Thread: Question for Atheists.

Hahaha, I love DV.

Originally Posted by LRT

Atheist beliefs:

First there was a bunch of nothing and a cosmic egg, and then there was the big bang. Nothing caused it, and nothing happened before it, because there was no time. But nothing started time. It just... started itself. Because things are known to just start themselves, right? Ya, it happens all the time. Anyway, it just happened, and purely by chance, everything worked out so you're sitting there reading this. But it's all chance. Really.

Nice job

No seriously, that's an ingenious way to display your ignorance.


Loser

Because there is no, abosolutely no evidence of god whatsoever. Thats why we are atheists.

I will not believe in something on faith alone. I believe in science because it offers the most evidence for its claims. Prove to me YOUR God (Argument from inconsistent revelations) exists, and I will believe in God.
I suppose you theists believe in Russell's Teapot as well.

Even if god was true i still wouldn't follow him.

I never believed in God growing up. I was educated about Christian/buddhist/pagan religions among many other things. I think I was very lucky growing up because I was told that there were lots of religions out there and if I felt pulled to one, then I should seek faith. I even met the Dalai Lama when I was six.

However, I believe firmly that I am my own god. I don't think that people should be coerced into religion through fear and submission. Faith is a beautiful thing, but not if faith was forced upon you. I think that people should view religion and faith as something personal to them and not try to enforce it on everyone else. I don't believe there's a universal moral code that some god demanded we live by, and I think the bible is outdated and should be taken as stories not as fact. It makes me sick to my stomach when I read stories or meet kids who grew up, on the extreme side, evangelical. Even if they grow up later and realize they don't believe in god, or don't want to be evangelical, they end up having so much guilt they carry for the rest of their lives and there's a very high suicide rate among kids who grow up evangelical and realize that it's not for them.

80% of homeschool kids in the United States are Evangelical. 80% of homeschool kids are sitting around with their evangelical parents learning about creationism and... it really makes me sad. Have you heard of megamalls? The malls of god. I think it's sickening. I think that a lot of these religions are simply taking advantage of peoples faith.

I'm not saying I hate people who believe in God, or are religious. I have no problem with religion, or people who have faith. Again, it can be a very beautiful thing. It's mainly the church's that I have a problem with, and the people who take it too far.

No gods, no masters.

I feel like the only member of the 'old breed' still around (pre 2008), I'm starting to feel ancient. Anyway, I don't believe in god because of the lack of evidence for his existence. There isn't a single definitive fact that supports theism, it is all coincidence; the death of my mother opened my eyes. As far as god goes, even if he did exist, I don't think I'd want to be on His side, he is nothing but a tyrant; homicidal and hypocritical. Of course this is all just my opinion (I won't at this time back it with fact) and I try to be incredibly open minded, to each his and or her own.

I became atheist because I dont think He is here. I think that's enough on my part.

It just sort of happened. I was in eighth grade I think. My family and I were all at Synagogue. Everyone was chanting, and I just... realized... I didn't think God existed.

Not much more to it than that.

I'm not even sure if I'd still consider myself as Athiest over Agnostic; religion has never been a concern to me, and I'm not going to start practicing it any time soon.

Well, to take care of the atheist vs agnostic bit: do you believe there is a god? This is not the same as "do you completely deny the possibility that any sort of god could exist," it's just whether or not you actually think there is one out there. By the sound of your post, I'd say you're probably atheist in that you don't believe there is a god out there, but agnostic in that you don't completely deny the possibility, either. This would make you an agnostic atheist, I guess.

Though, I could be totally off-base, too.

i was raised catholic Ive been an atheist most of my life until a couple years ago. i don't believe in a moral judeo-christian lawgiver god. I would agree more with the Hindu perspective of god as being the web that interconnects all of existence. I strongly disagree with organized religion but I still have yet to hear a halfway logical argument for the non existence of "god" from the people on this site besides the "i don't perceive him with my five senses therefore he doesn't exist" argument. under the same logic you would half to admit that emotions are fake too since you cannot perceive them with your senses. I agree with the mentality that we should question everything but do you question the big bang or the existence of subatomic particles? or just blindly except them to be infallible truths because scientist know more than you do?
I believe that nature, humans, existence in general are very complex organisms and were intelligently designed by....a designer!
EX: you wash ashore on a deserted island. You see the words SOS written with rocks on the beach. there are two ways you can go about this; #1: a confluence of random events, laws of physics, erosion, and chance, after millions of years is responsible for the rocks spelling out SOS. #2 Or you can say its too perfect someone (a designer) definitely put it (the design) there intentionally. Random events would not have formed the specific words SOS on a deserted island. SO logically we can conclude that someone put it there. this is not my infallible proof that a creator exists. I just want to have a logical argument (and be proven wrong, broaden my horizons please) minus the teenage angst. Give me a good reason why god does not exist. make me think!

Originally Posted by stormcrow

Give me a good reason why god does not exist. make me think!

A better question would be to give me a good reason why god exists. Would you believe that there's an invisible flying spaghetti monster out there, just because someone told you there was? Or how about that there's a teakettle in the asteroid belt? There is more to the nonexistence of god argument than just "we can't perceive it." Emotions are perfectly perceivable. God is not. We can experience emotions. We can feel anger, love, joy, all that. Not so with god. But on top of our inability to perceive him directly, it just isn't all that feasible an argument. Now, your example with the beach...we KNOW that people tend to get stranded on islands once in a while. We KNOW that SOS is the universal signal of distress for a person trapped on an island. It WOULD be more plausible that a creator was responsible for that, as that solution contains the fewest variables. We know people exist, and we know they can arrange rocks to make distress signals in times of distress. BUT, life in general is not so straightforward. We don't know if there's a divine being or not. We don't know what it's like or if it's responsible for life if it does exist. We do know that amino acids are found all throughout the universe, and that they can be formed by chemical reactions that we can replicate and reproduce. To make the conclusion that life exists from a creator, you must first make the large assumption that there's an all-powerful being without any evidence. With the island scenario, you can make an educated guess. Not so much with life. Now, if YOU were a god and you knew about other gods, and you found Earth, you could assume one of them did it. Fewer variables. But, without any evidence, knowledge, or perception of a designer, it actually contains more variables than other theories, and so is less likely.

Originally Posted by stormcrow

Give me a good reason why god does not exist. make me think!

Would you even have the concept of god that you do now if it weren't for organized religion? If not, then you either have to believe that a supernatural deity revealed itself to a select few in ancient times, or that the same people made it up. Occam's razor.

It's simply easier to believe that god is a result of the incredibly complex human psyche rather than the master of the universe.

It seems that a lot of people come to the conclusion that a god created everything because they can't accept that the complexity of the universe is natural. I find this incredibly sad and closed-minded. It's degrading to the universe, you should give it more credit. You're but a single human among billions, in a galaxy with billions of stars, in a universe with billions of galaxies. You've only seen a tiny spec of time compared to the age of the universe. So who are you to say what the universe is capable or not of doing on its own? Are you really so pretentious as to believe that you "solved" the universe (with god)?

Sorry, I'm not trying to sound aggressive . I'm just trying to drive the point home of how foolish it sounds for one insignificant human to assume what can and can't naturally occur in the whole universe.

Originally Posted by Spartiate

Would you even have the concept of god that you do now if it weren't for organized religion? If not, then you either have to believe that a supernatural deity revealed itself to a select few in ancient times, or that the same people made it up. Occam's razor.

It's simply easier to believe that god is a result of the incredibly complex human psyche rather than the master of the universe.

It seems that a lot of people come to the conclusion that a god created everything because they can't accept that the complexity of the universe is natural. I find this incredibly sad and closed-minded. It's degrading to the universe, you should give it more credit. You're but a single human among billions, in a galaxy with billions of stars, in a universe with billions of galaxies. You've only seen a tiny spec of time compared to the age of the universe. So who are you to say what the universe is capable or not of doing on its own? Are you really so pretentious as to believe that you "solved" the universe (with god)?

Sorry, I'm not trying to sound aggressive . I'm just trying to drive the point home of how foolish it sounds for one insignificant human to assume what can and can't naturally occur in the whole universe.

no worries Spariate. I never claimed to "solve" as you say, the problem of the existence of god. the island metaphor is not the proof of anything. its a logic game. mostly everyone will assume that the SOS was created by a designer not random events. It is too coincidental. The reason i brought it up was so that someone will prove me wrong. Neither of you could provide a logical explanation why god doesn't exist like i asked. You say i am foolish for putting limits on the universe but you do the same when you write off the existence of a designer. As for mario92 i was referring to the feeling IE touching sensation. We can not physically touch/feel anger or love they are abstract concepts(not saying they dont exist).spariate you are completely right we are just a speck of dust in the hourglass of time so who are we to say what the universe is capable of? thank you for replying i look forward to more thought provoking responses.

Originally Posted by stormcrow

mostly everyone will assume that the SOS was created by a designer not random events.

What do you see in your life that you base this "SOS" thing on? I have never seen what I would consider a "signature" of god, and I've seen quite a bit...

Like i said i brought the Island metaphor up for the sake of argument so someone can prove me wrong. im not trying to convert anyone to any belief and im not trying to disrespect anyone's beliefs by any means. Im just trying to reach a better understanding.

Originally Posted by stormcrow

Like i said i brought the Island metaphor up for the sake of argument so someone can prove me wrong. im not trying to convert anyone to any belief and im not trying to disrespect anyone's beliefs by any means. Im just trying to reach a better understanding.

All I want to know is what you have seen that makes you feel so strongly about your belief. I don't see how your SOS example is relevant unless you have something to compare it to in real life.

Again, its a logic game. its no proof that god exists. All it is trying to say is that rationally most people will consider the SOS to be the work of a designer. It would not be rational to say it was an accident. Deserted island. SOS. Too coincidental. Lets forget about the island for a minute. After all its just a metaphor. Not proof that god exists ok? So the big bang was an explosion of energy and matter that created the universe and life. This is the most popular theory for the origins of the universe. Most people logically assume that since the galaxies are expanding away from each other they came from one central point at one time. Life evolved randomly possibly from organic soup. But lets think about how evolution works. Species evolve as a result from external stimuli. They don't evolve because they feel like it, they evolve because they are presented with an external challenge that they must overcome or they die. So what external forces caused life to evolve from organic molecules in the first place? We all know life comes from other life. So why is this designer theory considered irrational? Im just trying to use logic to figure this out and I would appreciate others opinions as well.

Originally Posted by stormcrow

Again, its a logic game. its no proof that god exists. All it is trying to say is that rationally most people will consider the SOS to be the work of a designer. It would not be rational to say it was an accident. Deserted island. SOS. Too coincidental. Lets forget about the island for a minute. After all its just a metaphor. Not proof that god exists ok? So the big bang was an explosion of energy and matter that created the universe and life. This is the most popular theory for the origins of the universe. Most people logically assume that since the galaxies are expanding away from each other they came from one central point at one time. Life evolved randomly possibly from organic soup. But lets think about how evolution works. Species evolve as a result from external stimuli. They don't evolve because they feel like it, they evolve because they are presented with an external challenge that they must overcome or they die. So what external forces caused life to evolve from organic molecules in the first place? We all know life comes from other life. So why is this designer theory considered irrational? Im just trying to use logic to figure this out and I would appreciate others opinions as well.

Your argument relies on the premise that "everything needs a designer", which leads to an endless chain of questions. (Who was god's designer? And god's designer's designer? etc) If you say that god doesn't need a designer you're admitting the falsity of the very premise used to prove his existence.

wow I did not think of that before. that brings up a very good point. im definitely stumped for now. i need a bit to think about it. thanks this is exactly what i wanted.

Originally Posted by stormcrow

Again, its a logic game. its no proof that god exists. All it is trying to say is that rationally most people will consider the SOS to be the work of a designer. It would not be rational to say it was an accident. Deserted island. SOS. Too coincidental. Lets forget about the island for a minute. After all its just a metaphor. Not proof that god exists ok?

Yes I realize it's a metaphor but how does it apply to real life. I too would assume that a person created the SOS on the island, but I see nothing in real life that can compare. It's like saying "if you go to a deserted island and meet god, it would be logical to believe that god exists". Yes it would... but since god doesn't present himself in real life, how is that a valid argument?

So the big bang was an explosion of energy and matter that created the universe and life. This is the most popular theory for the origins of the universe. Most people logically assume that since the galaxies are expanding away from each other they came from one central point at one time.

Our understanding of the early universe is incredibly small, we don't know what happened before the big bang, right after the big bang or even what it was. The laws of the universe could have been completely different back then, throwing our concept of logic out the window. The idea that there must be a creator to the big bang seems like an incredible simplification so that the average human may try to understand something that is completely out of their comprehension.

Life evolved randomly possibly from organic soup. But lets think about how evolution works. Species evolve as a result from external stimuli. They don't evolve because they feel like it, they evolve because they are presented with an external challenge that they must overcome or they die. So what external forces caused life to evolve from organic molecules in the first place? We all know life comes from other life. So why is this designer theory considered irrational? Im just trying to use logic to figure this out and I would appreciate others opinions as well.

That's not how evolution works. Species don't evolve because they are faced with a different environment, they are constantly evolving and when the environment happens to change, those who evolve in a certain way have a better chance of survival. Say you take a bunch of giraffes and put them in a place where the trees are too tall for them to be able to reach the leaves. All the giraffes won't "start" evolving longer necks, a small amount of giraffes may happen to have offspring with randomly mutated longer necks (which are unrelated to the change of environment), these giraffes would doubtlessly have an easier time surviving and procreating.

Originally Posted by Sekhmet

All humans are born athiest.

No one knows god or becomes religious until it is taught to them. Even after being exposed to religiion, babies and small children will only copycat behaviour from their caretakers in order to please them. Their minds have no concept of god.

Humans are born neither theist nor atheist. It is because they don't have a concept of God at birth that they are not capable of a position. Being an atheist is negating, disbelieving or disagreeing with a concept of a God. You are not even born an agnostic, because that is also a position that is relative to a belief or concept. Nobody is born with a belief about things they don't understand, especially when they have not even understood words or language.

Originally Posted by stormcrow

I believe that nature, humans, existence in general are very complex organisms and were intelligently designed by....a designer!
EX: you wash ashore on a deserted island. You see the words SOS written with rocks on the beach. there are two ways you can go about this; #1: a confluence of random events, laws of physics, erosion, and chance, after millions of years is responsible for the rocks spelling out SOS. #2 Or you can say its too perfect someone (a designer) definitely put it (the design) there intentionally. Random events would not have formed the specific words SOS on a deserted island. SO logically we can conclude that someone put it there. this is not my infallible proof that a creator exists. I just want to have a logical argument (and be proven wrong, broaden my horizons please) minus the teenage angst. Give me a good reason why god does not exist. make me think!

The idea of intelligent design only works if you decide to take consciousness as the absolute entity above all other objects we perceive to exist (in the objective world). Just because I perceive things and conceive concepts doesn't make me some sort of an authority. Why would it... do we know what an atom is? What gives us the right to use our pathetic little ideas and concepts to state them as dominant over the objective reality. Concepts like design...

If I take one thing on faith - that there is an objective reality which I can work with - then I can use science to discover how the universe works, which means that we discover how things interact. Well we have a good general picture how certain things work, like the human organism for example. You can say that consciousness and the functioning brain just correlate, or you could just state the obvious - that one causes the other, just like we determine for everything else to work in the universe. We might be unique, but I still don't see with what authority we have to assume ambiguous human concepts and perceptions are all that can be. Which brings me back to design. How do you define design objectively? You don't... something designed, was built with purpose, purpose indicates intent, which indicates will a.k.a free will. How do you define free will in this universe? Where does it come from...does it just pop out of nothing? If quantum mechanics is the answer, what is will free from... apparently not quantum probability. If we can't even define the basic foundations of a concept, how can we use it as a measure for objective inquiry?

The analogy with SOS presents a false dichotomy - between nature an consciousness. The dichotomy that possibly doesn't even exist, as I've concluded in the previous paragraph. But even if we presuppose it as valid... how do we know what is conscious? For all we know water could be conscious. How do we know what is an example of design as opposed to something that arises through crude natural forces? Intelligent design isn't a science, it's a belief of course. But tell me why it should take precedence over science?

Originally Posted by Scatterbrain

Your argument relies on the premise that "everything needs a designer", which leads to an endless chain of questions. (Who was god's designer? And god's designer's designer? etc) If you say that god doesn't need a designer you're admitting the falsity of the very premise used to prove his existence.

This reminds me of the quote (which was attributed to Ryan Hanson):

If God created the world, then who created god? and who created whoever created god? So somewhere along the line something had to just be there. So why can’t we just skip the idea of god and go straight to earth?

I think this is an important thing for people to remember when they ask the question of "How did x start? You don't know? That's proof God exists, he created everything.". If they assume that the universe couldn't have "just been", then they must also question the possibility of God "just being". If he could exist without a creator, then why is it so hard to believe that the Universe/Elements couldn't have just existed to begin with?