RE: Any atheists here?

RE: Any atheists here? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Musicmystery -> RE: Any atheists here? (10/3/2008 8:02:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rule quote: ORIGINAL: bipolarber The question I've always had is... "Why?" Why bother to create the universe in the first place? What purpose does it serve? According to Egyptian mythology the Creator created the other gods and men in order to no longer be alone. It is legitimate to extrapolate this motivation of one of the incarnate gods to the Divine. quote: ORIGINAL: bipolarber Could it be that creating a universe where life and intelligence could develop is just a starting point? Maybe. The Creation has not yet been completed, though. Mankind is still very much an unfinished species. This actually highlights the problem with the common "Well SOMETHING must have created the universe" argument for God---it's only an assumption, not a case. The Hindu and Greek gods, for example, didn't create the universe----the universe created them. And in Hindu thought, nothing created the universe---the universe simply always was. We like to think in terms of time, but mystic tradition, Einstein and quantum mechanics all show us the time, at best, is relative, at most, doesn't exist outside of perception. And David Hume argued four centuries ago that cause and effect is just an assumption, that our perception of the principle can indeed be nothing but coincidence.

CallaFirestormBW -> RE: Any atheists here? (10/3/2008 9:16:19 AM)
I will embrace the "Fair Witness" stance on the issue of God or any other being of like described nature. I have obtained no compelling evidence of the existence of any 'supreme being or omnipresent/omniscient consciousness'. Without compelling evidence, I will not presume the existence of such an entity. Were it not for the statements of those who -do- profess belief that such a being is both omniscient and omnipresent, I would hold out the possibility that somewhere in the vast Universe, in one of the multitude of areas that I have not explored, there -might- be some being that would, by my limited capacity, be recognized as a 'supreme being', however, the implication that this being is omnipresent would imply that there should be -some- concrete evidence of its existence at every location at every time, so without compelling evidence, I would have to say that I cannot presume such a being's existence. Calla Firestorm

Rule -> RE: Any atheists here? (10/3/2008 9:20:42 AM)
Simply go to some place where nobody can observe you and do a wish. Feel your desire. See what happens.

Rule -> RE: Any atheists here? (10/3/2008 9:24:50 AM)
Gotta die to have that happen, mc. I suspect that your mind is not compatible to such an event.

CallaFirestormBW -> RE: Any atheists here? (10/3/2008 9:25:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rule quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero Which puts it squarely back into the realm of comfort, as the "salvation" offered is only needed because it is prefaced, by the very same religion, by the declaration of our sinfulness. Duh! They are manuals intended to reduce suffering here on Earth. Simply consider all the hurt people, the sick people and the murdered and starving innocents. Ending that suffering is the secular salvation that is offered - but it can be gotten only by making an exertion to stop that suffering. It has nothing to do with comfort: it is about working to achieve a goal. So basically, what you're saying here, in not so many words, Rule, is that suffering is a part of human existence, and God can choose to end such suffering if he wants -- which begs the issue of if God is capable of ending suffering, then what kind of sadistic creature can he be where he would allow such completely inhumane situations to continue? ...and don't toss the line about "testing" to me -- If I tested my offspring's love by poisoning them, starving them, and stealing everything they owned, I would -rightfully- be considered an abusive prick. If I had the power to take them to a doctor and get them healed of illness and I didn't, I would be charged with child neglect... but it's OK for an omniscient, omnipresent, all-powerful, all-knowing being to, intentionally or through neglect, choose who to non-consensually torture, kill, maim, steal from, etc., and choose who to save, heal, etc., strictly on the basis of who -believes- more... or by even more arbitrary criteria that make no sense (witness the book of Job)? Do you have -any- idea how weak this sounds??? I choose NO god, rather than to have a god who was capable of this kind of blatant cruelty, deceit, etc. Calla Firestorm

Musicmystery -> RE: Any atheists here? (10/3/2008 9:34:48 AM)
quote: There are various supernatural beings, like vampires, werewolves, cynocephali, Bigfoot, pooka, and such. None of them are human. Nor do they exist.

Musicmystery -> RE: Any atheists here? (10/3/2008 9:38:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rule quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver Its not for me to define god since I don't believe there is anything to define, its for those that believe to define god and prove their hypothesis. If you refuse to define God, then you are by definition unable to accept the commensurate evidence of his existence. So your demand for evidence is frivolous. Just read these lines. Move them closer together. Now closer. Really close. Notice anything? Look again. Take a moment to think. No, really, it's OK. Think as long as you like.

bipolarber -> RE: Any atheists here? (10/3/2008 9:40:12 AM)
Just for the record, I DO tend to agree with lazarus on this. Although I think the question of God's existence should be left open, and will be for the individual to decide, I also agree that most religions utilize "faith" as a means of stifling thought. (Just look at the trial of Galileo for an example... or of Bruno's being burned at the stake.) Being religious seems to be, at heart, an agreement to stop trying to find out, and just accept an authority. (An authority, I might add, that is based on "making shit up.")

Rule -> RE: Any atheists here? (10/3/2008 10:16:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CallaFirestormBW So basically, what you're saying here, in not so many words, Rule, is that suffering is a part of human existence, Are you denying that people suffer? quote: ORIGINAL: CallaFirestormBW and God can choose to end such suffering if he wants Where have I ever said that? Please quote me and tell the number of the post? Incidentally, about which God are you talking? The Divine, one of the incarnate gods, or perhaps something else? quote: ORIGINAL: CallaFirestormBW -- which begs the issue of if God is capable of ending suffering You are speculating here, right? quote: ORIGINAL: CallaFirestormBW then what kind of sadistic creature can he be where he would allow such completely inhumane situations to continue? Do not you suppose that he might ask us the same question? Do not you have ever considered that the alternative might be far worse? Have you never asked yourself what would happen if people never died? quote: ORIGINAL: CallaFirestormBW ...and don't toss the line about "testing" to me -- If I tested my offspring's love by poisoning them, starving them, and stealing everything they owned, I would -rightfully- be considered an abusive prick. If I had the power to take them to a doctor and get them healed of illness and I didn't, I would be charged with child neglect... but it's OK for an omniscient, omnipresent, all-powerful, all-knowing being to, intentionally or through neglect, choose who to non-consensually torture, kill, maim, steal from, etc., and choose who to save, heal, etc., strictly on the basis of who -believes- more... or by even more arbitrary criteria that make no sense (witness the book of Job)? Do you have -any- idea how weak this sounds??? Why do not you first figure out which god you are talking about before you start to get mad? quote: ORIGINAL: CallaFirestormBW I choose NO god, rather than to have a god who was capable of this kind of blatant cruelty, deceit, etc. Ah, deceit. I guess that you are speaking about Satan, then?

NihilusZero -> RE: Any atheists here? (10/3/2008 10:19:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark That having a faith isn't always a crutch. It can be completely the opposite. We've jumped from the term "religion" to the term "faith. I also didn't use the term "crutch". But it inevitably does boil down to solace and comfort because all actions done with the faith in mind are because the end result is expected to be a pleased deity (who will love the believer...ergo, comfort/solace). quote: ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark And salvation isn't a given. A few church visits, hale marys, fastings, the odd jihad, hugging a tree and not squishing that little ant isn't going to guarentee anything. What if someone was of the faith that a few church visits, hail marys, etc. did guarantee their passage to a happy afterlife? Would you deny them that metaphysical view? I ask this because it casts into sharp contrast the fact that each individual constructs their own moral code by which to abide. So...while they would themselves say "salvation isn't a give" they will also tell you they (nearly always) do know the process by which to get there and strive to live that way. quote: ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark Sometimes faith or religion is a way to self improvement. Anything can be a catalyst for self-improvement. quote: ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark I find it uncomfortable when people start throwing around the comfort 'n' crutch statement because it becomes obvious that people haven't had significant experience with people of different faiths. It kind of weakens their argument to make such a statement and sometimes it would just be (and yes I am going to use my least favourite word) 'nice' to have a discussion with and about those with faith and those without faith - without it coming down to 'comfort', 'proof' or 'illusion'. I have, in my life, evolved philosophically through the steps of roman catholicism, personal-flavored christian spirituality, neopaganism, native american spirituality, zen buddhism and daoism (not to mention having specifically studied world religions in college). I have had many different "faiths" in my life and, for that very reason, I feel competent in adequately assessing them from an objective point. The very nature of faith is to provide comfort. It's very definition is that of assuring one's self of answers that cannot be proven...because of the human thirst for answers at all costs. I am not putting a subjective value on any believer as to whether what they have faith in is 'right' for them. I only address things as they are. quote: ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark It can be said that non faith people could be blinded by their own 'illusions'. It's possible. However, you'll find that those who do not espouse "faith" rely on verifiable evidence in order to admit something into the realm of "knowing". So...the chance for "illusion" to creep into the realm of what they admit to be 'real' is often less likely. quote: ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark It's not an illusion - it's a belief (or non belief) and something very tangible for many people - whether is it one single entity, or a number of animal type gods or a holy person or some spiritual awareness or the environment around them or simply nothing at all. It's not "tangible" at all! The very definition of the word implies having sensory dimensions. This doesn't mean that it cannot be important to someone or that it isn't something which helps them cope better with their lives...but the metaphysical is specifically illusory because it has no materialistic reality...which makes it an illusion. quote: ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark I guess it's just me. I simply get a really sad feeling when I see people bringing it down to 'those people' or 'those kinds ' and a sensation of sadness when people start pointing fingers at any belief or non belief and start grouping it all together under one banner and start second guessing why someone has either thought instead of listening and asking a single person what it means to them. I don't intend to "bring down" anyone. I support everyone's freedom to adopt whatever belief system they wish (although I am cautious of belief systems that have built-in tenets that would seek to infringe on the freedom of others). And, though I think everyone would have a different story as to what it means to them, from an anthropological perspective, we are all creatures of habit and sentience...acting out in ways that, inevitably, we think will bring us solace. I guess in that respect, I should have specified that no one is free from that causation. The distinction I make, however, is in people trying to translate metaphysical "belief" into the realm of materialistic "reality".

Rule -> RE: Any atheists here? (10/3/2008 10:22:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote: There are various supernatural beings, like vampires, werewolves, cynocephali, Bigfoot, pooka, and such. None of them are human. Nor do they exist. I suspect that the people that got eaten by them would disagree with you if you had told them so shortly before they died. (By the way: one of my friends happened to see a werewolf from a very close distance in about 1976. )

NihilusZero -> RE: Any atheists here? (10/3/2008 10:32:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rule Nonsense. People do not appreciate being ill nor starving and such suffering. They definitely do not welcome it. Neither do religions. Really? Are you familiar with Siddartha Gautama? Mother Teresa? Mahatma Gandhi? quote: ORIGINAL: Rule To end or endure any suffering a spiritual effort is necessary Huh? So...you're saying a secular humanist cannot end or endure an suffering because they cannot/will not exert a "spiritual effort"? quote: ORIGINAL: Rule What is a theistic deity as opposed to a non-theistic deity or perhaps an anti-theistic deity? Are you referring to the Divine or to an incarnate god? A theistic deity is one that has his/her hands and thought constantly meddling/affecting our lives. A deistic one would just answer the question of initial causation, after which the deity would was its hands of concern for its creation. quote: ORIGINAL: Rule quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero (If we are to believe in a theistic deity) they (the acts of including suffering) are actively chosen events perpetrated upon innocent people to bolster a sense of devotion. Are you implying that Bush is a theistic deity since 911? If you for some reason think Bush is directly responsible for the terrorist attacks on 9/11/2001. quote: ORIGINAL: Rule quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero And all this is done precisely to ensure a comfort: the "salvation" of our next life. I am losing track here. Who is doing this specifically? The theistic deity, you say? Or are you now talking about someone or something else? If the latter: what or whom? It is done by most interpretations of theistic deities when trying to understand/apply the existence of suffering in the world with a presumably benevolent mindset. quote: ORIGINAL: Rule They are about what I said it was: they are manuals to secular and spiritual salvation. Most are in some ways out of date manuals - but in other ways they are still relevant. Solace has nothing to do with it. And what do you think "salvation" is?

NihilusZero -> RE: Any atheists here? (10/3/2008 10:34:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rule I suspect that the people that got eaten by them would disagree with you if you had told them so shortly before they died. (By the way: one of my friends happened to see a werewolf from a very close distance in about 1976. ) Anecdotal evidence is good for fiction books, not for determining verifiable facts.

variation30 -> RE: Any atheists here? (10/3/2008 10:35:57 AM)
I've always failed to see the point of this discussion. trying to convert others when they aren't asking your opinion is always obnoxious. yelling at people about how their thoughts are stifling their ideas or are close-minded or are foolish is just as bad as someone standing on a street corner shouting 'sinners in the hands of an angry god'. anti-theists can go fuck themselves - let people live as they want to. if they try to force their beliefs upon you, that is when you try to reason with them. if they still try to force their beliefs upon you, well... http://olegvolk.net/gallery/d/24194-3/FAL1306.jpg

NihilusZero -> RE: Any atheists here? (10/3/2008 10:37:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: variation30 let people live as they want to. Would you be so kind as to inform us who here is not doing that?

Rule -> RE: Any atheists here? (10/3/2008 10:40:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero quote: ORIGINAL: Rule I suspect that the people that got eaten by them would disagree with you if you had told them so shortly before they died. (By the way: one of my friends happened to see a werewolf from a very close distance in about 1976. ) Anecdotal evidence is good for fiction books, not for determining verifiable facts. It is a fact that I believe my friend. Wanna verify that I believe him? How do you propose to do so?

RCdc -> RE: Any atheists here? (10/3/2008 10:43:28 AM)
Greetings Nihilus quote: What if someone was of the faith that a few church visits, hail marys, etc. did guarantee their passage to a happy afterlife? Would you deny them that metaphyscial view? I ask this because it casts into shar contrast the fact that each individual constructs their own moral code by which to abide. So...whie they would themselves say "salvation isn't a give" they will also tell you they (nearly always) do know the process by which to get there and strive to live that way. I wouldnt deny them anything - because it isn't up to me. My point was that there are any number of beliefs/faith/religion not just down to a single one and that salvation isn;t always a given depending on the doctrine. quote: The very nature of faith is to provide comfort. It's very definition is that of assuring one's self of answers that cannot be proven...because of the human thirst for answers at all costs. I am not putting a subjective value on any believer as to whether what they have faith in is 'right' for them. I only address things as they are. But you cannot know what they are for an individual that is what I was suggesting. You say that faith provides comfort. You say it as though it is the absolute truth. I can say that would not be the case for everyone of faith. quote: It's not "tangible" at all! The very definition of the word implies having sensory dimensions. This doesn't mean that it cannot be important to someone or that it isn't something which helps them cope better with their lives...but the metaphysical is pseicifcally illusory because it has no materialistic reality...which makes it an illusion. It is. For many people. Just because you haven't touched or felt something solid does not negate that others have. You cannot demand that a person has not experienced a sensory experience with something. Just because you have not - does not make it so for others. quote: I don't intend to "bring down" anyone. I suport everyone's freedom to adopt whatever belief system they wish (although I am cautious of belief systems that have built-in tenets that would seek to infringe on the freedom of others). I never suggested you had. It was more a general statement. the.dark.

CallaFirestormBW -> RE: Any atheists here? (10/3/2008 10:43:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: variation30 I've always failed to see the point of this discussion. trying to convert others when they aren't asking your opinion is always obnoxious. yelling at people about how their thoughts are stifling their ideas or are close-minded or are foolish is just as bad as someone standing on a street corner shouting 'sinners in the hands of an angry god'. anti-theists can go fuck themselves - let people live as they want to. if they try to force their beliefs upon you, that is when you try to reason with them. if they still try to force their beliefs upon you, well... http://olegvolk.net/gallery/d/24194-3/FAL1306.jpg Is it a reasonable conclusion, then, that the theists should also go fuck themselves and let people live as they want to... and if they try to foist their beliefs on others (including by acts of war thinly disguised as 'nationalism') that the remaining world is welcome to hoist them on their own petards or exterminate their lives at will? Perhaps that's the point -- that we should all just go masturbate; alone or in groups of our choice; let people live as they want to, and keep our gods and guns to ourselves. In the OP, I don't recall any request for theist involvement, or for the conversion of theists... all I seem to recall is a question about whether atheists exist on the boards and the phrase "discuss"... not compel, convert, conscribe... just "discuss". Calla Firestorm

Musicmystery -> RE: Any atheists here? (10/3/2008 10:45:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rule quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote: There are various supernatural beings, like vampires, werewolves, cynocephali, Bigfoot, pooka, and such. None of them are human. Nor do they exist. I suspect that the people that got eaten by them would disagree with you if you had told them so shortly before they died. (By the way: one of my friends happened to see a werewolf from a very close distance in about 1976. ) This is what gives idiots a bad name.

Rule -> RE: Any atheists here? (10/3/2008 10:59:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero Are you familiar with Siddartha Gautama? Mother Teresa? Mahatma Gandhi? I am. Apparently you are not. quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero So...you're saying a secular humanist cannot end or endure an suffering because they cannot/will not exert a "spiritual effort"? To want something is making a spiritual effort. Indeed, a secular humanist cannot end or endure a suffering if they do not want to do so. (And notice that even if they do want, it is not a given that the Divine will facilitate their desire.) quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero A theistic deity is one that has his/her hands and thought constantly meddling/affecting our lives. Oh, you are talking about yourself, not about the Divine or any of the incarnate gods. Or perhaps you are talking about your wife or mother in law? quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero A deistic one would just answer the question of initial causation, after which the deity would was its hands of concern for its creation. So your father abandoned your mother after he had his way with her? And you grew up as a single parent person? (I just know that you are not talking about any of the gods.) quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero It is done by most interpretations of theistic deities when trying to understand/apply the existence of suffering in the world with a presumably benevolent mindset. You presume too much. To which I will add that I am unable to interpret your sentence in a way that makes sense to me. quote: ORIGINAL: NihilusZero what do you think "salvation" is? Buy a dictionary. (They are sold in bookshops.)

Page: << < prev 5 6 [7] 8 9 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625