U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Atheism and Agnosticism
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-20-2011, 07:00 AM
 
5,462 posts, read 5,936,605 times
Reputation: 1804

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper 88 View Post
But wouldnt this speak more towards the error of HUMAN thinking rather than that of the possibility of God?
If we can't seem to understand it in any consistent way, what's the point of pretending to?

That's the problem with the supernatural. It's not the evidence that's lacking that's the issue - although the evidence surely is lacking. It's that we don't even know what we're looking of evidence for. Sure, X Y & Z are strange random occurrences which we didn't expect - but what's the overriding explanation for how they fit together to demonstrate a god instead of just some strange natural stuff we don't understand yet?

Looking for evidence is putting the cart before the horse. We'd need to know what sort of evidence would prove or disprove this god before even starting to look for it. And that kind of concrete description of god is sorely lacking. That's not the non-believer's fault.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-20-2011, 07:22 AM
 
9,412 posts, read 11,726,587 times
Reputation: 20221
If god supposedly created the world then he understands the significance of obscurity.

It begs the question 'Why make his presence so obscure that people actually don't believe in a god because of it?'

Do we simply believe anyway, despite the lack of any credible evidence? Obviously many people do.

I can't. My brain doesn't allow me to.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2011, 07:36 AM
 
7,802 posts, read 5,278,810 times
Reputation: 2973
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper 88 View Post
Atheists only please......

Is there anything that could ever change the views you have now? Even the staunch anti-theist Christopher Hitchens admitted on 60 minutes that he wont say nthat there is nothing that could change his mind, but he has yet to see anything that could come close
I would agree 100% with Hitchens in that regard.

Theists all too often think that if you say there is no reason on offer to think there is a god, that you are saying there is no possibility of there being a god. Very few people say that however.

I am more than willing to accept the possibility. This does not change one iota the fact that no one has ever gotten around to showing me a single scrap of evidence, argument, data or reasons that such an entity in fact does exist.

I am also... for example.... more than willing to accept the possibility there is a cat sitting, until now, unnoticed on my head. In accepting the possiblity however I have not granted that there is a single reason to think there IS such a cat in such a posture.

If I could change one thing in the minds of people all over the world it would be to learn to recognise the difference between accepting the possibility of X (which I do) and accepting that there is no evidence to think X is so. The difference between these two things, obvious to me, seems to be opaque to all too many people.

If you are aware of any reasons lending credence to the god claim then feel free to adumbrate them for me and I will consider them all and will not reject them out of hand but will, usually at length as I am rather verbose, if rejecting them explain exactly why.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2011, 08:27 AM
 
Location: Ohio
19,883 posts, read 14,224,806 times
Reputation: 16076
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper 88 View Post
Is there anything that could ever change the views you have now?
No, nothing.

It would be nearly impossible for me to explain this to you without you first acquiring the same level of knowledge that I have. Essentially, it is akin to a theoretical physicist trying to explain how a nuclear device works to a person with a doctoral degree in Shakespearean Literature.

The theoretical physicist tries to explain how atomic and sub-atomic level particles interact, and the PhD keeps quoting Shakespeare. It's truly a Comedy of Errors.

I don't doubt that there was an historical figure named Jesus, but he was neither god, nor the son of a god, and in fact, he didn't even die, at least not in the way christians claim he did.

Reading the gospels is not the same thing as studying the gospels. Read them critically, as though you were an attorney or paralegal reading the sworn depositions of deponents, or as a detective sergeant or private investigator reading the sworn statements of witnesses. I've worked in the capacity of 3 out of 4 of those jobs, so it's a little easier for me.

As a prosecutor in a murder trial, there is no way in Hell I'm going to put Matthew, Mark, Luke or John on the witness stand to testify. Their stories conflict so badly it would confuse a jury and I'd never be able to get a conviction.

You can't even prove Jesus died. There's overwhelming evidence he didn't. And if you understand the political and social situation and the structures and organizations that existed at the time, you can easily see what happened.

A fanatical sect of Essenes has a desire to usurp political, religious and social power from the Pharisees and Sadducees. They concoct a plan to have someone die and then be resurrected, and then attempt to pull it off. They do pull it off, except that their zeal and fanaticism blinds them to the reality, which is that no one really cares who's in charge.

So the revolution is a failure, and Jesus must flee, lest he be killed for real (and that is why he is in Damascus -- because he's on the road to India).

I'm sure you would say there are lots of "witnesses" but I would say those aren't "witnesses" at all. Those are confederates in a con-game.

Jesus appearing before his own followers is like preaching to the choir. Why doesn't Jesus appear before anyone who really matters; before anyone who is important? Because he can't since he isn't dead.

Does Jesus appear before Pontius Pilate? No, no freaking way would he do that. Pilate would have had him arrested and killed for real.

Does Jesus appear before the Pharisees or Sadducees? No. No way would he do that. Why not? Because he isn't really dead, and they would kill him on the spot. Yet who is it that needed convincing the most? The followers of Jesus or the Pharisees? Yeah, total fail there.

What would be the whole point of debating and arguing with the Pharisees, and then failing to appear before them to demonstrate the truth?

And when does Jesus state unequivocally in no uncertain terms that Yahweh and the incredibly vague and ambiguous "Father" are one in the same? He never does, so for all you know, the "Father" could be Baal, or Yam or Mot or Ningishiddza, Enki, Markduk or even Nabu.

And all of this completely irrelevant if the Old Testament is proven to be a sham.

It's ironic that Jewish theologians are more critical of the Old Testament than christian theologians. Even the Jews admit that the Old Testament is at least three separate works merged together, which means you basically have three separate religions or religious ideologies merged together. It's only a matter of time before they find the original 'E' text, the original 'J' text or both, and then your world will come crashing down around you.

The 'J' and 'E' texts conflict heavily. Your god doesn't even know how Joseph got to Egypt. How sad is that?

And when find the 'J' and 'E' texts, the only thing it will is add one more piece of irrefutable evidence that the entire pre-history of the Jews, for the most part the first 36 chapters of Genesis were plagiarized from Sumerian and Akkadian sources.

Not that it matters. I'm certain you and your ilk will deny it all to the bitter end, because you were never interested in knowing the Truth, rather you are interested in perpetuating a dogmatic belief system that has been antiquated for more than 4,000 years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2011, 09:00 AM
 
9,912 posts, read 12,470,050 times
Reputation: 7280
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper 88 View Post
Atheists only please......

Is there anything that could ever change the views you have now? Even the staunch anti-theist Christopher Hitchens admitted on 60 minutes that he wont say nthat there is nothing that could change his mind, but he has yet to see anything that could come close

This is a serious thread. If you want to make wise cracks, I would ask that you please go somwhere else. Be advised that any post or comment that dosnt contribute positively to this thread, is sarcastic or condescending, will be reported. If there is nothing that could change your mind, than a simple "nothing" post will do.

I'd have to seriously reconsider if some powerful all knowing being rocked up, said "Ta-dah!" and then set about Moderator cut: inappropriate slappin every half arsed religious nutter that ever perpetrated heinous physical and emotional trauma against humanity and the creatures and the planet in ITS name. If the same being managed to whip the deluded into shape to the point where ACTUAL self realization occurred and put an end to the spiritual and mental masturbation I see go on. If said powerful all knowing being ended suffering, hunger, poverty, pain, death and taxes and convinced the world population to get on with being the best they could be. If it all added up to a utopic love fest of great happiness and intelligence....yeah.....I'm with Hitch.....

Last edited by june 7th; 06-23-2011 at 09:07 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2011, 09:33 AM
 
Location: USA
15,906 posts, read 8,166,085 times
Reputation: 2103
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hueffenhardt View Post
Well, first things first, what are we talking about when we say "god"?
Not responding to Hueff, just using this part of his post to bounce off into my own thoughts...

I was a basically fundamentalist Christian all my life, but when forced to abandon my literal view of the bible, I left faith in a God altogether. But, recently, I realized that letting go of the mythical understanding of what God must be that I once had, allows me to look at things differently and explore new possibilities. I still bounce back and forth between theism and atheism, and I honestly don't think I will ever be absolutely certain one way or another, but I am leaning more and more toward theism at the time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2011, 09:36 AM
 
58 posts, read 39,003 times
Reputation: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper 88 View Post
Atheists only please......

Is there anything that could ever change the views you have now? Even the staunch anti-theist Christopher Hitchens admitted on 60 minutes that he wont say nthat there is nothing that could change his mind, but he has yet to see anything that could come close

This is a serious thread. If you want to make wise cracks, I would ask that you please go somwhere else. Be advised that any post or comment that dosnt contribute positively to this thread, is sarcastic or condescending, will be reported. If there is nothing that could change your mind, than a simple "nothing" post will do.
Sure.

Have God appear before all of the planet, have it confirmed on virtually all news outlets, with complete unanimity, and have him perform a miracle, such as re-routing the rotation of the earth, or safely lifting a continent into the sky and resting it back down. Then have him explain all the mysteries of the universe to us, including the processes by which we would need to take to discover them ourselves. All this should be quite simple for the creator of the universe.

Anything short of that is an admission of non-existance.

Moderator cut: Orphaned

Last edited by june 7th; 06-23-2011 at 09:08 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2011, 04:29 PM
 
1,429 posts, read 2,109,269 times
Reputation: 1891
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nozzferrahhtoo View Post
I would agree 100% with Hitchens in that regard.

Theists all too often think that if you say there is no reason on offer to think there is a god, that you are saying there is no possibility of there being a god. Very few people say that however.

I am more than willing to accept the possibility. This does not change one iota the fact that no one has ever gotten around to showing me a single scrap of evidence, argument, data or reasons that such an entity in fact does exist.

I am also... for example.... more than willing to accept the possibility there is a cat sitting, until now, unnoticed on my head. In accepting the possiblity however I have not granted that there is a single reason to think there IS such a cat in such a posture.

If I could change one thing in the minds of people all over the world it would be to learn to recognise the difference between accepting the possibility of X (which I do) and accepting that there is no evidence to think X is so. The difference between these two things, obvious to me, seems to be opaque to all too many people.

If you are aware of any reasons lending credence to the god claim then feel free to adumbrate them for me and I will consider them all and will not reject them out of hand but will, usually at length as I am rather verbose, if rejecting them explain exactly why.
I think the "I'll believe only once you show me evidence" is preposterous and not the way I approach Atheism. You're misunderstanding what the very definition of faith means - "belief that is not based on proof." Evidence has no place in it. There is no evidence that will convince me to have faith in one particular God. That way of thinking is a misunderstanding of faith..


Am I the only Atheist that 100% believes there is no God, afterlife, etc etc? Rather than the:


A: We accept the possibility of a God, we just need proof to believe in it.


I'm more the:


B: Your belief in religion is only an emotional response based out of fear for this being all their is. Their is no God, afterlife, this is truly it.


I don't think "B" is an extreme way of thinking, in fact I think it's the only way to make sense of the Indian praying to Vishnu, the Viking dieing expecting Valhalla, or the Jihadist expecting their virgins. My way of thinking says to them all "Your belief is BS, but I understand how it fulfilled a purpose for you.." - Christianity and God just happens to be yet another variance - nothing special or above every single other belief someone died for.

I'm 100% comfortable with saying this is it, I'll never get to see my family who passed on again but I knew that at the time and I made the best of their time on earth. This is my one shot at life, and I'll make the best of it. I 100% don't believe in Ghosts, superstition, an afterlife, etc, and when I die all I expect is pain and then - lights out.

That's Atheism to me, not "I accept the possibility of, just show me proof..."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2011, 05:11 PM
 
Location: Golden, CO
2,108 posts, read 2,497,814 times
Reputation: 1018
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheEarthBeneathMe View Post
Am I the only Atheist that 100% believes there is no God, afterlife, etc etc? Rather than the:


A: We accept the possibility of a God, we just need proof to believe in it.


I'm more the:


B: Your belief in religion is only an emotional response based out of fear for this being all their is. Their is no God, afterlife, this is truly it.
I believe statement B is true. But, I cannot say that it is the absolute truth; as much as I would like to, I can't. There is the infinitesimally small chance that there is a god. Logically, rationally I must concede that. It is impossible to prove that no god exists, especially since god is not clearly defined, so the possibility remains that a god could exist. Similarly, it is possible that fairies and ghosts exist. It is highly unlikely, but since we cannot prove they do not exist, they could. This is being brutally honest and logically consistent.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2011, 07:21 PM
 
Location: USA
15,906 posts, read 8,166,085 times
Reputation: 2103
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheEarthBeneathMe
I'm more the:


B: Your belief in religion is only an emotional response based out of fear for this being all their is. Their is no God, afterlife, this is truly it.
I don't think the belief (or being open to a belief) in the existence of a God and the belief in an afterlife necessarily go hand in hand. They don't for me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Atheism and Agnosticism
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top