Survey for Atheists

[secondeve]

Do you beleive that you are too smart to believe an intelligent entity greater and more powerful than yourselves, capable of creating a universe, even though you know it cannot be proven scientifically that the entity exists?

No.

I don't believe in god because, assuming such an entity exists, and assuming that they have directly involved themselves in the welfare of humanity, and assuming that they have a preference as to how we live our lives, and assuming they've told us that preference, I don't believe any human being is smart enough, on the evidence alone, to tell which religion, of the hundreds of thousands that human history can offer, is the right one.

I say on the evidence aloneas a qualifier because every single religious devotee of every single faith in human history has also believed that theirs is the right one, not just on the evidence, but because they have felt or witnessed the power of their god/gods 'telling' them so. As this clearly cannot be true in even the vast majority of cases, I'm forced to one of three conclusions:

1. There is no god, and these incidents of his presence are either lies, misunderstandings or able to be explained by other causes.

2. There is a god, and he is revealing himself to everyone, regardless of their religion.

3. There is a god, but people cannot tell the difference between lies, misunderstandings and other causes and his messages.

Factor in that even within any correct religion, you could still have believers thinking they'd 'felt' god when they actually hadn't, or had been 'spoken' to by god when, in fact, god had said no such thing.

So, ultimately, while I'm open to the possibility of god (or gods), I don't believe it's possible to actually know whether you've got the right religion, or - more importantly - whether god has a religion at all.

[systemstrike_7]

Do you beleive that you are too smart to believe an intelligent entity greater and more powerful than yourselves, capable of creating a universe, even though you know it cannot be proven scientifically that the entity exists?

No.

I don't believe in god because, assuming such an entity exists, and assuming that they have directly involved themselves in the welfare of humanity, and assuming that they have a preference as to how we live our lives, and assuming they've told us that preference, I don't believe any human being is smart enough, on the evidence alone, to tell which religion, of the hundreds of thousands that human history can offer, is the right one.

I say on the evidence aloneas a qualifier because every single religious devotee of every single faith in human history has also believed that theirs is the right one, not just on the evidence, but because they have felt or witnessed the power of their god/gods 'telling' them so. As this clearly cannot be true in even the vast majority of cases, I'm forced to one of three conclusions:

1. There is no god, and these incidents of his presence are either lies, misunderstandings or able to be explained by other causes.

2. There is a god, and he is revealing himself to everyone, regardless of their religion.

3. There is a god, but people cannot tell the difference between lies, misunderstandings and other causes and his messages.

Factor in that even within any correct religion, you could still have believers thinking they'd 'felt' god when they actually hadn't, or had been 'spoken' to by god when, in fact, god had said no such thing.

So, ultimately, while I'm open to the possibility of god (or gods), I don't believe it's possible to actually know whether you've got the right religion, or - more importantly - whether god has a religion at all.

God will only be found in the comfort of our own soul. I think God has made it clear that He will no longer do the amazing things as explained in ancient religious writings. Who knows, maybe God has simply overexerted Himself to the point of despondency. When one reads the bible looking for God, they will only find themselves looking up at them from those dusty pages.

[cwcrenshaw]

Its because its not just semantics, cw, those are great differences. Those claims did not make me raise an eyebrow, because I knew that several of them were incorrect, showing you did not know about the Egyptian religion in the first place, and that they were indeed different. If you found only one similarity, I feel confident that you would still believe it was a huge co-relation between the two beliefs. The Egyptian pantheon was massive, with over 5,000 seperate deities that we have identified. There are bound to be some similar characters, but the fact is they are a long ways from identical, or even notably similar.

Our beliefs are not the exact same, no, but they are not radically different from person to person. That's no excuse to be unknowledgable.

I think you need to do some research on the subject before blindly dismissing it. You will find that of the supposed divine characteristics of Jesus, none are very unique. And I don't appreciate you implying that because I don't care about your particular interpretation, that I am "unknowledgable" about Christianity in general. You seem bound and determined to include personal attacks in each of your responses.

There are already bad habits on your own, and your inabillity to admit that is still noted.

Again, your idols were not atheists at all, and even in your atheist world, which has apparently already been created, there is still much disagreement, pain, wrongdoing, and suffering. I stick by the possibillity that all of those who used religion to sponsor evil were in fact atheists.

We've already been over this ground. My "idols" (which you insist on calling them as though I worship them...could I not just respect the men? ) did not refer to themselves as "Atheists" for various reasons (I'm sure if they were alive today, this may be a different story)....but if you actually read Spinoza, Paine, Jefferson, etc you will find that they have laid the foundation for civilized society to enjoy freedom from religion as well as freedom of. Is there suffering, pain, etc in even the best societies? Of course...But compare this to any theocracy you like. I understand that you would like to blame all of the ills of religion on Atheism, but this is absurd. I'm sure Atheism is also to blame for the things that go bump in the night. Are you seriously saying that anyone who is truely religious is incapable of evil acts?

'Scariest' is a general word, but this does prove that I still have little to fear if I am wrong. Yes, you would still have some concerns, but you asked about the relevance of Pascal's Wager (did I call him Carl earlier? Sorry about that) under the circumstances of multiple religions, and I gave it to you from the points of view of those religions. Consider your argument with the use of multiplicity of gods refuted.

I will not consider my argument refuted because you have not refuted it. But I will let it go because Pascal's wager is one of the weakest possible arguments you could have possibly made, so I do understand if you would like to sweep it under the rug.

No, it would not. The physics of the universe would not be reset. You cannot demonstrate that the big bang works, but it is still taught in schools. I do not need to demonstrate God making the universe through supernatural (naturally undetectable) means. All we would be saying is that it took a supernatural entity to create natural material, since no other means applies, and that we now have a continuity of physical evidence that can be studied and analyzed to come up to purely natural explanations.

I do understand, however, that methodological naturalism would not allow for this to be taught in schools, and that isn't what I was really looking for. All I want is for scientists to reveal the truth that the Big Bang theory is totally irrational and irreconcilable with other laws of nature.

Big Bang vs. Creationism is a side argument that has no bearing on the point at hand. The topic is in regards to the basis of understand that all scientific advancement is founded on. That basis is a set of unchanging natural laws. If it were to be found that this basis is not correct and that there were forces that existed that could skirt these laws...the basis for science, as well as all that has been founded upon that basis, would instantly crumble. By your own definition though, this force (God) could never be proven of disproven in an objective, empirical way. Therefore God must be taken on faith...as also required for belief in the Tooth Fairy, Santa Claus, and the monster living in my dryer that continues to steal my socks.

Its not an anecdote, its my experience, and they are real. If they happened to you, you would not be so quick to discard them. Such is the nature of a metaphysical naturalist. You take real contradictions at your word as made up stories and sometimes even refuse to see the experiences in your own life. I actually tried to show that it works, just through my own life experience, which I thought you might value at this point. You overrate your own arguing abillity, but that is one of the expected flaws of your approach.

They may be real to the person it happened to, but this again goes back to there being no truth, only perception. There are those out there that swear to have had contact with ghosts...and some that swear to have been abducted by aliens. Does this mean that I should accept that aliens and ghosts are real because the experience was real to that person? Hardly. It may be true to them but until hard, empirical evidence is provided...I will continue to look at the possibility of God in the same skeptical light as aliens and ghosts. Amusingly, there has been more evidence provided (however dubious and open to interpretation it may be) that ghosts/aliens exist than evidence for the existence of God...but I digress.

What does rationallity have to do with it? 'Higher thinking animals' is an indescriptive term with no meaning and it does not quallify in a meta-ethics discussion. If there is no God, you invented those reasons NOT to do 'bad' things, cw. Why should we follow those laws? Why does anything matter? We are accidents, and our existence is so small, so menial, so unnecessary. There is no reason NOT to do anything. Do whatever makes you happy, because you will not be able to enjoy anything when you die, and we all die. Moreover, what will happen if you don't follow your 'moral guide' that you believe in so strongly? The only thing you need concern yourself with is happiness (which doesn't really exist or matter, because it is just a chemical state in your brain induced by certian stimuli) and staying alive. You only follow the law or your moral guide because other people might prevent you from achieving either of those.

However contrived you consider an inate, godless "moral guide" to be, it does not change the fact that we are of high enough mental capacity to know that some things are wrong. This is an issue that cannot be agreed upon by people who look at it as oppositely as we do. You believe that the morality that holds mankind together is due to God...that without God we would have no reason to be good to eachother and would descend into utter chaos. I, on the other hand, have the view that there is no God and that the fact that there is a moral code that keeps mankind from killing eachother is in itself proof that our "built in moral code" is real. We are looking at the same thing from two entirely different directions. The only thing we can really agree upon is that there is evil done every moment of everyday on this planet. You would no doubt attribute this to free-will and sin while I would consider this evidence that we are in fact animals who are perhaps not as evolved yet as we claim to be. That is to say that we often times "relapse" into our primitive mindset of brutality and survival of the fittest. I don't think there is much to say about this particular point other than we completely disagree.

Plato's Cave is very real, and people do need God, whether or not they are humble enough to admit it. We can FUNCTION without Him, but that's it. We don't have joy, we don't have peace, and we don't feel fulfilled in life. You may think that your existence right now is all there is too it, and like Trent Resner you may feel 'happy here', because you haven't ever known anything more, and you've fooled yourself into believing that you're full of joy, but if you knew God's joy and His peace, you would be so much better off. You could finally experience the other half of reallity, the other half of your consciousness that has been shut off to you all along.

I agree that Plato's Cave is real, but not from a religious perspective...only from a knowledge perspective (which is how he intended it originally). At the risk of sounding anecdotal myself, I "function" quite well without any need for superstition. Again, I appreciate your attempt at describing me...but again...you know nothing of me. I was raised in a Christian household and never found any need to seek a God...sure there were times when I wondered about God as a child, but as the bible says: "When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things."

Edited October 29, 2007 by cwcrenshaw

[sososo]

Hi JoelWildtree

I'm just wondering since you mention in your reply things concerning the mind, soul [ie.,feelings, personality,..] and spirit to which you end your post in a sarcasm concerning spirituality and Allah, what do you view as spirit or if you even still believe that a part of you besides the mind and emotions is spirit and is a part of us? Do you view consciousness as spirituality in whole or in part?

I don't believe in humanism to which many atheists adhere to and any of the lies that we are gods[ if consciously realized ] and the whole or any major part of any of humanities' problems will ever be solved, remember we were exiled from Eden, in a state of duality and corrupt.

A part of what I mean when I say corrupt has something to do with death. You can research this yourself and find that there is no such thing as a natural death [check any coroner's report], there is no reason to why we die except as a inherited at the time of exile.

If you are completely satisfied with the secular answers given for life's big questions I'm not one to judge. If you are satisfied that this is all there is in life as a human being and that viruses are better at this then us, I'm not one to judge. If your sub-conscious and conscious are telling you Hmmmm.... there is something I'm missing, I'm am not one to judge.

I don't believe that there is a "spirit" or "soul" beyond that which is physically manifest within our minds (brain). If one would like to call their conscious or subconscious mind a "soul", that's fine ... as long as they realize that attaching the word "soul" doesn't suddenly give their mind supernatural qualities. I don't really *believe* in humanism, but I have looked into it, critically examined it's reasons, and found little fault. I don't adhere to it, but I see that it makes sense, so I try to live as a humanist, extending rights and freedoms I would personally want to those around me, keeping a skeptical attitude about those things which are harder to explain.

And I certainly agree, the humanities problems will never be solved ... but I think it's quite possible to do my part at least, and not contribute toward the suffering. No I disagree though, I don't remember being exiled from Eden, all I remember is my life from about 3 years old and on, if you have any evidence for this 'Eden' besides a passage in a claimed Divinely inspired book then please share with me.

I'm not satisfied with dying, but it's going to happen. I know for a fact that you neither are satisfied with dying, do you honestly want to leave behind this physical life? No of course not, although you have convinced yourself there is another, precisely because you can't deal with the fact of death, but it's still there, undeniable, we all die. Why do you think the story of the resurrection was constructed? It gives hope of eternal life to the followers of Christianity. The big questions in my life are, "will I enjoy my career for long?", "will I make enough to keep myself and my family financially supported?", "do I want to get married?", "is my girlfriend 'one'?" ... my questions pertain to this life I'm living. Your big questions are what keeps you from just living life ... therefor you cannot go on until you've found an answer that is satisfactory, and any religion will provide you with unsubstantiated answers. I cannot buy it though, so I'm just going to live my life, and worry about the things that matter to me.

Hi JoelWildtree

Can you clarify or explain " I don't believe that there is a "spirit" or "soul" beyond that which is physically manifest within our minds (brain). " ? How does the mind [brain] physically manifest spirit ? It seems you view yourself as two dimensional. Are you simply a mind and body? Surely you are conscious and that is an aspect of you, who you are, how creative thoughts/ideas and awareness have little to do with the mechanics of neurons and electrons. Something a PC can never acquire [please don't relate this to an AI topic].

You find humanism has very few faults and makes sense and try to live as a humanist, enough said so, don't be contradictory with I don't believe in it, I don't adhere to it... and who gave you the power and authority to " extend rights and freedoms "? Please.

" Humanities problems will never be solved.. " like you actually care because, in the next paragraph you give a description of " the things that matter to me ".

Nothing to further discuss.

BTW The LAMB broke the chain of Death so, NO I have absolutely no fear of death, I only continue to fear the Creator.

Edited October 31, 2007 by sososo

[Matthitjah]

God will only be found in the comfort of our own soul. I think God has made it clear that He will no longer do the amazing things as explained in ancient religious writings. Who knows, maybe God has simply overexerted Himself to the point of despondency. When one reads the bible looking for God, they will only find themselves looking up at them from those dusty pages.

Grace to you,

Hmmmm?

System do you believe that Jesus is God even as those dusty old pages say he is?

Peace,

Dave

[systemstrike_7]

God will only be found in the comfort of our own soul. I think God has made it clear that He will no longer do the amazing things as explained in ancient religious writings. Who knows, maybe God has simply overexerted Himself to the point of despondency. When one reads the bible looking for God, they will only find themselves looking up at them from those dusty pages.

Grace to you,

Hmmmm?

System do you believe that Jesus is God even as those dusty old pages say he is?

Peace,

Dave

Yes I do. When I read through the Tanakh, I find that the entire thing is speaking of Jesus. What I am trying to say is that when you read the Gospels, you find your own picture of Jesus. My picture of God will probably be very different from anyone else's. So you can keep listed as a believer if you wish, because I do believe. I just like to ask questions. In short, I guess I just haven't quite come to terms with who I think God is. It has proven to be a very tedious journey, and if you find any frustration in my tone it is due to the fact that I can't seem to get any help from God Himself. But maybe God knows that this journey is what keeps me happy and interested. So kudos to Him.

[systemstrike_7]

God will only be found in the comfort of our own soul. I think God has made it clear that He will no longer do the amazing things as explained in ancient religious writings. Who knows, maybe God has simply overexerted Himself to the point of despondency. When one reads the bible looking for God, they will only find themselves looking up at them from those dusty pages.

Grace to you,

Hmmmm?

System do you believe that Jesus is God even as those dusty old pages say he is?

Peace,

Dave

Well, I feel a bit foolish now. I just realized that I am already listed as a nonbeliever. I find this odd, but I'm sure your reasoning is sufficient. I'm not one too argue about such matters. Do as you wish...

[sososo]

Hi JoelWildtree

We do have a few thoughts in common. I also don't believe in religion and doctrine per say or as you know it but I do know God has a purpose and plan for humanity. I don't understand your view that our reality is not in a state of duality? There are hundreds of examples of opposites for instance [even the PC code of 0's and 1's]. You have been given a twisted view of what a 'Christian' is so, I do have an idea of where you're coming from because of this. Your description of how the brain works is a presumption where it concerns consciousness, nothing more than maybe a belief you hold that is unsubstantiated.

Regards

[DozyBen]

Do you beleive that you are too smart to believe an intelligent entity greater and more powerful than yourselves, capable of creating a universe, even though you know it cannot be proven scientificallly that the entity exists?

No. I don't think it's a question of smart. It's possible to be very smart and irrational. Bit of an odd way to phrase it really.

Anyway science doesn't prove anything, it makes theories and predictions and then sees if the evidence stacks up. Disagreeing evidence encourages re-writing of the theory. Rinse and repeat.

Example: Theory - Bible is literally true. Prediction - Earth is 6,000 or so years old from following Genesis chronologies. Evidence - None. Lots saying Earth is older. Conclusion - Bible is not literally true (at least in this respect).

Slightly disappointed by thread. I haven't been on these boards for ages and was excited by a survey!

[undone]

There are plenty of dumb people who don't believe. Being smart is NOT a prerequisite.