Over the past several thousand years, man has continuously asked the question of why he existed, and even more importantly, what happens after we die. The obvious truth, that the same thing happens to humans as it does to every other life form on the planet, well, it?s not pretty. So humans invented gods.And when I say gods, I mean lots and lots of gods. Thousands of them. Each of the gods gave pretty much the same explanation of man?s purpose, as well as an answer as to why the earth shook, the stars glimmered, the moon changed phases, and the weather changed seasons. Most gods had supporting evidence of their existence. People ?felt the presence? of Zeus on Mt Olympus, and where do you think that lightning came from, anyway? Miracles were witnessed, gospels were written and embellished over time, songs of praise were written and sung. All gods promised immortality and some form of enlightenment AFTER death, and to varying degrees, all described bad afterlives for those who disbelieve. Most of these gods are dismissed today as mythology, because we know why the earth shakes and why seasons change. The mysteries of the world are becoming apparent, slowly but surely. Additionally, the number of religious wars has resulted in conquorings and conquest, so today there are far fewer gods considered ?real? by anyone than there once were. Still, the gods of today have NO MORE evidence supporting their existence than their predecessors. People ?feel their existence?, ?see miracles? even though NONE have ever been proven, and sing songs of praise. But there is no more support for these gods than there ever was for Thor, Qetzalcoatl, and Hawaiian Tikki gods. I?m no fan of watering down the truth, so here?s a nice absolute. There is not a single reason to accept any of today?s gods that wasn?t used to support the gods we all consider mythology. This leads to one undeniable conclusion: religion and mythology are the same thing. Discuss.
HZ: I don’t know about mpr. Text guy m’self.
Hmmmm. I think WinZip handles all formats at this point.
Have redhat 7.3 on other partition. Lemmee think about it for a day or so. Thanks.
“You all have really showed me what I have to study in order to defend my faith with confidence.”
Pleeeeease. You don’t need to study anything to defend faith. To defend anything based on faith, simply take a solipsist view of the universe, and preclude all intellectual discussion. That’s all faith really is; a “just because” form of argumentation. Now seeking real truth beside a solipsist religious myth view. Now that takes respectable effort.
4Him,
We talked about the flood the other day, and I finally got the time to read your links about young earth science last night. It’s interesting stuff, and I can see why it convinced you. Here’s a link that I think will change your mind:
Problems with a Global Flood
If that’s not enough, there are many other sites like this one that explain why the flood could not possibly have happened. Many also includes references to peer-reviewed information that will explain things in greater detail. If you distrust the scientific community so much that, even after seeing indisputable facts that contradict the possibility of the flood, you still think it could have happened, strip away all the science and just think about the most absurd part of the story. How could all those animals cross the ocean to get to the ark, then cross the oceans again to return to their original habitats. I think it’s clear that the story was written before the author could have known that there were other continents.
Just noticed that the link tag I put into my last post didn’t work for some reason. Here’s the url:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html
How did male and female species come to be separate and why do they produce life?
This, surprisingly, also has a simple answer.
The very first reproduction was asexual – meaning mitosis, what your cells do every single day. They simply just made copies of themselves.
Now some bacteria (and other organisms) will undergo something called conjugation – a very simplistic form of sexual reproduction. One bacterium sends out chemical signals to another bacterium, they connect together through a pilus, and a nick in the DNA happens and that DNA is transferred to the recipient bacterium.
In fact, just take some water from a puddle the next time it rains and look at it under the microscope. You may just find some organisms doing it!
Eventually throughout time, organisms that could reproduce in this type of fashion were more favored as it gave them more genetic diversity. Add in a little more time (which we have plenty of), you get a divison of labor – males and females (of which, females are argueably more important).
If you need to know where babies come from, talk to your parents.
To those theists who would equate science with faith, as just another thing to “believe” in:
Is this a joke? Seriously? Are you really, secretly, here to -amuse- us?
It would seem so.
Because, let’s look at it;
Science has brought us:
Modern medicine, all sorts of technology, like say THE INTERNET, and has put people ON THE FRIGGIN’ MOON!
Whereas faith has done… what?
Can you PRAY your computer to work even if it isn’t plugged in?
Can you PRAY yourself to the moon?
Can you… gah… why go on?
This would be hilarious if it wasn’t so sad.
Wow, been away for a couple of days and y’all have been busy. Been crazy busy at work, plus my husband found a very young, adorable, stray puppy that we’re fostering for now (we are looking for a loving home for him but if we can’t find one I guess we’ll keep him and he’ll learn to love cats!) but honestly it’s like having a toddler in the house. It’s turned totally upside-down.
So nice to see that 4Him didn’t turn out to be like You-Know-Who. Good luck with your research.
GooseHenry, I don’t think you’re an idiot either, I just think you’re a victim of what’s probably the greatest scam ever inflicted upon the human race. I know it can seem very real and the evidence Xtian apologists offer against science can seem very convincing. I think that some people just want to believe in something so badly that maybe, for lack of a better description, it blinds them to the actual facts.
I am friends with many people who are very devout Christians – these are intelligent, loving, good people who, like you, are well-adjusted, have a great family life, and generally function well in society. I would question their beliefs, but I would never call them idiots in any sense of the word.
“I am friends with many people who are very devout Christians – these are intelligent, loving, good people who, like you, are well-adjusted, have a great family life, and generally function well in society. I would question their beliefs, but I would never call them idiots in any sense of the word.”
Do they patronize, thus discredit you by telling you you’ve been decieved by Satan demons, and that you’re blinded to this effect?
GooseHenry, I don’t think you’re an idiot either, I just think you’re a victim of what’s probably the greatest scam ever inflicted upon the human race. I know it can seem very real and the evidence Xtian apologists offer against science can seem very convincing. I think that some people just want to believe in something so badly that maybe, for lack of a better description, it blinds them to the actual facts.
Well ok. Let’s say i am a victim of a scam.
This automatically assumes some things:
1) somebody had to convince to become a christian. Yet no other person was present when i became a christian.
2) I have been exposed to indoctrination during my life. Yet i have never been exposed to any preaching or prozelytizing since i have barely been in touch with christians during my life. Sure, i’ve been handed a tract sometime. Prior to becoming i christian i didn’t really know what the faith was all about. In my country christians are in a minority and faith is not really something you see in everyday society.
3) I read the bible. Which i didn’t.
Though i have to admit, when i was in church during for example weddings or funerals, i felt a surge in my stomach. So these things certainly had an affect on me.
But not enough to trick me into becoming a “victim of a scam”
“Though i have to admit, when i was in church during for example weddings or funerals, i felt a surge in my stomach. So these things certainly had an affect on me.”
So you want the feeling of being in a celebrated social environment. This still doesn’t mean that Atheists are influenced by your assertions of mythic demons. People are free to choose whatever views they wish. If I choose to be Pagan, because I get the euphoric sense of wellness you felt, then there’s really nothing wrong there either. It’s when you start being conniving with this on others who are happy with their lives already, that this becomes issue.
Still being that you still support a myth dogma that promotes demonization of others for no humane reason, even just tries pushing myth as fact without real evidence, you’re still pushing a scam.
Slimmins,
Actually, no, they don’t patronize but then, most of them don’t know I’m an out-and-out atheist. They do know, however, that I’m “not religious”, and that I don’t go to church, so for the most part we do not discuss religion, unless they mention in passing something they’re going to do at church, etc.
GooseHenry,
Maybe “scam” was not an appropriate choice of words. Deception, maybe? That’s my opinion. But I don’t think you have to be indoctrinated into Christianity to be lured by it – witness the many conversions by “missionaries” over these couple of thousand years. They are adept at pursuing “new souls” . I’m not sure how you became involved, but around here, churches work very hard to attract people, especially young people – and make it seem like the best thing going.
All I know is, I’ve heard a great deal of their persuasions, and they can be very, very, sharp about telling you what you want to hear. Many of them don’t WANT you to read the Bible because that way, you only get THEIR interpretation, and they can lead you where they want you to follow. That’s why I think it is very important, not just for newly converted Christians, but for those indoctrinated in the religion from birth, to READ the Bible for themselves, and study and learn about the history of the religion.
Sure, it feels good to be in a group of people, listening to a charismatic speaker talk about how wonderful everything is with Jesus. I feel euphoric at times listening to the music of Bach, Schubert, Jimi Hendrix or the Beatles. Or watching my children grow and learn, or working in my flower garden, or any number of other things that make me feel good. But I in no way put that good feeling down to supernatural influence. It’s a chemical reaction of the brain. Science has proven that to me, as well as many other things.
I know of a lot of unchurched people who speak of similar experiences of “feeling something” at weddings, funerals, etc. Many of them think that it’s Jesus calling them and promptly “get saved”. What you have to remember is weddings – and especially funerals -are emotionally charged atmospheres anyway. And where I’m from, the ministers doing the funerals don’t spend as much time talking about the deceased as they do telling all the mourners that they’d better “get right with God” before they’re lying up there in the casket. So it’s no wonder some people are profoundly affected by it.
More later, gotta get busy.
Symbiote
where did you study evoulotion biology thinking of going into that field of study
already took a few classes on micro biology and evoluntiary biology had to quit school
but your post made me start looking at my biology book again mainly looking at the chapters about chemical evolution and natural selection
I havent had time to read all the posts here and I dont think I will have time anytime soon
, but I just wanted to tell how I am working to expose religion as mythology.. I do it through my paintings. Right now I am working on the garden of eden. What most people (especially christians) dont know is that the bible uses symbology just like the old religions now called mythology. For example the tree of knowlege is symbolic for the goddess asherah(who is mentioned in the bible over 40 times)whos followers practiced sexual rituals to assure fertility to people and crops. She held the knowledge of how to create life and food in abundence, hence adam and eves punishments..Adams: to till the soil for the rest of his life. Eves: to bring forth children out of sorrow and pain. In my painting I gave a female figure to the forbidden tree who was also known as the goddess of the groves in the bible.
The serpent is another symbol of a goddess who was known as the babylonian serpent goddess who also was a fertility goddess whos followers practiced sexual fertility rituals. She was also called Lilith. Some jews believe that lilith was the first wife of Adam who refused to lie beneath him during sex. Anyway, I am running out of time to explain further(damn kids!)but I do hope you guys get a chance to look up Asherah and Lilith!! Their stories reveal a LOT about the bible and biblical beliefs!
I hope to have more time later!!
Tootles for now.
Ps. The religious right hates feminists and feminist theologians most of all because they have been the most damaging to the patriarchal religious beliefs by exposing the truth about who the pagans really were! They also do not do well against the feminist when it comes to biblical debates! I think a thread about sexism in the bible would be a GREAT topic to debate with christians!!:D
GooseHenry:
Well enough, & all. We’re to assume you didn’t talk to ANYONE, or do any research whatsoever? My pardon, that is the impression I’m receiving.
You just happened to become a believer? No external advice whatsoever? I mean, there must’ve been something outside of just deciding 1 day.
Curiouser & curiouser, to quote Carrol.
You’ve got me intrigued, I must admit.
The exception tests the rule. Or proves it. I forget which.
Spanders said (a while ago), “I freely admit I have an irrational belief that is not provable”.
I would be very happy is all theists realized this fact. It would make them much easier to talk to, and Spanders is a prime example of this.
I have been trying to catch up on all the posts and comments since my power was interrupted by Hurricane Wilma. This one has been especially interesting.
BTW, where’s Phreedm?
r4d:
“Little Beirut”, hmmm? Sounds like my kinda place. A leftist’s paradise? How’s the job market up there? Anything for a left-leaning rabble rouser like meself?
Slimmins
So you want the feeling of being in a celebrated social environment.
Que? No actually i don’t care at all for such things.
People are free to choose whatever views they wish.
Excellent. Then i choose to view reality as two forces, God and the devil, whom one has to choose between.
It’s when you start being conniving with this on others who are happy with their lives already, that this becomes issue.
Have i done this? Also, i don’t think there’s any point conniving with people. You can tell quite early on if they are interested in the gospel. If not, i leave it be. Conniving doesn’t pay off.
Still being that you still support a myth dogma that promotes demonization of others for no humane reason, even just tries pushing myth as fact without real evidence, you’re still pushing a scam.
Christianity doesn’t promote demonization of others. Where did you get that from?
Peach63
Well yes, i understand what you mean. Kudos for showing the respect you have by the way.
I know i can’t use the following words but just let me in order to explain myself. The atheist “faith” (yes i know what you are going to say there is no such thing but i use it just to explain a point) isn’t good enough for me because it fails to give me any answers.
For example, why do i have this unexplainable longing that this world simply can’t satisfy? Why haven’t evolution eradicated this? Sometimes i think that if i just can visit this country or do this and that (whatever i think is the reason for this longing) then i will be happy. But no, afterwards it just feels empty, i long for something that can satisfy my innermost needs.
The word of God does.
Why do i think the world is cruel and unfair? Given that evolution was correct, i would just think that everything is normal. This, combined with the longing i previously explained, convi?nces me that we humans were not made for this world.
Why am i afraid to die? That is totally illogical. Sure, given that evolution was correct, i would strive to avoid death in order to secure my offspring. But i wouldn’t ponder and philosophize around it with fear and uncertainty. Its almost like death is unnatural. Makes me think i was really made to last forever.
Now, this, among other things, is why atheism totally fails to do anything for me. The Word gives me answers to all my questions. And gives me serenity and hope.
Reluctant:
Well enough, & all. We’re to assume you didn’t talk to ANYONE, or do any research whatsoever? My pardon, that is the impression I’m receiving.
You just happened to become a believer? No external advice whatsoever? I mean, there must’ve been something outside of just deciding 1 day.
You get the right impression. I didn’t talk with anyone or do any research. I just simply put God to the test. I told him taht if Jesus was the truth, he could come into my life.
Then it was up to him.
GooseHenry:
“Have i done this?”
No, you’re just sharing. Appreciated.
“Christianity doesn’t promote demonization of others. Where did you get that from?”
Well, I refer you to some of r4d’s posts about mormons (‘nother thread). McDowell’s book does it. Or see the thread, ‘http://www.atheists.org/nogodblog/index.php/2005/09/29/intelligence_from_those_who_study_the_un’. Check out Theodosius, on answers.com. Google on ‘Dominion Theonomy’. You may not do such a thing (which makes you a wonderful person, in my book, no sarcasm at all), but I’ve seen all KINDS of such nonsense, on apologist websites, in the news, etc. Ad hominem/poisoning the well, etc. is part & parcel of the apologists arsenal, it seems. At least in this country. Or watch ‘Outfoxed’.
“Given that evolution was correct, i would just think that everything is normal.”
Not so. Evolution lends new meaning to the term ‘A work in progress’. Everything is in the process of evolving. Even at this moment, our DNA is evolving. All things are transitional.
“I didn’t talk with anyone or do any research.”
Hey, it works for you, that’s fine. I’ve no problem w/that. It’s free will. More power to you my friend.
I just wish the Xtians in this country were more like you, is all. Walking the talk, as it were.
I just have a problem w/living in fear, is all. Either fear death, god, government: tain’t any way to live, IMHO.
It’s hard enough to be human.
this is very good
good related article
drowning pool – bodies
drowning pool – bodies
Too bad. I it seems that this debate is over. Ahh well such is life. Please read Richard Dawkins book The God Delusion and then try and convince me there is something to religion. (good luck)
Cults and mythology are just religions with too few followers.
As for atheism being the result of bad parenting, that’s the biggest load of crock I’ve ever heard… well, not really but it’s close.
How do atheists become so obsessed over a “NON”-belief?
southsanclemente,
This is a very old thread. If you would like to participate you are most welcome but please comment on a more recent one. Thank you.
And, do you mean ,Why?
I mean Who…but it doesn’t matter if you were to answer the question as if I asked Why…
remy
It is an old thread, but it’s one of those Dave included in the popular threads lists on the right. I guess we should have been ready for someone new to come along and want to discuss what’s in them. It’s either go to the old thread or hijack a current one.
southsanclemente
How, who, why?
It isn’t part of my daily routine to be “obsessed” with my nonbelief. I don’t even think about it regularly, to tell you the truth. I do feel the need to defend or explain it when I come across some idiot sayig something like “There are no atheists in foxholes”, or a court official not knowing how to swear me in without using a bible, or a group trying to infiltrate creationism into school curricula.
The problem is that religionists seem to see nonbelievers as nonentities. We are finally standing up and saying, “Oh, no, no, no. We ARE here. We ARE for real. And we deserve a voice and a seat at the table.”
We do not deny you the right to believe as you wish. We will fight against the threat of a theocratic government though. We will fight for our right to not believe.
Sorry Karen, I didn’t know about “popular threads”. It’s never come up before and there was a recent drive by in an old thread.
southsanclemente
Atheists are not a unanimous collective. The word itself was originally a pejorative term used to describe unbelievers, ie., bad people.
While obsession is perhaps too strong a word, I can say that since coming here I think about theism far more, but then, read the name of the blog.
There are many atheists who have come from the world of theism and are probably examining why they were so duped by the religion they left behind. I spring from a family of critical thinkers who questioned everything. Early on I investigated supernatural belief because I found it to be so incredibly strange.
I left it alone for 25 years until I saw a growing evangelism in my country which represented a certain lack of the aforementioned critical thinking. It spooked me a tad and I resumed my fascination. I began to read again about belief systems for which there is absolutely no credible evidence.
Worse, from the point of view of this particular atheist, is the number of believers who actually take the Bible as the inerrant word of god.
Now. May I inquire why it is that theists seem to adore the ellipsis?
FAITH IN SCIENCE?
WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO BE HAVE FAITH IN GODS POWER TODAY VERSES HISTORICAL CONCEPTS OF GODS POWER? IT IS GREAT TO TOUT THE POWER OF GOD TO DO ANYTHING BUT IF GIVEN THE CHOICE BETWEEN LIVING IN THE WILDERNESS RELYING ON GOD TO PROVIDE, OR LIVING ON FARM WITH THE TOOLS TO PROVIDE FOR YOURSELF. I BELIEVE MOST PEOPLE OF FAITH TODAY WOULD CHOOSE THE FARM WITH THEIR FEET AND GOD WITH THEIR LIPS. WOULD IT HAVE BEEN THE SAME FOR EARLY FOLLOWERS OF RELIGIOUS FAITH? SINCE EARLY JEWS, CHRISTIANS AND MUSLIMS WERE KNOW FOR THEIR WANDERINGS (AND GIVING UNTO CEASAR WHAT IS CEASARS), IT’S MY BELIEF THERE IS A DIFFERENCE. SCIENCE IS TO BE THANKED.
SCIENCE AND RELIGION SPRANG FROM THE SAME ROOT. RELIGION WAS THE EXPLANATION FOR OUR PLACE IN THE UNIVERSE, LIFE’S BEGININGS, SUFFERING AND REWARD, AND NATURAL PHENOMENON. TRIBAL SHAMAN ONCE EMBODIED THE SUM OF KNOWLEDGE ABOUT BOTH SCIENCE AND GOD. THEY WOULD LEAD RELIGIOUS CEREMONIES, OFFER GUIDANCE, HEAL THE SICK, AND CONFRONT NATURAL CALAMITIES THROUGH DEVINE WISDOM AND PRAYER. AT SOME POINT THE SCIENCE AND RELIGIOUS PROPERTIES OF GOD’S POWER DIVERGED AND WHAT PURE SCIENCE DISCOVERED THAT DEVIATED FROM BIBLICAL TEACHING WAS SOON DISOWNED OR SILENCED BY RELIGION LIKE AN ILLEGITIMATE CHILD. ONCE THINGS WERE UNDERSTOOD BY MAN IT WAS HARD TO SEE IT AS DEVINE, LIKE A MAGIC TRICK WHO’S SECRET HAS BEEN REVEALED.
GROWING UP IN OUR ERA HAS LEFT US WITH A MENTAL PICTURE OF THE WORLD COMPLETELY DIFFERENT FROM PEOPLE WHO LIVED DURRING THE ERA THAT THE 3 MAJOR MONOTHEISTIC RELIGIOUS TEXTS WERE WRITTEN IN. READ THE FOLLOWING LONG/SHORT LIST AND REFLECT ON THE CAUSES/MECHANICS AS YOU UNDERSTAND THEM VS. OUR BCE COUNTERPARTS:
ELECTRICITY, HUMAN FLIGHT, MEDICINE, TORNADOES, HURRICANES, DIASEASE, COSMOLOGY, PHYSICS, MATHEMATICS, MATTER, AGE OF THE PLANET, AGE OF THE UNIVERSE, SIZE OF THE UNIVERSE, THERMODYNAMICS, GRAVITY, REPRODUCTION, EVOLUTION, RELATIVITY, ATMOSPHERE, VOLCANOES, EARTHQUAKES, FLOODS, TIDAL WAVES, SHAPE OF THE EARTH, THE MOON, MICROBES, BACTERIA, VIRUSES, MOLECULES, ATOMS, MASS, MENTAL HEALTH, PHYSICAL HEALTH, COMBUSTION, EXPLOSION, FISSION, SYNTHETICS, COMPUTERS, PHYSIOLOGY, ARCHEOLOGY
MOST OF THESE TERMS AND HUNDREDS MORE WOULD HAVE BEEN UNKNOWN TO PEOPLE LIVING JUST A HALF A MELLENIA AGO. GO BACK 2000-3000YEARS AND PRACTIALLY ALL THE TERMS AND THEIR EFFECTS ON SOCIETY WOULD FALL UNDER THE HEADING OF ?THE POWER AND KNOWLEDGE OF GOD.?
TODAY PEOPLE RARELY LOOK TO THEIR CHURCHES FOR PREDICTIONS, SERVICES OR EXPLANATIONS RELATED TO THESE TERMS. INSTEAD WE WATCH THE NEWS FOR WHEATHER PREDICTIONS, AN INVESTMENT BANKER TO PREDICT ECONOMIC CONDITIONS, THE HYWAY PATROL FOR ROAD CONDITIONS, EXPEDIA FOR FLIGHT PREDICTIONS, DOCTORS FOR PREDICTIONS OF OUR HEALTH AND THE GENDER AND BIRTH DATE OF UNBORN CHILDREN. WE MAKE APPOINTMENTS WITH DOCTORS WHEN WE ARE SICK. WE CALL UTILITIES WHEN THE POWER SUDDENLY GOES OFF, WASH OUR HANDS BEFORE REMOVING A SPLINTER. TAKE ASPRIN FOR HEADACHES. READ GARDENING BOOKS TO RAISE PLANTS, ALMANACS FOR TIDAL AND MOON PHASES, READ REPAIR MANUALS WHEN SOMETHING BREAKS. USE A REMOTE CONTROL TO CHANGE CHANELS, A SWITCH FOR LIGHT, COOK WITH MICROWAVES, LOOK FOR RESEARCH ON THE WORLD WIDE WEB. SET UP A TELESCOPE TO STUDY THE UNIVERSE. USE A CALCULATOR TO DETERMINE VALUES, USE A PHONE TO COMMUNICATE AND A CAR FOR TRAVEL. EVERYDAY WE UTILIZE THE TOOLS OF ,AND PROVE OUR ?FAITH? IN, SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND MATHEMATICS . WHEN OUR FAITH IS NOT REWARDED EACH AND EVERYTIME, WE GET ANOID AND BEMOAN THE FACT THAT ?THINGS JUST AREN’T BUILT THE WAY THEY USE TO BE.? WE WORSHIP AT THE ALTER OF SCIENCE WITH OUR ACTIONS HUNDREDS OF TIMES A DAY. PROVING OUR FAITH THAT THESE TOOLS OF SCIENCE WILL WORK FOR US ON DEMAND…. BECAUSE THEY DO.
THEN THERE IS OUR FAITH IN GOD’S POWER. IT’S FAR MORE VERBAL AS WE DON’T EXPECT IT TO RESPOND LIKE A LIGHT SWITCH. WE DRIVE TO CHURCH ON SUNDAY,THROW IN A LITTLE BIBLE STUDY, SAY A PRAYER BEFORE EATING AND SOMETIMES JUST BEFORE BED. (IF WERE MUSLIM MAYBE WE BOW TO MECA A FEW MORE TIMES THRUOGH OUT THE DAY. NO MATTTER THE FAITH, IT WONT COMPARE TO THE TIME WE GIVE UP ON HIGH TO SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY)THEN WE DO ONE MORE THING TO PROVE OUR FAITH IN GOD, WE COMPLAIN ABOUT THE INTRUSION OF SCIENCE IN OUR RELIGIOUS BELIEFS AND IMPEDE IT’S PROGRESS IF NECCESARY. WE DISMISS IT’S CONCLUSIONS, WE QUESTION THE MORALITY OF AND MARGINALIZE ITS SUPPORTERS AND PRACTITIONERS. WE ASSURE OURSELVES THAT WE ARE SUPERIOR BECAUSE WE HAVE THIS INTIMATE RELATIONSHIP WITH GOD. OUR FAITH IN GOD.
OF COURSE WE DON’T REJECT ALL THE PRODUCTS OF OUR SCIENTIFIC HERITAGE. IN FACT, SOME MAKE GREAT STATUS SYMBOLS (IF THEY’RE BIG ENOUGH AND EXPENSIVE ENOUGH). GOD IS JUST LIKE THE CORNER STORE WITH SCIENCE CAST AS WALMART. ?I PROTESTED BEFORE WALMART MOVED IN ACROSS THE STREET.? ? BUT, THE CORNER STORE DOSN’T HAVE THE SELECTION AND ON DEMAND AVAILABILITY OF WALMART THAT I ENJOY.? ?MY FRIENDS AND I STILL SHOP THE CORNER STORE FOR A FEW ITEMS ,BUT SOME OF THE LESS CONCERNED AND LESS LOYAL PEOPLE OF THIS TOWN WONT SHOP THERE AT ALL.?
I WONDER IF EARLY RELIGIOUS FOLLOWERS OF JUDAISM, CHRISTIANITY AND ISLAM WHO HAD VERY SHORT LIST OF KNOWN SCIENCE AND A VERY LONG LIST OF THE POWERS OF GOD WOULD EVEN RECOGNIZE THAT THEIR MODERN DAY COUNTERPARTS ARE PART OF THE SAME RELIGION?. I ALSO WONDER THAT IF THEY COULD SEE ALL THE BENEFITS OF SCIENCE , RESULTING IN LONGER, HEALTHIER, MORE COMFORTABLE LIVES, WOULD THEY SHARE THE SAME DISMISSANT ATTITUDE FOR SCIENTIFIC PROGRESS OF TODAYS RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALIST? OR WOULD THEY HAVE A NEW APPRECIATION FOR THE TREASURES OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY AND FIND IT ALL….. MAGICAL?
Hey, all. I’m new here. I’m a theist — a Christian, specifically. In light of all the recent atheist bestsellers, I’m interested in getting a better understanding of the atheist perspective. This “Open Debate with Theists” seemed like a good enough place to start, so here I am. Not sure which specific point to begin with, but I will say that I’m about two-thirds of the way through Hitchens’ “god is not Great.”
Jason,
You might start here:
http://atheism.about.com
http://www.whywontgodhealamputees.com
I just finished Hitchens book and liked it enough to order a copy for myself.
Thanks for the info. I just finished reading Hitchens’ latest; it’s difficult to give a full review here, but as a short summary of my opinion I’ll say this: Hitchens is certainly adept at showing the dark side of religion, but his litany of grievances is mostly a rant, lacking much in the way of logic to support his atheist/anti-God position. In other words, the fact that many bad things have been done in the name of religion in no way proves that a.) God is evil, or that b.) God doesn’t exist. To apply Hitchens’ “logic” to other facets of life, it would be like me saying that money is inherently evil simply because many people have used it for evil purposes. For money, just like religion and positions of authority, is simply a tool, something that can be used by corrupt, imperfect humans for good or evil. That being the case, religion is no more to blame for evil than all the kitchen knives that have been turned into deadly weapons over the years. The real problem in both cases is flawed humankind: those who have twisted religion to their own selfish ends, yes, but also those who have been greedy with money, or abusive of power positions (think Enron, WorldCom, and the many other corporate and political scandals that had nothing to do with religion and everything to do with greed, and how much trouble these events caused). I find it highly unfortunate that religion (or any other thing) has ever been misused to control or manipulate people, but Hitchens’ diatribe is not so much a list of how religion poisons everything, but of how we imperfect humans have poisoned everything, including religion.
I love the passion you display on this subject, and the extent of the clarity of mind you use. The problem with your argument is in your defense of there being no God you forget to prove your hypothesis on how there is indeed no God. You give emotional reason why you don?t believe in a theistic God but you give no evidence for their not being one. You are reasoning that no God exist but never provide evidence on how that is truth in itself. You said you don?t like watered down truth so consider the following. The universe has great complexity, complexity does not come by chance it has to be designed, therefore someone had to design the universe. If you were walking in a field and you saw a watch, you would not think for a second that the watch you are looking at grew out of the ground, why, because the watch displays high complexity. You would know that the watch you were looking at was created and placed or dropped on the ground where you where. Lets take the same watch and consider the very origin of the universe. If we take the watch and crush it into millions of pieces and place the smashes watch pieces into a bag and shake it up for millions and millions of years, what would happen to the watch? Would it turn into something else? Would it become a neck tie? No it would still be a busted watch in a bag, why? Because non-existing things can?t produce existing things, that defies the law of existence! Nothing can?t make something no matter the time length. As I close my blog consider the following: we as you must know are finite beings. Meaning we grow old and die will not be here forever we are finite. Every part of us is finite our stomach, our hands our hair, all of it is even our brains. When we die these things shut down and die as well. So if we are finite beings even in the brain how come we have this concept of an infinite God. There is nothing infinite about us yet, we have an idea or a presupposition of an infinite or eternal God. Us being finite, without there existing an infinite being, how could we come to this conclusion? I will be awaiting a response. Have a great day.
sumidiot,
One more time:
“I don’t believe in god(s)”is the atheist stance: “a” (without) “theist” (belief/believer).
NOT the same as “I believe there is no god”.
Same old logical fallacy presented time and again by people that have no idea (comprehension) of what they’re talking about.
sumphutos,
In addition to 666’s excellent point, since when do the people making a claim get to force the burden of proof on everyone else?
What logic is there in that?
It’s well known you can’t disprove the existence of deities. But Atheists don’t have to prove anything of the sort.
You should read up on Russell’s Teapot:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russells_teapot
Jason,
That isn’t Hitchens’ point. Further, the idea of an Atheist saying “God is evil” is ridiculous.
Until God’s existence is proven (or even until “God” is defined), the question makes no sense.
One of Hitchens’ points is that Theists do bad things, at least as often as Atheists (though if the prison population numbers are to be believed, Theists do more bad things per capita. I remain unconvinced). And that Theists often do bad things in the name of their Deities. The “moral high ground” that Theists so often attempt to occupy is right out.
Further, an argument against Organized Religion is not necessarily an argument against Deities. Religion is often used to control the weak-willed through deception, this is the crux of Hitchens’ arguments. He’s not making a case for the disbelief of God (that’s a case that makes itself), he’s making a case for not cutting Theism more slack than it deserves. Theism deserves no slack.
An addendum,
I will grant you that Hitchens’ muddles his own argument by using “God” as a euphemism for “Organized Religion.”
But he needed a title that would sell books.
Alatham,
First, thanks for your response.
Second, I suppose you’re right about the title thing. I never got the impression, though, that Hitchens was talking only about Organized Religion. In fact, there are a (precious) few instances in his book in which he credits “religious” laypeople for their bravery in standing up to evil — and then chalks it up to their “sense of humanism” instead of their religious faith. It seems to me, therefore, that Hitchens doesn’t want to give ANY credit to theism. The real issue for me, I think, is personal responsibility: the past or current faults of Organized Religion or of “the religious” in no way absolves anyone else, myself included, from taking up a personal quest for the truth. We each have a duty to find out (and SHOULD have an interest in finding out) what reality is. I agree that religion is often a misused tool … but so is money and power and sex, to name a few others. The real flaw, however, isn’t any of these things, but a deficiency within us. If anyone wants to make a case for atheism on its own merits, that’s certainly an option, but what I’m finding instead, as I look around, is not a solid logical case FOR atheism, but an emotional case against God based on the bad deeds of certain theists (many of whom, I’m sure, don’t care two bits about God but are just using His name for their own benefit). To me, this is intellectual dishonesty, a case of “dodging the issue” — if someone can blame all sorts of bad things on the alleged followers of God, then said person can simply rationalize thus: “to heck with God, if that’s what He’s like,” and never give the subject serious inquiry. You say that the case for disbelief in God makes itself, but I don’t see how. Can you elaborate?
I hope you’re right! I hope there is not a monster in my closet! Every once in a while I have paralysis, and then I think that monster is trying to eat me. Actaully, the name of that monster, because I’ve given him a name, is Puffin Barjesus Devilmonger and he likes to eat people who don’t read and adhere to the teachings in the Monster Book!
Nah, just kidding! I’m a rational human being, but theists aren’t.
i often wonder at the ridiculousness of theists insisting that their religion is the TRUE ONE and the only one PROMISING SALVATION. in my ap world history class, and in history classes i have had in general, religion has always been described as a belief system created to explain natural occurrences which, in the past, were not explainable. and this definition is to be applied to all religions. christianity stems from judaism, which is itself rooted in ancient middle eastern mythologies. these were all created by primitive peoples trying to explain a world which they did not understand. CHRISTIANITY, JUDAISM, AND ALL RELIGIONS ARE OUTDATED. i will not argue that science is perfect, but it attempts to explain everything with reasoning and evidence, not simply blind faith. once people remember how religions came about and WHY they were created, maybe theists will realize their stupidity and will open the eyes which society and religion has closed.
Jason,
I have no idea if you’ll read this since it’s in a dead thread and I just now realized I never responded to you.
The reason that the case for disbelief in God makes itself is this: The burden of proof falls on the one making the claim. Since disbelief is not a claim and the case for God has no compelling evidence, the weak atheist position is simple to defend.
The disbelief position simply reserves judgment until there’s some evidence that can be used to make a judgment. Until that evidence comes to light, I am fully justified in my disbelief.
It’s no different from a disbelief in unicorns or a disbelief in la chupacabra.
Hector,
It would be great if people would study religion from an objective standpoint, but the real problem is that people want to believe. They feel it makes life easier since it frees them from having to make moral decisions and it allows them to sell themselves to an Authority and feel less responsible for mistakes they make (since many religions teach that people are imperfect).
Atheism provides neither of those things, so it only appeals to those who don’t mind the mental exercises needed to make moral decisions and those who aren’t afraid to take true responsibility for their own actions. Sometimes it’s difficult being an atheist, but I’ve never been one to shy from the difficult path.
Funny I addressed some issues on the creationist blog and find this one even more exciting. One would wonder why most of you are trying so hard to convince those of us who are “ridiculous theists” that our beliefs are wrong and your disbelief is right. Based on most of your arguments against faith, mainly Christian faiths, is that God is a man made idea. Guess what so is evolution yet you demand that we teach this to every person on the planet as the only “true” way. I have had the advantage of being raised Catholic, then on my own (with the help of relatives – don’t want to take all the credit) tried several other Christian denominations, even broke out on my own for a while (not quite a non-believer though). Yet I came back and now I’m a Youth Ministry member and teach Catholic Doctrine. This is my faith and I wish to share it. He is my take, God’s greatest gift to mankind was free thought. You are free to think that there is no god, I am free to think that there is. The gift of our fore fathers is the chance in this great nation to openly practice our beliefs regardless. I believe in God, the father, son and holy spirit. I believe that if I follow Christ and treat each man as my brother then life would be good. I believe that your unbelief in God, does not limit your belief that if you treat others with kindness and respect then life would be good. I do not dispute each persons right to live how they choose, just don’t force your views on me or interfer with the practice of my faith. Thanks and Peace be with each of you.
I just read a book called “A Day inthe Life of God” by Osita Iroku, and I must say, i thought it was going to make me a more skeptical Christian (cause it deals with a lot of history behind the religion); but instead it added a real foundation for my faith. I mean, I actually know who I believe in now. For anyone who has EVER had any doubts about whether we are fooling oursleves by believing in God, please read this book.
Well, though this thread does seem dead, I’m still going to post. The problem people have with theism vs. atheism is this- toleration. People don’t want to be tolerant of another’s idea if it is different than their own. I am a Christian, and I have several Atheist friends. I don’t push my religion on them because I don’t believe it’s proper for me to say I’m right and they’re wrong when there is no actual back-up to EITHER side of the story. Atheists can’t disprove religion or PROVE there isn’t a God. Theists can’t disprove the Big Bang or any other non-theistic belief, and we can’t PROVE there is a God. The only way we’ll ever truly know if we’re right or not is when we die. I like to keep my faith, because I look at it like this- If I’m wrong about my faith now, then I’m wrong for 70, 80 years, however long I live. Honestly, a flash in the grand scheme of things. But if I am Atheist and choose not to believe in God and Christ, then when I die and it comes to be that Christianity is truth, then I am wrong for the rest of eternity. I’m sorry, friends, but I’m not going to take the chance of possibly burning in a fiery, horrible place forever. Literally for the REST OF TIME!!! So, there’s my theistic logic in this argument.
Greatbean:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_wager
If you are using Pascal’s Wager a reason for being religious then you should practise all religions, just in case.
Greatbean,
Pascal’s wager is a terribly ignorant and egotistic argument. It assumes from the outset that there are only two possibilities, 1) God exists and behaves as I believe him/her to behave and 2) There is no God. This is an example of a false dilemma:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dillema
It also assumes at the outset that the person behind the argument has some sort of perfect insight into the behavior of their chosen deity. If we introduce any uncertainty about the behavior of this deity, then the argument falls apart immediately.
The fact is, there are an arbitrary number of ideas about deities and their behavior. We can make it up as we go along (as Pascal was doing). If we’re already assuming that a deity exists, then why not make the equally valid assumption that this deity rewards people of reason and punishes those with blind faith?
We could also make the equally valid assumption that this deity punishes everyone based on how tall they are or rewards people who sleep on their backs, in which case the acceptance of theism makes no difference.
What you have to do in order for your argument to hold any water is provide reasonable evidence that your deity exists and reasonable evidence that your deity behaves the way you believe him to behave. We atheists have been waiting for that evidence since we evolved the ability to trick ourselves.
Greatbean,
One more thing:
Please speak for yourself. There is a huge difference between intolerance and asking for evidence. I see much more intolerance coming from theists than atheists, but I freely admit to being biased.
The bulk of atheists are ultimately asking for evidence. But we’ve been asking a long time and nobody has put any evidence up. So as time passes, we become intolerant of specific arguments, but not necessarily of the underlying idea behind it. For example, I am plenty tolerant of theistic ideas, but I am not tolerant of arguments as weak as Pascal’s Wager.
If you find atheists being intolerant of your ideas, try looking at your arguments from a different perspective and perhaps you’ll see just how weak they are rather than simply writing atheists off as intolerant.
You can only brush away a fly so many times before you simply get up and leave the room. Come up with something a bit more substantial and we can have a real debate. If Pascal’s Wager is all you’ve got, don’t expect people to sit around and listen to you talk about how reasonable you think it is. Our patience is limited.
god is a funny invention and the dullheaded followers are waiting for paradise.
alatham wrote:
“The bulk of atheists are ultimately asking for evidence. But we’ve been asking a long time and nobody has put any evidence up.”
More nonsensical claptrap on order of Ellen Johnson and her disastrous interview on Larry King.
The problem with atheists is, they like to subjectively define what “evidence” is (not far from Clinton blurring the line on “is” itself). There is LOADS of evidence that Jesus existed, actually more than any other historical figure in antiquity, but listen to Ellen Johnson and there is “none”. Haha. No wonder AA ousted her.
http://www.y-jesus.com/ is a site directly refuting the claims of Ellen (it even references her lies). Give it a look, I double-dare you! Haha.
Example of “evidence”:
“?Overall, at least seventeen non-Christian writings record more than fifty details concerning the life, teachings, death, and resurrection of Jesus, plus details concerning the early church.? This is astounding, considering the lack of other history we possess from this time period. Jesus is mentioned by more sources than the conquests of Caesar during this same period. It is even more astounding since these confirmations of New Testament details date from 20 to 150 years after Christ, ?quite early by the standards of ancient historiography.?
But, atheists won’t call that evidence. Nope. The “FSM” needs to bonk them on the head with his staff for them to believe. Will God doing this in the past suffice? NO, he has to bonk ME on the head! Haha. He has to write MY name in the clouds. He has to speak MY name in the heavens for me to believe… and even then I might blame it on binge drinking.
The only evidence (some) atheists require, is any evidence (they deem) isn’t there. Will the eyewitness accounts of real people count? Nope. Will an unparalleled book written by 40 men of diverse backgrounds over the course of 1500 years, which stands as the single most reliable example of textual criticism do? Nope. Will miracles do? Nope (not unless I see them, and then I have to qualify them). What does all this equal? Someone who doesn’t *want* to believe, not someone who is truly seeking.
If you truly seek the truth of Christ, you’ll be changed, forever. If you’re looking to find nothing, you can find it easily in the Bible, it rests in the space between each word printed. If you want to find nothing, it’s easy, but only if you’re committed to finding nothing. If you look, with an open mind, truly seeking to find *whatever* you find (nothing or something), you’ll be astounded. Atheists are just like men standing in a forest who dogmatically claim they only see *trees*, dammit, there is no “forest”. How can you prove to a man standing in a forest that he is standing in a forest and not a “collection of trees”. You can’t. If someone won’t drink, leading them to water won’t help. It’s not a “supply” problem, it’s a “demand” problem. God is there, evidence is there, what is lacking is your honesty in seeing.
I thought xians were not supposed to lie. Or is this just proof that you are delusional?
I see. So, because you ‘wanted’ to believe you were able to find truth in writings which you new to be correct before you read them.
Translation: It’s easy if you to belief if you believe before you read. You will find the truth you seek. Just ignore all the contradictions and cruelty and please remember that god is loving and gentle and kind ( unless you don’t believe, so you’d better believe).
There you go with the generalizations again. Regardless, it’s a bad analogy. Anyone, especially a skeptical person, would conclude, given that there are a lot of trees surrounding him,that he was indeed in a forest, or at the very least, a copse.
Well, you’re going to hell. That’s twice with the same lie.