The Folly of Atheism

[ArtieE]

A mistaken idea of the God of Abraham.

The Qu'ran was dictated by Allah...

 

[Subduction Zone]

Mythology ? No - ancient oral tradition and ancient texts.

What makes you think they are false ?

You are ready to believe in the annals written by classical historians - what makes you believe that the ancient Christian texts and oral traditions are any less reliable ?

Unless, of course, you are an intellectual snob who believes that only academics (and Roman big-pots) can be believed, whereas ordinary people (like the early Christians) can't be believed.

Oral tradition is how myths are formed. And there is very little in the way of "ancient texts" to support your claims. Yes some early Christians were killed. But the myths of how they died is totally different. Think of George Washington and the Cherry Tree. George Washington, real, the cherry tree, not so much.

 

[ArtieE]

No - "Atheist" means A-theist, meaning No God.

Yes it does.
Theist: Belief in God
(Weak) atheist: Absence of belief in the existence of God, absence of belief in the non-existence of God
Strong atheist: Absence of belief in the existence of God, presence of belief in the non-existence of God

 

[columbus]

Muslims and Christians are in agreement on this - that the One True God is the God first worshipped clearly by Abraham.

I'm pretty familiar with the Original Testament. I'm certain that Moses and Samuel and such would have considered standard Christian Trinitarian theology and Jesus's divinity utter heresy. A complete breaking of the 1st Commandment, and Jesus's regular depiction in the Christian world breaking the 2nd.
It's no surprise to me that devout Jews completely rejected this pagan polytheism.
Tom

 

[Subduction Zone]

No - "Atheist" means A-theist, meaning No God.

Your etymology needs some work too. If you want to play that game it is better to use the term "atheism". Theism is having a belief in god. A-theism is without a belief in a god.

Most atheists simply do not believe in any gods.

 

[Subduction Zone]

But it isn't self-defeating.

The complexity and rationality and smooth-functioning (it survives !) of the universe, are excellent arguments for God's existence.

"Make believe entity" ?

You are ASSUMING A PRIORI that God is make-believe !

But that assumption can't be made.

That is a different logical fallacy than I thought that you would use. You are using a combination of an argument from ignorance along with confirmation bias. It is still a fatally failed argument.

 

[Altfish]

Not good for unwanted babies, though.

Or suicidal mothers, who are never considered.

 

[Altfish]

God is the sole source of the human mind, thus of knowledge.

God is the overall picture, the inventor of the human mind, thus of science.

Religion begins as the hope that there is hope, not as an intended explanation of the universe.

Which is God, not religion.

If you're an atheist that is total rubbish.
God is not in our equation or universe; it makes a lot more sense.

 

[Altfish]

God is the Uncreated - the first cause, the starting point of everything.

There necessarily IS one !

If not God, then who or what ?

But - with WMD's and climate change - we're so much wiser and CLEVERER than those benighted religious people of the past !

Why invent god as the first cause???

Why not science instead?
Why is "I'm not sure" not a good answer?

 

[Altfish]

God is the sole source of the human mind, thus of knowledge.

God is the overall picture, the inventor of the human mind, thus of science.

Religion begins as the hope that there is hope, not as an intended explanation of the universe.

Which is God, not religion.

According to your explanation.
It makes absolutely no sense to me
I don't care about 'hope', i care about reality and what is going to happen.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Then you are darned lucky you don't have to believe in the evil God.
Does that escape you?

Luck has nothing to do with it-- reason is why I no longer believe.

I could no more make myself believe in something for which there is no rational reason TO believe, than I could command my arm to detach, and take a vacation in Vermont.

Belief isn't a matter of choice, you see-- once you learn the truth of that? You cannot "unsee" it again.

Not without some form of severe emotional or brain trauma...

 

[Trailblazer]

That is a good point. Only those believers who believe stuff based on nothing but personal experiences or "feelings" or "faith" or indoctrination or brainwashing or ancient or modern scriptures or religious "authorities" or upbringing etc should be in that category. Those who have thoroughly studied all the religions and sects and cults and gods and the scientific explanations for why we believe in gods and religions to begin with and still have made an informed decision to believe in the existence of one or more gods should be respected at least for their effort. This is an interesting article. The Origins of Religion: How Supernatural Beliefs Evolved

I see no need to thoroughly study all the religions. Did I need to go shopping and compare men before I got married? It is the same. We got married three weeks after we met and we have been married 34 years. I never had sex with anyone before or after that and neither did he. I bought all my three houses the same way. I saw them, I liked them, I knew they were one of a kind, and I bought them, and I still have all of them. Of course I had a home inspection before I bought them.

As far as I am concerned there is no chance that any of the older religions are the religion that God wants me to follow because I know that the Baha’i Faith is that religion. That does not mean there is no truth in those older religions, they all contain the same spiritual truths that my religion contains, but they are past their shelf lives, and they do not have what humanity needs in this new age. I do not live in the past; I live in the present, and sometimes look towards the future. Humanity would not have any future if Baha’u’llah had not come. That is my belief, others need not share it.

So true. All theists and religions seem to have their own personal version of God and they all contradict each other showing that we are not dealing with an actual entity here but just how different people are imagining one.

That is absolutely true. Peoples’ conceptions of God do not represent the one true God.

Every time an atheist points out something wrong a theist can just say "Oh no, that's not the God I believe in!" An atheist always has to address the God the particular person believes in. It's a nightmare, I can tell you...

I can certainly understand how that would be the case. If I was an atheist, I would be doing my own independent research, IF I wanted to believe in God. I would not be listening to believers.

So you brainwashed yourself by just feeding yourself information from one source?

People do not brainwash themselves, they become convinced by looking at all the evidence. That is EXACTLY what Baha’u’llah has enjoined us to do, look at all the evidence and make an informed decision.

People who want to know about Christianity read about Christianity, namely the Bible, they do not read about the Baha’i Faith. People who want to know about the Baha’i Faith read about the Baha’i Faith, namely the Baha’i Writings, they do not read about Christianity. The best source of information about any religion if from their own scriptures and from believers who know them. It is not from those who oppose those religions, for obvious logical reasons. Of course those who oppose the religion are not going to present accurate information, this is logic 101 stuff.

Excellent! Now it's getting interesting! Make a detailed list of the information that has been confirmed to be accurate along with the corroborating evidence from other independent neutral objective sources! That would be useful and actually get us somewhere!

Here are the ‘categories of evidence I have looked at and confirmed:

The evidence that Baha’u’llah was who He claimed to be is His character; the history of His life; what He did during His mission on earth; the scriptures that He wrote; what others have written about Him; the Bible prophecies that He fulfilled and the prophecies of other religions that He fulfilled; the predictions He made that have come to pass; the religion that was established as the result of His Revelation, what His followers all over the world have done and are doing now.

Baha’u’llah had a good character, an important mission on earth that was completed successfully, and scriptures that contain valuable information about God and other things we need to know in order to fulfill the purpose for our existence. Those scriptures have social teachings and laws for this new age in this new age and the blueprint instructions humanity needs to build the Kingdom of God on earth. There is a religion established by His followers who are living according to the teachings and laws and completing the tasks assigned by Him. Baha’u’llah fulfilled all the Bible prophecies that refer to the Messiah and the return of Christ, many of which are so specific and that they could not be fulfilled by anyone else in the future. On top of all that, Baha’u’llah made many predictions that came to pass.

Sorry, but there is very little corroborating evidence from other independent neutral objective sources, because everyone who did research and presented accurate information about the Baha’i Faith has become a Baha’i.

As far as being neutral, people are not neutral about the Baha’i Faith. They are either Baha’is or they are some other religion who considers the Baha’i Faith a false religion. It is too early yet to have a lot written about the Baha’i Faith by scholars who are not biased by a religious view they already hold. Do you think that would have been available in the first two centuries after Christianity was established? Sure, we now live in a more modern age, but humans have not changed that much. Most humans believe what they were raised in and they cling tenaciously to it. There are only a numbered few true seekers who are open-minded enough to look at a new religion.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Nor can you show any empirical reason to deny my perceptions and embrace atheism....

"deny my perceptions"? Seriously? A stiff drink is all I need to point to-- to prove that humans are capable of imagiary and fantastical (but not real) "perceptions".

Do YOU deny the thousands of people who truly believe they were abducted by Space Aliens?

They are JUST as certain as YOU --- only they think it was Beings from Outer Space.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

The premeditated killing of civilians in war (of babies in particular) is universally regarded as a war crime, or extremely close.

And "soldiers" are merely civilians who have been given the title "soldier."

Laws are mutable. The principles on which they are largely based are not, however. What was wrong in the Stone Age is wrong now, and vice versa.

But the principles are human-specific, are they not? For instance, does a fly care if a human is dead or alive? If anything, it would prefer a dead human to a living one. So our "principles" are specifically human-intrinsic - they don't apply universally to any and all interaction with our species. As a different kind of example, in lean times, hamsters will consume their young to preserve a brood and keep the babies from growing up suffering - unable to eat and likely die anyway. Humans would see that action in another human as entirely "wrong" and indefensible. For a hamster, it is deemed a necessity and their social interactions entirely permit this under those circumstances. Human principles are decidedly human - and are therefore subjective right out of the gate. Think of it this final way - if there were no more humans, then human principles would not matter to anyone/anything else in the universe. They may or may not match up to other beings' principles, but there would definitely be specific human ideals that were no longer applicable anywhere or to anything/anyone.

Each of us has a choice between good and evil - a choice which (at death) becomes a final, thus everlasting, one.

Our version of "evil" is also entirely subjective to the human experience. I always shake my head when I am watching one of those satan-based horror movies where they have flies pouring out of someone's mouth, or a ton of flies gathering at some window, or around a house - and this is supposed to evoke a sense of "evil." It's ridiculous. What, intrinsically, makes flies "evil?" That they are nuisance to humans? That they carry bacteria that humans are subject to becoming infected with? Other animals cherish them as a food source, and they do absolutely wonders for cleaning up the Earth of other infectious/bacteria-riddled things like carcasses and feces. I would dare say they have a far more important (or at least neutral) role in the stewardship of the Earth than we humans do!

Good consequences flow from a final choice of good, evil consequences from a final choice of evil.

I don't believe their are such things as "consequences" after death. To me, your statement only applies to ongoing choices and ongoing consequences during your lifetime. Make what your fellow humans regard as "good" choices, receive "good" consequences. Make what your fellow humans and yourself regard as "bad" choices" and you will likely be the recipient of "bad" consequences. There are no guarantees what happens after death... and my bet is that it is a big, fat nothing. Like being unborn... going back to the time before you were born. Do you remember that time? How could you? You didn't exist yet. My best guess is that it is something like that. No more "plug in" to reality. All gone.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

God took on human nature and died in agony on the Cross, not sparing Himself..

Citation needed: Prove it. No? Well... there you go, then!

As for "dying while in agony"? Oh PLEASE! Immortal Being, remember? Less bothersome than a HANGNAIL.

The WORST was Jesus was mildly inconvienced-- he had to change his Weekend Plans or something.

An immortal being cannot begin to understand the agony of a mortal death.

Why does God allow evil to exist ? - because He is Love and a libertarian, not a puppet-master.

Not good enough-- maliciously evil.

Or incredibly incompetent.

Either works -- but your sad claims, above? Don't.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

The New Testament dates from the highly-civilised and well-educated days of the Roman Empire..

Nope. It is no older than about 300CE-- and came from a Bronze Age culture that still practiced Slave-keeping and worse.

 

[Trailblazer]

Belief isn't a matter of choice, you see-- once you learn the truth of that? You cannot "unsee" it again.

That is true, and that is why I am still a Baha'i...
It is not a choice I can make to unbelieve in what is so obviously the truth from God.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Wrong. Many Christians were murdered in the Soviet Union for NO OTHER reason than their religious faith - and sometimes likewise under Mao..

That is 100% false in both cases and you know it. But keep on telling those comforting lies.

Hitler was a renegade Christian who hated Christianity, blaming it for pacifism and Communism; and in turn hated the Jews for having caused Christianity..

Nope. Hitler's own words state he was Doing Christ's Holy Work. I have actual photographs of him attending Catholic Mass. There are hundreds of these photographs connecting the NAZI party to the Catholic Church.

No Christians of the Dark Ages (even the most brutal) shared Hitler's belief in Social Darwinism, the survival of the fittest and the VIRTUE and VALUE of brutality..

That's not actually what Hitler believed---- in fact, it's the opposite-- he believed in BIRTHRIGHT.

You know-- God's Special Favorites --- Born That Way exactly like the bible talks of which is no doubt where he GOT the ideas in the FIRST PLACE.

The Inquisition pursued theological deviants (heretics) - unbelievers like atheists were usually left in peace.

100% false claim-- unbelievers and atheists were the first to be burnt. Followed by Gypsies, Jews, Pagans and any other non-christian group. Heck-- even Christians were put to the Inquisition, if they were the "wrong sort" of "christian"....!

As one Pope said? "Kill them all, God knows his own"

 

[Valjean]

God is the sole source of the human mind, thus of knowledge.

God is the overall picture, the inventor of the human mind, thus of science.

Religion begins as the hope that there is hope, not as an intended explanation of the universe.

Which is God, not religion.

You're preaching, and not giving any evidence to support your claims. Do you expect anyone to believe this fantastic claim without hard evidence?

God is the Uncreated - the first cause, the starting point of everything.

There necessarily IS one !

Wait -- aren't you Christians always saying that everything must have a cause? Yet God has none?
I'm still waiting for some real evidence. I don't see why a God is necessary. The universe unfolds just as the indifferent, undirected laws of physics dictate.

If not God, then who or what ?

Physics. Chemistry. Biology....

You don't have to invoke a magical force to explain an automobile moving by itself. The capacity for movement is inevitable given its mechanical structure and the chemistry of combustion. But for the mechanically ignorant, such movement might appear miraculous, and they would attempt to fit it into whatever world-view they were familiar with. Perhaps they'd ascribe it to a magical deity.
What are we to think if they refuse to consider the explanations of those familiar with automotive mechanics, dig in their heels and insist there must needs be a magical "explanation" involving some invisible mover.
We get really frustrated by obtuseness like this.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

The more Atheists have found themselves on the losing side (since the late-1970's) the shiftier and more evasive they have become.

100% false. The USA? Operates under a SECULAR CONSTITUTION-- as Godless as you could ask for. In fact, The Constitution has Strict Language that forbids FOR OR AGAINST GOD OF ANY SORT. It was written DELIBERATELY NEUTRAL to god-claims.

But wait! Here in the USA? Religion is dying out.

Atheist/agnostics/non-believers? Now make up roughly 20% of the US Population-- if you factor in "not religious"? It's even higher!

The next closest Religious Group is Catholics, at roughly 20% -- these two are neck-and-neck.

All the rest of the various Religious Groups make up ever smaller fractions.

It would be disingenuos of you to lump all religious groups into one group-- as none recognize the others as being "One True Religions" --- the best, see the others as "dumb, backwards step children that need more education"