1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured Atheism doesn't exist?:)

Discussion in 'Religious Debates' started by Rabbi Daniel, Jan 12, 2020.

  1. Rabbi Daniel

    Rabbi Daniel Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2020
    Messages:
    32
    Ratings:
    +26
    Religion:
    Jewish
    I know there is a God. There is such a thing of 100%
    whereas, for a non believer, its maybe almost impossible to claim that he doesnt believe 100% and that there is no God 0%
    BTW a famous atheist say or wrote something like that
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. Heyo

    Heyo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2019
    Messages:
    5,240
    Ratings:
    +4,300
    Religion:
    none
    Nope. You don't. You don't even know what a god is.
    You believe there is a god and you can believe 100% there to be a god.
    I can believe there to be no god with 100% certainty.
    But we both don't know.

    How do I know that you don't know?
    Knowledge has a definition and properties. Knowledge is transferable. If someone had knowledge about the existence and nature of god and transferred that knowledge, we wouldn't have 10s of 1000s of religions, denominations, sects.
     
    • Winner Winner x 3
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  3. TagliatelliMonster

    TagliatelliMonster Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2019
    Messages:
    8,289
    Ratings:
    +6,544
    Religion:
    Atheist
    So it's just your opinion / interpretation of some anecdotes people told you.


    Which would be an argument against the claims of the religion, which would provide basis for nonbelief.

    Sounds like you heared what you wanted to hear instead of what was actually said.

    I don't see what is "mad" or "angry" about noting that a supposed benevolent being wouldn't engage in reprehensible immoral acts.

    It's just pointing out an internal contradiction.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. HonestJoe

    HonestJoe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2010
    Messages:
    4,204
    Ratings:
    +2,489
    Religion:
    None
    Why do you keep ignoring all the replies challenging your assertions?

    Again, you believe there is a God and you may well be 100% certain in that belief but it is equally possible for someone to believe there are no gods and be 100% certain in their belief. The assertion the individual believes in doesn't make any difference to whether they can believe it 100% or not.

    I'd actually doubt anyone can be truly 100% certain of any belief, however much we might like to convince ourselves differently. Maybe part of that might be pushing the idea that anyone who believes differently to us can't possibly be as certain as we are in our belief because what we believe is different and better. :cool:

    And at some time a famous theist will have said "There is no god but Allah and Mohammed is his prophet" but you're not expected to agree with them. Why should what some other atheist said have anything to do with any of us?
     
    • Like Like x 3
  5. 9-10ths_Penguin

    9-10ths_Penguin 1/10 Subway Stalinist
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    Messages:
    58,929
    Ratings:
    +16,791
    Religion:
    None (atheist)
    This didn't answer my questions.

    All knowledge is tentative. If you were more honest with yourself or thought about the issue a bit deeper, maybe you'd recognize this and bring yourself a notch or two back from your 100% certainty.

    ...But I think it's a bit dishonest to try to spin this as if this atheists have some sort of special uncertainty when it comes to God.

    I mean, the same can be said about all sorts of claims that are obviously fabricated; that's the whole point of Russell's Teapot. We can't say for sure that Bertrand Russell's absurd suggestion - that there's a teapot floating space out near Mars - is absolutely false. Same with the Invisible Pink Unicorn and the Flying Spaghetti Monster: if we're being honest with ourselves, we can't reject them with 100% certainty either.

    So there are questions that are more interesting and relevant to me than "can we be 100% sure that this doesn't exist?" These are questions like:

    - do I have more uncertainty about this thing than I do for things that are obviously absurd fabrications?

    - is there good reason to believe that this thing is real?

    - can I recognize mechanisms that might allow the thing to be real?

    - is it more likely that the thing exists or doesn't? Does its existence or non-existence create any logical problems?
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  6. Bob the Unbeliever

    Bob the Unbeliever Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2017
    Messages:
    7,139
    Ratings:
    +4,492
    Religion:
    unbeliever
    Yes, yes... you said that already-- the Million $$ question is Why?
     
  7. BilliardsBall

    BilliardsBall Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2012
    Messages:
    9,953
    Ratings:
    +786
    Religion:
    Messianic Jewish Christianity
    Don't worry, atheists friends here will assault your thesis because they HAVE to, it's in their nature.

    I hereby challenge atheists to admit they have beliefs/hopes/concepts, however suppressed, that God loves them, watches them.
     
  8. 9-10ths_Penguin

    9-10ths_Penguin 1/10 Subway Stalinist
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    Messages:
    58,929
    Ratings:
    +16,791
    Religion:
    None (atheist)
    You just can't relate to an atheist mindset at all, can you?

    I mean, you effectively just told us that not believing in God is so foreign and unimaginable to you that you figure atheists are lying. I think this says more about you than it does about atheists.
     
    • Like Like x 4
    • Winner Winner x 1
  9. A Vestigial Mote

    A Vestigial Mote Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2015
    Messages:
    5,831
    Ratings:
    +3,828
    Religion:
    ?
    That just means that the atheist position is far more tenable. Given the state of our universe and the state of "us" as humans (with our very imperfect means of perceiving the contents of said universe) - 100% certainty about almost anything is a form of naivete.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. A Vestigial Mote

    A Vestigial Mote Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2015
    Messages:
    5,831
    Ratings:
    +3,828
    Religion:
    ?
    I don't have this. Not in the slightest.

    There's an interesting difference between us, eh? I am willing to allow that other people have views on this topic different from my own, and you simply are not. You act as if you know what I think, or how I feel. You would tell me straight to my face that I am lying about my own disposition, which I can certainly know far better than you can by definition.

    But you see, I believe you about your disposition. I am quite sure you believe as you say you do. Otherwise, how could I explain your abject levels of disgusting smugness about it all?
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
  11. HonestJoe

    HonestJoe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2010
    Messages:
    4,204
    Ratings:
    +2,489
    Religion:
    None
    Who is assaulting him? He came here and basically accused all atheist of lying and most of the responses have just been trying (but failing) to engage him in polite discussion.

    Exactly as much as you have suppressed beliefs/hopes/concepts that Odin is watching over you and on your death, will send the Valkyries to carry you to Valhalla. :cool:
     
    • Like Like x 2
  12. It Aint Necessarily So

    It Aint Necessarily So Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2017
    Messages:
    5,852
    Ratings:
    +6,405
    Religion:
    None
    I've seen this definition before. I would drop the first two words (and change "God" to "a god"), and write, "Atheism : lack of belief in the existence of a god or gods."

    My reason is that whatever is meant by disbelief is either a synonym of "lack of belief" or going further to claim that the idea is untrue. I use the words unbelief and disbelief as I do the words unproven and disproven, which most people would agree say different things, but others use them as synonyms.

    Dawkins had an interesting take on this:

    Dawkins proposes that religion arose as a result of co-opting the natural tendency of people, especially children, to unquestioningly submit to authority figures, especially fathers and tribal chiefs - a behavior which offers a survival advantage.

    Also, add the intuition to impute agency to nature, which we inherited from the beasts. Better to assume that that sound or movement was due to a conscious agent, run, and to have been wrong than the other way around. Thus lightning and thunder became gods warring once linguistic thought and ideas such as that became possible.

    Given these proclivities in man, it's nor surprising that gods were invented to explain the wrath of nature, and religions established with priesthoods ostensibly to appease these gods with offerings and obedience. You referred to manipulation above. This is manipulation at the grandest scale, using the literary device of a god for those wishing to exploit others by usurping its alleged authority when speaking as if channeling a divine command

    Dawkins offers the example of the moth spiraling into the flame or light bulb as an illustration of this usurpation of an instinct by a modern development. If you ask what survival advantage that behavior provided the moth, the answer is the same as with religious activities : none. Following paths using light sources evolved when the only night lights were celestial bodies, bodies that were so far away that their beams, which the moth uses to navigate, are parallel for practical purposes. It's the radial beams emanating from nearby light sources that confound the moth and condemn it to spiraling into the light.

    Dawkins' larger point is that just because a behavior is widespread doesn't mean that it offers a survival advantage. The moth's behavior is clearly destructive. Dawkins argues that man invests so much energy and consumes so many resources on this activity, religion, that like spiraling into a flame, it is actually counterproductive rather than conferring a survival advantage.

    Why do theists propose such absurdities as that a person who doesn't believe in a god or gods can't possibly find value anywhere. Is this what your religion teaches you? If so, you need better and more reliable information sources.

    I worship nothing, including the things I hold dear. I respect, admire, value, and advocate for much, but worship nothing. I find it undignified.

    Can you show me one of these diatribes? I keep hearing about them from theists, but I don't ever see them. What I see are reasoned arguments presented dispassionately that offend theists, and that they perceive as personal attacks, but no actual attacks. Atheists aren't angry at theists unless they try to inject their religion into the law..

    We demand nothing from you except evidence before we believe you, and you offer none. I know why what you call evil exists, and there is no evidence that it involves gods.

    That was never a fact of any kind - just another bad guess believed by faith. Just like other faith-based ideas like creationism and astrology, it was divorced from evidence, and was predictably sterile for that reason.

    Yes, Jehovah can be ruled out, but how do you rule out the deist god, for example. You wouldn't expect to find any evidence for it even if it ever existed.I am content holding that position and living as if these gods don't exist as I do regarding vampires and leprechauns. We don't need to rule these things out with certainty to disregard them and live as if they don't exists. For me, it is logically more satisfying to not take that leap of faith from apatheism, or indifference regarding gods, to strong atheism.

    You may be 100% certain, but it doesn't make you correct. You call yourself a gnostic atheist, but I don't believe you know what you claim to know because I consider it unknowable however certain you are. For example, how did you rule out the deist god? What test, observation, or algorithm can demonstrate that no gods exist?

    I believe that it is wise to hold some philosophical doubt, which is different from psychological doubt, or the feeling of being uncertain. Philosophical doubt is the understanding that you may be wrong despite your certitude. Descartes questioned the existence of external reality, arguing that we would have no means of determining that our conscious experience wasn't all illusion. That argument, which never gave me a feeling of doubt about the exitence of external reality, was compelling, and allowed me to doubt external reality intellectually if not emotionally.

    Notice that this understanding doesn't affect how we live life. Even if we knew for a fact that our conscious experience was of nothing external - just an illusion created by a great deceiver - what would you do differently? You're still not going to put what appears to be your hand in what appears to be boiling water, because the consequences will be whatthey always have been - the sensation of pain and appearance of blistering whatever their cause.

    Disagree. It is an opinion that requires no action. Anti-theism is the idea that the religion is a net negative in the world, which would be better without it. Nobody holding that idea need act on it.

    People do affirm that, but I don't believe that they can know that there are no gods.

    But you wrote "God," by which I assume that you mean a specific god, the god of the Hebrew scriptures. That god can be ruled out using only reason. It's logically impossible as described. Nothing can in the same sense and at the same time

    As I explained to the gentleman above, you can be 100% certain and still be wrong.

    Yeah they can, assuming that you are talking about a sentient creator rather than merely the blind laws of physics. In fact, if that's what they're searching for, they're not doing science. That's what the ID people are doing. Scientists look at nature. They are not looking for gods.

    But if they ever find a god in nature, I'm sure they'll let us know.

    Atheism is the name for unbelief in gods. If belief and unbelief mean the same to you, then perhaps.

    Incidentally, I neither believe nor disbelieve in gods, as in saying that they do or do not exist. I am agnostic have no opinion there, but am an atheist nevertheless.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  13. Heyo

    Heyo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2019
    Messages:
    5,240
    Ratings:
    +4,300
    Religion:
    none
    I once lived together with a cat. Cats have been worshiped as gods by the ancient Egyptians. So that cat could have been a goddess. I hoped she'd loved me.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  14. SkepticThinker

    SkepticThinker Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2013
    Messages:
    10,613
    Ratings:
    +5,058
    You might take steps to rid the worship of leprechauns if vast swaths of the population were worshiping leprechauns and expecting everyone else to do the same; pushing their leprechaun beliefs onto others in the public square; insisting that if everyone else doesn't worship leprechauns as you do then they will face horrible punishments when they die; inisisting that anyone who doesn't worship leprechauns are immoral leprechaun haters, etc. You know, like a lot of people have done with religion(s).
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  15. SkepticThinker

    SkepticThinker Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2013
    Messages:
    10,613
    Ratings:
    +5,058
    Yes, we are aware that you don't like your assertions to be challenged in debate forums where such things occur, and yet you continue to post in them. :shrug:

    You challenge us to admit to things we don't believe in? Huh?
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  16. dianaiad

    dianaiad Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2010
    Messages:
    4,394
    Ratings:
    +1,320
    Religion:
    LDS (the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day saints)
    Yes, I understand the rules for quotes. It's amazing, however, how many people do not understand the rules for quotes, and expect the reader to attribute imaginary dialog to real people, and vice versa.

    Nice to know that you acknowledge that your assumptions about what other people are thinking does come from your own imagination, and not reality.
     
  17. Rabbi Daniel

    Rabbi Daniel Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2020
    Messages:
    32
    Ratings:
    +26
    Religion:
    Jewish
    The famous atheist who I mentioned is Richard Dawkins. Now would you say, like what you may have alluded about me, that his approach is dishonest?
    Yes, there may be such a thing that a believer knows that God exists, and its 100%, whereas an atheist wouldn't believe that there is no God 100%, knowing that their might be, even a tiny percentage on his belief that God exists
     
  18. A Vestigial Mote

    A Vestigial Mote Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2015
    Messages:
    5,831
    Ratings:
    +3,828
    Religion:
    ?
    Those who "do believe that there is no God" are a subset of atheists... but are not representative of all atheists. Anyone who does not have a belief in any God/gods is an atheist.

    If I had to guess, you have also been told this many multiple times. Apparently it is just easier not to shatter your glass-house of a worldview, keep you poor opinion of atheists that you seem to think strengthens your position (hahahahaha) and keep trudging out the same CRAP over and over.
     
  19. dianaiad

    dianaiad Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2010
    Messages:
    4,394
    Ratings:
    +1,320
    Religion:
    LDS (the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day saints)
    I am rather careful about the difference between exegesis and eisegesis. I do my best to practice the first.

    It seems to me...pardon my assumptions here, but I base them upon the arguments of atheists who DO understand the difference between blaming the deity believed in and blaming the people who believe...that it gets pretty obvious when someone is mad at God rather than at the worshipers.

    Far too few of them make the obvious deduction that if no God exists, then the harm is done by PEOPLE believing in that deity, and arranging His/Her/Its commandments to suit them. Criticizing the deity simply takes the responsibility for that harm off the shoulders of the believers/leaders of the belief system.

    I have met...and read the words of...atheists who clearly understand the difference.

    You talk of 'internal contradictions"...but frankly, all one does when criticizing the deity is excuse the believer; the only possible results are to either get the believers to be more intransigent in their beliefs, or to disillusion them regarding that deity and set them looking for a better one. I don't think that's what anybody wants, is it? (well, I'd prefer 'looking for a better one,' but then I AM a theist)

    What you need to do is say...are you SURE that was a deity speaking? Shouldn't you take responsibility for your own actions?

    When we do that, we won't be quite so prone to falling for something else....like the horrific anti-theistic proclamations from government leaders that result in the deaths of millions and millions of people.
     
  20. HonestJoe

    HonestJoe Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2010
    Messages:
    4,204
    Ratings:
    +2,489
    Religion:
    None
    It's hard to say since you've not quoted him directly and it isn't actually entirely clear what you're saying or claiming that he is saying. Maybe if you actually engaged in discussion rather than blindly flinging out empty assertions, you might get some more meaningful responses.

    I personally can't stand the man and disagree with a lot of what he says about belief and religion. I do hope you're smart enough to realise that atheists aren't required to worship Dawkins and blindly accept everything he says. As it happens, I suspect he'd be on the same page as me on the question of certainty, recognising that nobody can be 100% certain of their beliefs regardless of what they are.
     
    #220 HonestJoe, Jan 14, 2020
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2020
    • Like Like x 1
Loading...