Why I am not an Atheist.

I think prayer can be a fantastic help for people, however, i don't think people can communicate with God because i don't believe God exists. I retract that statement 'prayer is a waste of time' I don't wiah to offend anyone. The point of arguement is not to win, rather to be enlightened. I think it's great being able to have this debate and learning all the different theories. I have been Christian at times in my life as i believed in creationism. I asked who created me, well my parents, but who created the first people? It must've been God. Or is it? Because how does God exist? In itself, he has always been, he will forever be, an infinite being, watching over the world while we are not perceiving it as Berkley would claim. I wish i could embrace the lord, the savior, but i can't, i simply do not believe, i don't think it's logical or provable. The world is very complex but i don't think a supreme being necessarily created it.

 

still defining your argument and beliefs through religions that you claim are fallicious eh? Fine, I find that sad, but nevertheless lets continue.

If Christianity claims it is the only way, and Islam claims it is the only way, then they are in contradiction with each other, not with themselves. Your point is moot.

By all means, you are free to type whatever you please, however, being that this is a thread about ATHEISM, it would be preferable that you stay on topic. Thanks.

I didn't see any valid points that I needed to address.

well now that is all faith now isn't it?

That is not the point of prayer. and besides, only a fool would pray for bread when he/she had money to buy it in the first place.

There is no evil. What you consider evil, is simply a lack of God. There is no inherent driving force behind evilness.

subjective emotional ranting.

 

Good post. I'm really impressed by the quality of this forum. I agree with Neodude's point that scientific naturalism is ultimately rooted in faith, since science still seems to be far removed from explaining the origin of the universe, life, and consciousness, not to mention the ideals and values that make life meaningful--although there are a number of plausible theories. As I said in a previous post, I resist efforts to characterize beliefs in this area in terms of logical or scientific "proofs". To me, they're matters of opinion and judgment, which can be characterized as informed or uninformed, rational or irrational, but not conclusive proofs. I think I have good reasons for betting on God, but I acknowledge that there can be good reasons for betting on naturalism, or not betting at all. The transcendental argument, the cosmological argument, and the argument from design can't prove God, but I think believers like me can find them persuasive, especially when evaluated in the context of personal experience and intuition. But I can also respect the judgments of Sagan, Dawkins, Mr. Stify, Common Sense, etc., to expect naturalistic explanations of these phenomena, because it's been productive to do so in the past. It helps me to recognize that we're all in the same boat as humans in coping with life's ambiguities.

 

To be frank, evolution through natural selection makes no sense.

 

I think we've had this dialogue before. what about it makes no sense?

 

"Well, if God caused all this, then what caused God?"

That's such an overused argument. I'm really starting to get annoyed by it, to be honest.

If cosmologists believe that the universe is ultimately causeless, then why can't a powerful something be causeless as well? Why can't they be one in the same?

Like Sagan said, if God can be causeless then maybe so to can the universe. Personally, I don't see how naturally occurrences such as the development of consciousness can only exist on earth. I see it as a direct reality and a 'copy' of what is already there. In other words, if development of consciousness is possible then the universe itself could have its own consciousness, just in a more complex form. We as humans could be acting out the consciousness of God (we could be conscious FOR him, or any other variation...)

You can say that our bodies operates under the same laws as the universe. Our bodies can't somehow go against those laws or be far from it. Something from the lower dimensions is inclusive to the higher dimensions. So in this sense, we can be be God himself, because there could be parts of us that goes beyond space and time - The soul can't look at itself.

 

Well, that's really the point, isn't it? If you go back in the causal chain far enough, eventually you're going to end up with an uncaused or eternal something. Some people like to ascribe things like omnipotence, omniscience, and benevolence to that thing, and they call it "God." Other people don't like to ascribe those sorts of things to it, and call it "nature." I'm really not trying to argue it either way. All I'm really saying is that we can't know the answer for sure, and that even attempting to decide the matter either way is a priori impossible.

 

Well, I suppose this is about the time when the creationist should show his true colours, so to speak. You're wrong, but this is another argument entirely. The argument you made in your original post is in no way inconsistent with evolution, and you basically amount to saying as much. I'm just going with what you give me.

 

evolution through natural selection is a theory, if you didn't know. a very flawed one at that. Im glad you have so much faith in your religion though, it would be sad if you didn't.

I'll get into the "why" tomorrow. For now, bed.

 

God is not innate, you are not born knowing God, you learn about him from humans. We are all born Atheists, without a belief in a god or gods, then when coming into contact with humans, we can be influenced.

 

None of us are born scientists, either. No one is born knowing about gravity, yet gravity still exists.

All concepts come from somewhere.

Animism is the oldest religion on earth. The Bushmen are animists. I think there is a natural understanding, not of God, but of a presence/energy that surrounds everything. Or should I say, an understanding that we eventually arrive at.

 

In addition to def's post, how on earth do you plan to back that claim up?

 

Another couple of questions for you; if perhaps as you say, we are not born with an innate knowledge of God, where does the concept come from? As Atheists are so fond of pointing out, God can't not be easily proven from the things we see around us, and so the concept of God would seem a difficult one to come up with and yet every civilization and culture and tribe no matter how separated has been found to have a concept of God or Gods, why do you think that's true?

 

I believe there is a calling from within ourselves which moves us to find out why we are here and who we really are. To the unaware, this may come from an external source , such as the belief of a god in the heavens,to the aware, this is super consciousness breaking through the veil of material reality prompting us to wake up.

 

So if man creates concepts, then gravity is just a concept as well, but it should still remain valid. Plenty of things are 'just concepts', so? Doesn't mean that it's untrue. Also, what doesn't come from the imagination? People always talk about imagination as if it is so kind of goofy-land where non-existing things exist. Do cars exist in reality, or do they exist within us? We aren't born with knowledge of cars. Yet, through imagination, and logic, we brought the reality from within our selves into the outside world. Imagination is one of our greatest tools; and with it, nothing would be created; there would not be any advancement of any kind. Without imagination, we wouldn't be able to understand anything and we wouldn't have any dreams to turn into realities. We wouldn't be humans; we would remain chimps in a forest. How can the imagination imagine anything that is impossible? Exactly how you can't imagine false colors... Imagination is a very powerful thing, and I find it really strange how people belittle the very thing that makes us human.


We can't imagine false colors, and we can't imagine anything untrue, so then where does the concept of a all pervading force come from? Our butts?

I think it's wild speculation to say that God is just man's concept of perfection. You can easily spin that around and say that God is symbolized as perfection because he is perfection. Just how atheists see God as a reflection of the father image. You can spin that around and say that God is symbolized as the father because in many instances he is.


The best proof of gravity existing is that we see some kind of effect from a force that we know very little about. We know very little about the universe, and hearing people say things like, "I don't know about you but I live in REALITY". Reality? What exactly is that? It's a pretty bold statement to say (not saying you say this, just making an overall comment) that you live in reality when reality isn't very well known. Not to mention how science is merely a tool, not an understanding. Although, many scientists will try to fool you into thinking its some kind of grand awakening. Reality doesn't need to be labeled by labelers that aren't as intelligent as they think they are.

But after saying that, I believe people have the natural ability to 'sense' truth, one way or another. We may never get the whole picture, but we can still sense what that big picture could be. In other words, we are capable of knowing enough.

 

Gravity may well be a concept, but it's a provable one with evidence from experiance, tried and tested. One can transcend themselves with imagination, we can become things we are not. We can imagine being a rock star, though we aren't. This explains our absolute freedom. We are who we make ourselves through our choices of free will. This thread was about how atheism is illogical and i completely disagree, it is no more illogical then having faith. I'd rather base my beliefs on facts, evidence and reason, based on science, based on what i know. We must begin from the cogito, for this is the only thing we can know for sure, that we exist. To me, believing in something that can't be proven without overwhelming evidence is illogical. I don't condemn anyone for believing or attempt to persuade them to atheism, i'm only attempting to explain why i have the beleifs i have with as much diplomacy as possible.

Okie: I don't know the names, per say, i remember learning about it in philosphy last year though, i'm not making it up lol. Surely it's not that hard to imagine aboriginee tribes for example or anarchist societies who live in their own society and help each other live day by day.

 

I think it's quite ironic and humbling that the one thing that exists beyond doubt is something metaphysical, consciousness.

 

Truth is something you earn, and truth can be arrived at in multiple ways.

How is it that people thousands of years ago were able to come up with truths without any equipments and ideas? The Kaballah came up with the idea of multiple universes way before science. A philosopher thousands of years ago came up with the concept of atoms, without a single way to 'verify' it other than to use his imagination. In other words, our imaginations is the lab within us all where we can test and see what is and isn't true. There is something within us that can determine true and falsehood; but without first working towards that truth through deep thought/meditation. There is something within us that is preprogrammed to recognize truth - Logic, reason, imagination, intuition, are all a deep part of our being.

There are multiple ways of arriving at truth, and truth is already there if you just search for it.

Science loves to label and turn everything into objects; and ironically, we do this at the expense of the truth. Never realizing that self-knowledge is important for man to reach his true potential. Like Captain Kirk has said in an episode of Star Trek, "Our knowledge to build weapons increases faster than our wisdom". We have all of this wonderful knowledge brought to us by the pursuit of science, but we have no direction on how to use it, or if we SHOULD use it. We teach our young how to think scientifically, yet neglect any subject that can help foster self-knowledge - It's really a shame.