Why I am not an Atheist.

Actually the real reason for this, Okiefreak's comment aside, is their failing to use the Bible as a whole.

They tend to pick and choose what they want to believe from the Bible, which allows them to take a scripture out of context and say; see our actions are Bible backed, when in reality the Bible is opposed to their actions!

 

Taking passages from scripture of context certainly contributes to the problem. Check out the thread on the Christian forum "I'm Free, to submit to authority" http://hipforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=299333. In my last post for that thread, entitled "some alternative christian perspectives', I argue that the dude has taken Romans 13 out of context and made it into a justification for blindly submitting to tyranny.

 

If Atheism is illogical then what is every other religion in the world? If i grew up in china, i would be buddist, if i grew up in india, hindu, in ancient greece i would beleive in Zeus. Why are there so many religions all claiming the same thing? Surely they cca't all be right? Well, they're not, they're all wrong. Faith is not evidence, infact it's the complete opposite. There are certainly logical arguement for not believing in gods. Why should i believe some guy in the sky controls me in some pre-determined destiny? I create my own essence through the choices I make, not god. Man is only that which he makes of himself. World was created in 7 days, heaven, hell, the bible is a farce, full of contradictions. Personally, i believe anyone to believe in this fairy tale is illogical and not a rational person. Existence precedes essence. The artisan first creates his image of the papewr knife and then the purpose, to cut paper, before he creates it. Why then is there no set human nature if we were created by this divine artisan? We would all have the same purpose. Art is like morality, there are no set rules, we create our own, humans made morals, not god. To be honest i don't think anyone cares whether you're an atheist or not, besides you, it's obvious you think you've logically come to the best conclusion, but that's for you, not for everyone. 'Man may have been made in gods image but the conception of god is made in mans own imagination'

 

Buddhism is not deity based, please research a religion before you try to dismiss it.

 

Why can you not speak only of atheism? Why do atheist center their beliefs around the trashing of other faiths?

Like I said previously, this thread isn't about Christianity, Buddhism, or Zeus. It's about atheism.

 

Neodude has a point... many atheists base their entire belief on the trashing of others.

I can hate fish, but I can't hate them out of existence.

Scientists 50 years ago: Parallel universes sounds ridiculous!
Scientists now: Hmm, sounds true.

 

Hello def zeppelin

In regard to your statement.

"I don't understand what's so flimsy about the belief that both love and forgiveness can bring world peace - That's pretty much the message behind Christianity".

I expect that these are just opinions and would be a matters of faith on your part. The same would go for your reading and interpretation of the bible I would expect.

On the points that you made in the last paragraph, I would only say that you seem to stumble on the old problem posed by the existence of evil. God is either omniscient and uncaring or is not omniscient at all. Either way god and his prescribed moral order retreat from the human scene.

You may draw comfort in your belief that there is a caring and all powerful personal god who will be able to abolish all the things that you do not like in the world, things that you regard as evil. It could be argued, that these very evil things you detest are a normal and necessary part of our world.

 

Religion is beyond critical scrutiny, is it really. As for trashing the beliefs of others Christians have been doing that for centuries in an effort to well abolish what they regard as evil from this world.

"Neodude has a point... many atheists base their entire belief on the trashing of others".

 

I don't believe in evil, just less good.

I don't base my faith on God by the Bible, but rather, by world religions, philosophies and under personal realizations. Although I am no Bible scholar (how many of us are?), I learn from the Bible because I believe there is wisdom stored away within. I base my faith on God by personal experiences, logical pursuits, reasoning, and intuition, and I don't understand why I should have any shame over it. My brain doesn't suddenly start melting for believing in something ineffable, nor do I start becoming delusional or sick-minded.

"God is either omniscient and uncaring or is not omniscient at all. Either way god and his prescribed moral order retreat from the human scene."

I don't believe in absolutes, and I don't believe that God's true characteristics can be truly understood 100% for what it is. Many views on God are based on assumptions, and I try not to label something that may not have a label - God is supposed to be felt, not understood as a thing - because doing so would prevent it from being what it is. I have a pretty limited view of God and see him existing within calm thought and good pursuits, and in love - That God is love but is expressed in many mysterious and beautiful ways, and perhaps maybe even in harsh ways.

Contrary to what most people may believe, I don't base any of these beliefs on ignorance. I pry deep within my own mind and within the mind of others by reading about many philosophical standpoints as possible, just as sure you have done. I have dug deep and uncovered theories (backed up by facts) that man, empirically, showcases an unconscious religiousness, something that even atheists possess (humanism). Although this isn't absolute truth (what is?), this theory and theories like it, can still provide, and does provide, credibility for something 'higher'.

 

Religion isn't beyond scrutiny and either is skepticism.

You can say many atheists are doing the same by trying to abolish what they feel is evil; That evil thing being religion - History seems to be repeating itself - We all try to abolish what we thing of as 'evil', no matter what belief system you may have. A nihilists evil is meaning, and no meaning becomes the messiah. Existentilists evil is meaninglessness, and meaning becomes the messiah... etc etc.

Christians, not all Christians, bashed/bash other religions, but saying this is only a reflection back from neodudes comment. As if it becomes ok to mimic the same behavior that atheists themselves mock.

Under less extreme views of Christianity, dismantling of 'evil' becomes less extreme as well. Evil is just anything considered to be anything that prevents man from reaching his true potential, and I think that's a viewpoint that any belief system can embrace. Why else undergo scientific pursuits other than to materialize the humanist symbol of "the happy human".

 

Hi again

Well 90% of the world probably believe in some form of personal God, So that probably leaves me in the delusional and sick minded category.

In any case even scientific knowledge is underpinned by a some degree of faith and basic intuition. We make observations of the world around us and then infer that phenomenon are related in a meaningful or regular way. We fill in the gaps between observations by making theories. Theories emerge then out of a degree of ignorance about the world around us. However through science humans have been able to developed a powerful set of epistemological tools that have greatly expanded our capacity to manipulate and understand our environment. I will support the side that possess the better arguments as I see them.

A proven predilection for religiousness only proves that man has well a predilection for believing in Gods and religions. Well we are born ignorant and will die with some form of cultivated ignorance. However it is a life affirming and creative process to attempt to fill in the gaps.

Regards

 

I didn't mean to say that you were delusional or sick minded.

We definitely fill in the gaps a lot, but it doesn't mean there isn't truth in it, and I personally find solace in not knowing everything.

Overall, nice debating with you.

 

Thanks for ignoring my entire post to pick apart one error, i have researched it before, but the point was about how times and eras are just as infallible as people. Beliefs change through progress and technology. People believe things simply because of their environment and because other people around them believe the same thing.

 

I speak of other religions to express why i am an atheist, the point there is more then one religion claiming that their god is the only one, their way is the righteous path, is contradictory. I don't believe in any gods, because why should I? This thread isn't just about anything, i'll talk about whatever i want, you can't control me or my thoughts, i'll type what i please. You completely ignored my points and i'm not suprised at all. Believing in a god is synonymous with an afterlife. I believe there is no afterlife, i believe we exist and then we die, we don't have a soul, there's no such thing. I am not nihilistic, i am an existential atheist, influenced by the great rational thinkers such as Sartre, Dawkins and Russell. Pray for bread for a million days and you shall never recieve it. Only when you yourself buy the bread will you get it. Prayer is a waste of time, you're not talking to anyone or anything but your own influenced mind. There's a little problem called evil, why is this benovolent, omniscient, omnipotent being, who can do anything, allowing this? Because it doesn't exist, that's why. The definition of god is made by man, not god. By being benovolent, he would be incapable or creating bad, but he can do anything. We're all born with sin, what bollox. I refuse to surrender my free will to a God who demands my love or threatens me to hell for eternity. It's farcical. I refuse to obey something that will never be proven, who hates homosexuals, therefore allows inequality and orders mass killings for his pleasure. Those are some reasons i am atheist, you should accept the whole bible or none of it, don't cherry pick the good love thy neighbour bits.

 

I'm responding to the original post here. I only really want to talk about (3) Design or Chance. I do not think that (1) is a very good argument. Not all atheists are materialists, and materialism does not really entail psychologism in logic. It is also quite another thing to assert that the truths of logic lie in a Platonic, formal realm. Frankly, I don't even understand (2).


As for (3), here's what he had to say:

I think what he's got in mind here is Behe's argument from Irreducible Complexity. He is quite right that the argument is completely compatible with evolution and even Darwinism. It is no refutation of Darwinism, as Darwinism is a theory of speciation, not the origins of life. Behe sometimes tries to pass it off as a refuation of Darwinism, which, I think, is just a sign that the creationists are getting desperate.

The details of Behe's argument don't concern us here. To characterize the argument in brief, the argument from IC is nothing more than the cosmological argument for the existence of God, with the origins of life as its terminal point, where the chain of cause and effect ends, as opposed to the traditional cosmological argument, which terminates at the first cause of the universe. Creationists often try to equate evolution with chance. This is false. Natural selection may be "blind" but it is anything but random. Predictable patterns follow from it.

But when it comes to the origins of life, things really do seem to come down to a matter of chance or design. Either the conditions for life emerged naturalistically, or else they were intentionally put in place. Creationists would like us to think that the odds of life originating naturalistically are so small, that it is a virtually an impossibility, like a tornato assembling a Boing 747 in a junkyard.

But there's something very wrong with this picture. When it comes to cosmological arguments, we can push back the chain of causes as far as we like, and everything becomes confused. As naive as it sounds, it is beyond reason to ask, "Well, if God caused all this, then what caused God?" Furthermore, it is not a priori impossible that life originated naturalistically. In consideration of the vast scale of geological time, the odds that life emerged naturalistically begin to look a lot better. But the point here is not to weigh probabilities. Philosophy aims at certainty, as should any a priori science. Because of considerations such as these, the cosmological argument and all its derivatives are, strictly speaking, invalid, and so cannot get us that certainty we desire.

 

Sorry to ignore your main points again, but i have a few more quibbles. Belief in God is not necessarily the same as belief in an afterlife. Classical Judaism did not believe in an afterlife, and in Jesus' time, the Sadducee sect of Judaism had no such belief. I don't believe in an afterlife. Also, God doesn't hate homosexuals. Not even most Christian fundamentalists believe that. They believe that God hates homosexuality (the sin) but not homosexuals (the sinner). Liberal Christians believe that God doesn't hate either of those. And of course there are other religions. God doesn't order mass killings for his pleasure, although some religions have conducted such killings in His name.

 

Aren't you a Christian? You say you don't believe in an afterlife, what do you believe then? I take your points and i admit i could've worded my thoughts better. Perhaps not all religions believe in an afterlife, but i'd say the majority do. Why is homosexuality necessarily a sin? I disagree with that. People claim they're born gay, i'm not too sure about this as i don't believe in determinism, i believe we create our own essence through the choices we make. There are passages in the bible where god commands the killing and wiping out of a city but i don't remember the verse, nor can i be bothered to find it. I know what i read.

I believe religion can be dangerous in the wrong hands and minds and i believe it segregates people and does nothing for community cohesian. People are so sure of their beliefs and their certainty, they mistake it for absolute certainty, which doesn't exist in this matter. Relgion creates division among non believers, those who believe question why those that don't do not. 'I may be going to hell in a bucket baby, but at least i'm enjoying the ride.' I hate when people associate atheism with immorality, because this is pure prejudice and ignorance. I don't need god to be moral, never have, never will, i have my brain, i am a rational progressive being. I see religion as a scare tactic, used for years to control the people into acting a certain way, 'if you don't believe then you'll go to hell!' Most people aren't like that but there are a lot of them. Many religious people never actually question their beliefs, they believe for beliefs sake, it becomes dead dogma and ultimately superstition. The world is becoming ever more sceptical of religion as well as more faithful, specifically in Islam. As long as i can live in peace with my fellow man without being attacked as being an 'infidel' i'll be happy. Though i feel i can't relate to many muslim, especially the women, who i feel are oppressed due to the koran. They only marry within their sects and religions and if they don't they are killed and stoned to death. This i find very sad. I can only hope for an improved tolerance of people's beliefs. Believing or not believing doesn't make anyone 'better,' or 'holier' or 'moral' the sooner people realise this the better.

 

I aplogise if I offended you, however, Buddhism doesn't make the same claims as those other religions you mentioned.

You were right in the things you said that I bolded. People create their whole lives around the material world. This objective consciousness can never be truly satisfied because the material world is constantly changing. People create their identity to fit in with their surroundings, to accomodate the beliefs and actions of others, it's like dreaming within a dream. The only thing that can define each and every one of us is that we are conscious, therefore we are consciousness itself. Consciousness is constant, it is the only thing in our lives that stays the same .The walls that separate humans from one another are simply illusions created when one perceives that the material world is all there is. This is how the false self comes to being.

 

I agree with much of what you say. I consider myself a Christian, because I've dedicated my life to the example and teachings of Jesus. Like Thomas Jefferson, I also believe that the Bible contains a lot of wisdom and folly and I rely on my judgment to sort it out. Jefferson even edited out the parts he thought were no longer relevant, and I think he did a good job. I don't think homosexuality is necessarily a sin. Most of the Biblical passages condemning it are in the context of promiscuity, gang rape, pederasty, and prostitution. The passage in Leviticus condemning male homosexuality that is so frequently cited for the "God hates fags" claim is found in a collection of laws that also prohibits planting two kinds of seed in the same field and wearing garments of two kinds of cloth, and that commands putting rebellious children to death. I haven't seen any fundamentalists protesting cotton polyester blends or killing their mouthy kids, so they seem to be selective in their biblical injunctions. The Hebrews were captives of both the Egyptians and Babylonians, and it was common practice of both peoples to humiliate their captive males by sodomizing them, so the Hebrews may have been touchy on the subject. The New Testament passage that seems most unambiguous is in Romans, where Paul condemns various vices of pagans. As a Jew, he may have been influenced by Leviticus, and also by natural law philosophy that was state of the art in his time. Yes in the Bible the Israelites massacred the Amalekites during their exodus, and Joshua massacred the inhabitants of Jerico. I don't believe God sanctioned that. Those passages were put into the Bible by humans attempting to justify and legitimize their atrocities. Religion certainly can be dangerous in the wrong hands, and may destroy us all, because it is in the wrong hands.

 

I found this interesting,
There is a preconception amoung many atheist thinkers about what prayer actually is, and they often dismiss it on these grounds without fully understanding what it is they are dismissing.

Your critique could certainly be applied to intercessionary prayer, but a great deal of believers don't believe in intercessionary prayer.
Kierkegaard, an existential Christian, believed that the point of prayer was to change the devotee, not the deity. A form of meditation that brings peace and wisdom to the mind.

In this regard, prayer actually tends to score pretty well in a scientific regard, along with meditation.
People that pray are shown to cope with stress better, to have longer life expectancies (even Dawkings concedes this). Alpha-waves in the brain are increased during prayer, making people happier.

As a mental activity it can be deemed fairly effective, whether or not you believe there is a deity at the other end. Just some food for thought.

Prayer, like religion, is a very vague term and I think someone who values science and philosophy needs to be precise in their use of language when making critiques about things like this.