Was atheism invented?

[Revoltingest]

Not me, I am not fun loving & good looking.

You & I will ruin the stereotype.

 

[questfortruth]

The problem is, a hypothesis really does need at least something to justify its very existence.

The 1=3 as the equation for Holy Trinity is justified by wave-particle duality.

 

[questfortruth]

No!

The Bible does not mention God? But how that verse: "In the Beginning God"?

 

[Altfish]

Who taught the first children? Who taught the first adults?

Their parents.

 

[questfortruth]

Their parents.

God is parent of Adam and Eve.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Their parents.

You hit the problem of infinite regress, because at some part of the past, there was no human parents, because there was no humans. So you are left with the problem, who taught the first humans religion.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Dawkins at al. have come only yesterday. India has a long history of atheism. As I mentioned, the oldest mention is in RigVeda which is about 3,000 years old. Then we had Buddha, Mahavira, Charvaks, Ajivakas, who were atheists, around 2,500 years ago. By the beginning of Christian era we had atheist philosophies like Samkhya (Nireeshwarvada - opinion that there is no God) and Vaisheshika, the Indian atomic theory of Kanada which also refuted existence of Gods. So, you cannot say that atheism has no history. It has a long history in India.
I too have read nothing by Western atheists except a book of essays by Bertrand Russell (which I liked very much). My atheism is rooted in Hindu and Buddhist philosophies.
Lastly, I am a practicing Hindu atheist. I believe in Advaita (non-duality), and my belief is closely related to the latest in science.
In this way, much of what you have said is your opinion and does not apply to me.

I'm kinda confused of what the disagreement is. Unless you believe in Dawkins and feel he's the head guy of atheism, the only thing that sounds disagreeable is how science has anything to do with atheism. Even then, though, people come to or reasons they disbelieve in deities for many reasons. I'm not familiar with most Buddhist cultural concepts and no near Hinduism; so, I don't see where you're coming from.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Atheism Is Inconsistent with the Scientific Method, Prizewinning Physicist Says

Templeton Foundation is basically a Christian organization. I get this from Wikipedia:
"The prize was originally awarded to people working in the field of religion (Mother Teresa was the first winner), but in the 1980s the scope broadened to include people working at the intersection of science and religion. Until 2001, the name of the prize was "Templeton Prize for Progress in Religion", and from 2002 to 2008 it was called the "Templeton Prize for Progress Toward Research or Discoveries about Spiritual Realities".
And how does it matter to me if Mr. A, B, or C is not an atheist. I am.

 

[firedragon]

Perhaps they just want to belong to the popular crowd.
Everyone knows that atheists are all fun loving & good looking.
(Of course, they haven't yet met me.)

Its an identity statement.

 

[Aupmanyav]

You hit the problem of infinite regress, because at some part of the past, there was no human parents, because there was no humans. So you are left with the problem, who taught the first humans religion.

It all started with Neanderthals. They had some kind of religion. They put red ochre on their dead and even flower petals when they buried them.

 

[Dave Watchman]

That's the problem with God. What is the actual basis for the God hypothesis? "There's stuff, and we can't explain that. Therefore there must be a stuff-causer." Now, that may be an okay hypothesis, but you know utterly zilch about that stuff-causer. And yet, we call it God, and wonder-of-wonders, every god ever imagined by we naked beach apes has become in every sense "a person," a being with intelligence and purpose. And there is no reason whatsoever for that hypothesis.

But claiming to know utterly zilch about that stuff-Causer, how can you declare in your heart that there is no God?

How can this declaration, this conclusion, be made.

History of atheism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Part of a series on
Atheism

Atheism is in the broadest sense a rejection of any belief in the existence of deities.[1][2][3][4] Technically, the term 'Positive atheism' describes a belief that the statement "There is a god/God" is a false proposition.[5][6][7] In an even narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities and any statements to the contrary are false ones.​

"Atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities and any statements to the contrary are false ones.

Can you see how this Wiki note confirms the statements made in the Physicist's interview?

That the Atheist is in violation of the scientific method.

Peaceful Sabbath.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

It all started with Neanderthals. They had some kind of religion. They put red ochre on their dead and even flower petals when they buried them.

How did they become religious?

 

[questfortruth]

And how does it matter to me if Mr. A, B, or C is not an atheist. I am.

There are many theistic scientists, for example, Albert Einstein, Newton. Look for the list of Christians on Wikipedia. Thus, even a theist can mean something to an atheist.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

There are many theistic scientists, for example, Albert Einstein, Newton. Look for the list of Christians on Wikipedia. Thus, even a theist can mean something to an atheist.

Evidence that Albert Einstein was a theist.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I'm kinda confused of what the disagreement is. Unless you believe in Dawkins and feel he's the head guy of atheism, the only thing that sounds disagreeable is how science has anything to do with atheism. Even then, though, people come to or reasons they disbelieve in deities for many reasons. I'm not familiar with most Buddhist cultural concepts and no near Hinduism; so, I don't see where you're coming from.

I just do not know about Richard Dawkins. I have read his name mentioned as a leading atheist. You too mentioned his name in your post. Otherwise I would not have even talked about him. We have many Hindu atheists of our own, to name two, Gaudapada (Gaudapada) and the pupil of his pupil, the first Sankaracharya (Shankaracharya). We have various Upanishads which promote atheism and non-duality. I do not really need Richard Dawkins.

Who will check for evidence about whether there is a God or not. Only science can do that. Science will tell me if a person can walk on water or if a person can feed 5000 with five loaves of bread and two fish. Science will tell me if some one can change water into wine (that will be so nice). So in all testing science will be involved.

It does not matter at all if you do not know about Hinduism or Buddhism. Perhaps you will never be able to understand them with all your prejudices. We are free-thinkers. So be happy with your four books.

 

[Dave Watchman]

Apparently his prize in physics doesn't extend to other areas.
I don't believe in things that lack reason & evidence.
Nothing unscientific about that.

I'm not sure if the prize he won was specifically for physics.

It sounded like a 1.5 million dollar prize for being humble, humility.

Atheism Is Inconsistent with the Scientific Method, Prizewinning Physicist Says
In conversation, the 2019 Templeton Prize winner does not pull punches on the limits of science, the value of humility and the irrationality of nonbelief.

Marcelo Gleiser, a 60-year-old Brazil-born theoretical physicist at Dartmouth College and prolific science popularizer, has won this year’s Templeton Prize. Valued at just under $1.5 million, the award from the John Templeton Foundation annually recognizes an individual “who has made an exceptional contribution to affirming life’s spiritual dimension.” Its past recipients include scientific luminaries such as Sir Martin Rees and Freeman Dyson, as well as religious or political leaders such as Mother Teresa, Desmond Tutu and the Dalai Lama.

Across his 35-year scientific career, Gleiser’s research has covered a wide breadth of topics, ranging from the properties of the early universe to the behavior of fundamental particles and the origins of life. But in awarding him its most prestigious honor, the Templeton Foundation chiefly cited his status as a leading public intellectual revealing “the historical, philosophical and cultural links between science, the humanities and spirituality.” He is also the first Latin American to receive the prize.

Scientific American spoke with Gleiser about the award, how he plans to advance his message of consilience, the need for humility in science, why humans are special, and the fundamental source of his curiosity as a physicist.​

Sounds like he's in good company, with Mother Teresa, Desmond Tutu and the Dalai Lama.

"The irrationality of nonbelief.

Peaceful Sabbath.

 

[questfortruth]

Evidence that Albert Einstein was a theist.

He has personally rejected the claims, that he is an atheist. He has thought of the beauty and wisdom of the Creation as of something divine. He was not a pantheist, but he was a very special theist. He has invented his own way to be the theist. It is the way of joy standing before the Spirit of Science.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

But claiming to know utterly zilch about that stuff-Causer, how can you declare in your heart that there is no God?

I haven't. I merely say that there is quite literally nothing that would cause me to entertain that hypothesis.

 

[Altfish]

God is parent of Adam and Eve.

OK

 

[Altfish]

You hit the problem of infinite regress, because at some part of the past, there was no human parents, because there was no humans. So you are left with the problem, who taught the first humans religion.

The problem is that you don't understand evolution.
They were primates; it's a bit like when does black become white? Which stage of grey do you call it white?