Bible is the inspired word of God that's fine with me, do what you want. To me the Bible is a book.
Putting the word "Holy" in front of any other word doesn't make it so.

I used an old Bible to light my wood-burning stove last year. The thin, ripped out pages made for good kindling. Yet another instance of how the Bible can give you a warm and fuzzy feeling.

I'm just wondering something here... What is your personal estimation for the age of our planet Earth?

by jackofalltech Feb 5, 2008

Based on evidence such as the age of the Methuselah tree (a Joshua pine, the oldest tree on earth); the half-life of Pollonium; the strength of the earth's magnetic field; etc., I estimate the earth to be around 6,000 to 10,000 years old. Since the geneologies in the Bible corroborate this figure, I am confidant it is correct.

Do you have any disputing evidence you would like to discuss?

Where the first question your new neighbors ask is, "And what church do you attend?"; and the second is, "Would you like to attend mine?"

by forum surfer Feb 5, 2008

In which case you get asked "Which ACC team do you pull for?" The week of March Madness is fought for on the corporate vacation schedule, just like 4th of July, Christmas and New Year's.

by nicknielsen Feb 9, 2008

It's SEC all the way around here, buddy!

Edit: time for supper. Stupid keyboard can't even spell SEC. :(

by forum surfer Feb 5, 2008

I never stated my beliefs. I just thought it was narrowminded to insult someone because they were different from you, which you continue to do.

by jardinier Feb 5, 2008

As I have not studied philosophy I cannot give an academic answer to your comment although I am quite sure there is a term to describe your line of thought. Something along the lines of "the chicken and the egg" I would imagine.

Either you acknowledge that there is an intelligence innate in the universe, or you insist that the whole lot "evolved" by random selection, which in itself would be a form of intelligence -- those forms surviving which can best utilise a particular environment.

In fact a definition of intelligence which I happen to like is: "The ability to adapt to changes in the environment."

Has it ever occurred to you that plants (trees for example) display a high degree of intelligence by reaching upwards towards the light, and (the roots) reaching downwards to seek moisture and nutriment.

It really doesn't matter to me. We will never know how the universe and all therein came into being so who cares?

by kjell_andorsen Feb 5, 2008

Well I was wondering when the Ad Homiem would start.

I believe I've been pretty clear about my lack of "belief" from my first post. My *viewpoint* iis simply that I don't need to "believe" in anything that doesn't have evidence to support it, but I will be willing to look at and analyze any new evidence that is presented. If that makes me an argumentative windbag, then so be it.

I suppose I could be called a nihilist ifyou need a label, but most branches of Nihilism are filled with a certain despair, even anger over the pointlessness of existance. I feel very little despair or rage at life, in fact I consider myself exceptionally happy.

You wanted the viewpoint of an atheist, yet you seem unwilling to accept mine.

MESSAGE DELETED

"I don't know how you could come to the conclusion that you are greater than the Creator."

I didn't come to that conclusion. Based on a lack of physical evidence, I've come to the conclusion there is no creator for me to be greater than.

MESSAGE DELETED

by tig2 Feb 5, 2008

There is nothing wrong with sharing your faith. My response was more
directed at the OP than you. Your point is a valid one- the discussion was
opened and you were therefore invited to share your views.

In a discussion between ourselves, I might choose to discuss my personal
beliefs. But I know two things at this particular thread- Jardinier likes to stir
the pot- this is not the first time that he has opened this kind of conversation,
and that the question as originally posed was speaking to atheists- which I am
not and I dare say you are not.

For all of Jardiner's vaunted search for truth, which he has presumably found
near as I can tell from his writing, I think he missed a fundamental truth. No
one wants to be told what to believe or how to believe. I have discovered that
conversations that begin from that premise go in one of two directions-
complete silence or general outcry. The way the initial post read to me was on
the lines of "if you're an atheist, you're obviously wrong so defend your choice".
While I will grant that other people read it differently, what I saw was yet
another post from Jardiner looking to start controversy.

Given the thoughtfulness of your first post, I have no doubt that a discussion of
faith with you would be delightful.

MESSAGE DELETED

jarninier started this on the 29th and then checked out for almost a week. Quoting from him above,

"The fact is I spend very little time at TR."

** This sounds like borderline trolling to me. Start a topic and then fail to follow up for an extended period.

"Normally I will only appear when I come across some news item which I think will stimulate discussion."

** I wonder what news item inspired this.

"I do not have time for the trivial repartee that tends to dominate most discussions."

** In a forum that's primarily about technical issues, I'm not sure how a religious discussion could not be considered "trivial repartee". It's presence in the Off-topic category should be proof enough.

"I created a ruckus at a Christian website ... I copped so much flak that I deleted my profile and created a new profile ..."

** Again, borderline trolling.

"I believe it was at TR some time ago that I started a discussion: 'Has religion done more harm than good?' "

** I should have remembered that this topic had already been hashed over in a similar form. I'm not sure what is gained by raising it again in a slightly different form.

** I have no problem with others having beliefs that differ from mine. I try to be a "live and let live" kind of guy. At times I'm envious of their ability to believe in something without physical proof. I ask questions not to change the beliefs of others, but to try to understand how they sustain faith in spite of what I view as a lack of supporting evidence.

I've learned one thing. This is the last time I respond to one of these fire starters. If someone starts a topic, I feel they're obligated to participate in it more than once a week.

Don't ever let a new thought or idea make you change your mind about anything.

Please enlighten me, what is the truth? D'ya think I'm going to go to hell?

Edit to add this question: How old is the Earth? Feel free to round off numbers.

by tig2 Feb 5, 2008

I would say that we are ALL keepers of the truth- as each of us knows it
individually.

I don't think that you are going to hell. What is more important is what YOU
think.

Don't let someone else's intolerance get to you. You have better things to do with
your time and energy. :)

Been a long time since I talked to a real hard-core Bible thumper and I kind of miss their entertainment value.

You said, "You have better things to do with
your time and energy." No I don't. :0 Besides watching Ellen right now my schedule is pretty wide-open.

MESSAGE DELETED

Many people avoid answering the question about the age of the Earth because they're not open to the ridicule they may receive.

Hard-core Bible thumper is about as bad as I'll call you. It's almost like a badge of honor, right? I won't assault your beliefs and I'll try not to make fun of them as your beliefs are really none of my business.

Who am I to say what someone else should or shouldn't do? There's far too much of that going around everywhere, even here at TR.

I used to believe much as you do. I never "got" the 6000 year part when, for me, there is so much better evidence but I kept on as a regular at my church anyway. I know a LOT of people like you. Been to many a prayer service kneeling right next to them. Almost miss those times, "almost" being the key word.

Thanks for not ignoring me or trying to minimize me as some folks try to do.

See you around the boards Pete.

by shellbot Feb 5, 2008

"forcing my tolerance" on you that is..

Same way as I suspect you would never ever try and force your beliefs on me?

Just saying its a big world..lot of people..lot of religions..and a lot of religions were around before Christianity and also request thier followrs follow only the god(s) of that religion.

Its a matter of respect mate..
Would you sit next to me at lunch if you knew i was not a believer of the correct religion?

No disrespect intended here...just curiosity as you posted a pretty heavy hitting post.

MESSAGE DELETED

MESSAGE DELETED

"If you buy a box labeled rat poison, you will accept that the contents are lethal unless you are proven otherwise. ... You wouldn't feed it to your dog on the chance that the contents were mis-labeled. You are living by FAITH and accepting the words on the box as TRUTH."

True, but I can test the rat poison. I can do a chemical analysis (okay, I personally can't, but I can pay to have it done or learn to do it myself), or I can observe rats that eat it. These methods will produce the same results every time they're repeated. I haven't found a method to do that for deities, but I'm open to suggestion.

Did everything arise out of nothing? Beats me; I don't worry about it much. I also don't worry much about why I exist, so the lack of faith doesn't hamper what I don't do anyway. Maybe I don't think about the significance of life because I don't think it was created so much as occurred. Maybe I think it just occurred because I don't think it has any long-term importance. Catch-22.

MESSAGE DELETED

I wasn't upset about "Palmie", I was just being silly. I assume you responded down here instead of up by the original "Palmie" posts because you don't yet know the "Maximum Level Reached" work around. If you want to respond to a post that's already at the bottommost level, go back to the post one level up and reply to it. This can result in a long series of potentially confusing posts at the bottom level. To prevent this, it helps to include the name of the person you're responding to in the Subject.

Your day may be starting, but I'm wrapping mine up.