Atheists believe in miracles more than believers

[Pogo]

Well, but if you go for this one "especially belief in one god as creator of the universe, intervening in it and sustaining a personal relation to his creatures." as in effect theism, then a non-theist can believe in a different kind of god(s).

No, a theist can believe in different kinds of gods, but a non-believer doesn't believe.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

No, a theist can believe in different kinds of gods, but a non-believer doesn't believe.

You are aware that there are other relgions than the theistic ones, right?
And that not all gods are theistic.
"specifically : belief in the existence of one God viewed as the creative source of the human race and the world who transcends yet is immanent in the world"

Definition of THEISM

belief in the existence of a god or gods; specifically : belief in the existence of one God viewed as the creative source of the human race and the world who transcends yet is immanent in the world… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

 

[leroy]

That doesn’t make sense.

Ok, then the objecting should be “it doesn’t make sense” not special pleading

 

[PureX]

What ever that is supposed to mean, I have no postive thoughts about what the universe really is. I have only beliefs that seems to work.

Most atheists pretend they have no ideas or beliefs regarding the source of existence because they know they cannot defend the ideas and beliefs that they clearly do have, even as they demand everyone else that has some thoughts or beliefs on the subject must present them to be judged in the atheist's 'kangaroo court'. So although they have nothing to contribute to the discussion, they want to be able to attack anything anyone else contributes to it.

Sorry if I jumped the gun on responding to your post. You are a bit of an anomaly when it comes to this subject. And I sometimes forget.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Most atheists pretend they have no ideas or beliefs regarding the source of existence because they know they cannot defend the ideas and beliefs that they clearly do have, even as they demand everyone else that has some thoughts or beliefs on the subject must present them to be judged in the atheist's 'kangaroo court'. So although they have nothing to contribute to the discussion, they want to be able to attack anything anyone else contributes to it.

Sorry if I jumped the gun on responding to your post. You are a bit of an anomaly when it comes to this subject. And I sometimes forget.

Here is how I understand some of my follow atheists. It has no really anything to do with them being atheists. It is in effect the belief that the universe is real and can rationally make sense, that seems to be at the core of their belief system.

 

[gnostic]

It's true that atheists believe in miracles even more than theists in the sense that atheists think existence just popped into being from absolutely nothing, and for absolutely no reason at all.

Atheism only deal with the questions on the existence of any god, nothing more, nothing less.

Atheism isn’t study of anything. Atheism isn’t science, isn’t physics, nor biology. It is also not about any cosmology…including anything about any popping into existence.

You are referring to theoretical scientists in the field of cosmology, who might propose such thing…but those cosmologists might be personally be theists, atheists or agnostics, or whatever reli or philosophical background.

Do not acquaint atheists or theists or whatever as the same as scientists, because being atheists or theists are not jobs in any science.

Majority of atheists around the world do not work scientists in any fields, most of them work in all sorts of professions and trades, so a majority of these have zero position on the matter of cosmology.

You are generalising…put every atheists in the same basket.

Have you even bother ask any atheist members here, if they believe anything about things (eg universe, Earth, life, etc) popping into existence from nothing?

Ask them, and they will they don’t agree with this you making about them.

You would be surprised just how many atheists here, thinking this is just another strawman claim from you. You are being dishonest with your generalisation about the atheists here.

btw, I am agnostic, not atheist, and I don’t agree with this garbage you are claiming.

 

[gnostic]

Ok, then the objecting should be “it doesn’t make sense” not special pleading

I am saying part of your post was incoherent, as in you are rambling…hence i am hinting that you might want edit the post so you will make more sense.

 

[shunyadragon]

Most atheists pretend they have no ideas or beliefs regarding the source of existence because they know they cannot defend the ideas and beliefs that they clearly do have, even as they demand everyone else that has some thoughts or beliefs on the subject must present them to be judged in the atheist's 'kangaroo court'. So although they have nothing to contribute to the discussion, they want to be able to attack anything anyone else contributes to it.

Sorry if I jumped the gun on responding to your post. You are a bit of an anomaly when it comes to this subject. And I sometimes forget.

False, atheists do have more than just ideas and beliefs as to the origin and nature of our physical existence. They accept the scientific views that our physical existence is potentially infinite based on current theories such as the Penrose-Hawking boundless universe based on Physics and Quantum Mechanics, They do not believe in an outside 'source' for the origin of our physical existence,

There is absolutely no objective evidence for any other possible outside source from the scientific perspective.

 

[shunyadragon]

It's true that atheists believe in miracles even more than theists in the sense that atheists think existence just popped into being from absolutely nothing, and for absolutely no reason at all. That it has no mystery source, which is far crazier and more irrational than theists claiming that there is a metaphysical, supernatural source (that they call God).

You do not understand the simple elementary school definition of miracle.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Atheism only deal with the questions on the existence of any god, nothing more, nothing less.

Atheism isn’t study of anything. Atheism isn’t science, isn’t physics, nor biology. It is also not about any cosmology…including anything about any popping into existence.

...

Well, remember this qoute is not written by me. It is from the site of an organisation called American Atheists:
"
Definitions
Atheism is the comprehensive world view of persons who are free from theism and have freed themselves of supernatural beliefs altogether. It is predicated on ancient Greek Materialism.

Atheism involves the mental attitude that unreservedly accepts the supremacy of reason and aims at establishing a life-style and ethical outlook verifiable by experience and the scientific method, independent of all arbitrary assumptions of authority and creeds.

Materialism declares that the cosmos is devoid of immanent conscious purpose; that it is governed by its own inherent, immutable, and impersonal laws; that there is no supernatural interference in human life; that humankind, finding the resources within themselves, can and must create their own destiny. It teaches that we must prize our life on earth and strive always to improve it. It holds that human beings are capable of creating a social system based on reason and justice. Materialism’s ‘faith’ is in humankind and their ability to transform the world culture by their own efforts. This is a commitment that is, in its very essence, life-asserting. It considers the struggle for progress as a moral obligation that is impossible without noble ideas that inspire us to bold, creative works. Materialism holds that our potential for good and more fulfilling cultural development is, for all practical purposes, unlimited."

Our Vision

We envision a world in which policies are made using the best evidence we have rather than using religious dogma.

www.atheists.org

 

[PureX]

Here is how I understand some of my follow atheists. It has no really anything to do with them being atheists. It is in effect the belief that the universe is real and can rationally make sense, that seems to be at the core of their belief system.

Yes.

And because they think they can know existence (make sense of it), they assume there is no God unless they know it to be so. And since they don't (can't) know it to be so, and no one else can convince them of it, then there is no God.

And yet logically this is as full of holes as Swiss cheese. So they must try and avoid having to defend it. And to do that they pretend that they have no position, no belief: even though their position and belief is as clear and obvious as can be to everyone else. And it is driving them to constantly attack any other proposition that anyone else offers.

 

[Pogo]

Well, remember this qoute is not written by me. It is from the site of an organisation called American Atheists:
"
Definitions
Atheism is the comprehensive world view of persons who are free from theism and have freed themselves of supernatural beliefs altogether. It is predicated on ancient Greek Materialism.

Atheism involves the mental attitude that unreservedly accepts the supremacy of reason and aims at establishing a life-style and ethical outlook verifiable by experience and the scientific method, independent of all arbitrary assumptions of authority and creeds.

Materialism declares that the cosmos is devoid of immanent conscious purpose; that it is governed by its own inherent, immutable, and impersonal laws; that there is no supernatural interference in human life; that humankind, finding the resources within themselves, can and must create their own destiny. It teaches that we must prize our life on earth and strive always to improve it. It holds that human beings are capable of creating a social system based on reason and justice. Materialism’s ‘faith’ is in humankind and their ability to transform the world culture by their own efforts. This is a commitment that is, in its very essence, life-asserting. It considers the struggle for progress as a moral obligation that is impossible without noble ideas that inspire us to bold, creative works. Materialism holds that our potential for good and more fulfilling cultural development is, for all practical purposes, unlimited."

Our Vision

We envision a world in which policies are made using the best evidence we have rather than using religious dogma.

www.atheists.org

The principles that drive us
We are independent, impartial, and neutral.
We are guided by universal medical ethics.
We are committed to bearing witness.
We are transparent and accountable.
We are committed to diversity, equity, and inclusion.

Home | Doctors Without Borders - USA

Médecins Sans Frontières/Doctors Without Borders (MSF) treats people where the need is greatest. We are an international medical humanitarian organisation. We help people threatened by violence, neglect, natural disasters, epidemics and health emergencies

www.doctorswithoutborders.org

MSF is an organization of doctors, but the principles above do not define doctor.

 

[gnostic]

Well, remember this qoute is not written by me. It is from the site of an organisation called American Atheists:
"
Definitions
Atheism is the comprehensive world view of persons who are free from theism and have freed themselves of supernatural beliefs altogether. It is predicated on ancient Greek Materialism.

Atheism involves the mental attitude that unreservedly accepts the supremacy of reason and aims at establishing a life-style and ethical outlook verifiable by experience and the scientific method, independent of all arbitrary assumptions of authority and creeds.

Materialism declares that the cosmos is devoid of immanent conscious purpose; that it is governed by its own inherent, immutable, and impersonal laws; that there is no supernatural interference in human life; that humankind, finding the resources within themselves, can and must create their own destiny. It teaches that we must prize our life on earth and strive always to improve it. It holds that human beings are capable of creating a social system based on reason and justice. Materialism’s ‘faith’ is in humankind and their ability to transform the world culture by their own efforts. This is a commitment that is, in its very essence, life-asserting. It considers the struggle for progress as a moral obligation that is impossible without noble ideas that inspire us to bold, creative works. Materialism holds that our potential for good and more fulfilling cultural development is, for all practical purposes, unlimited."

Our Vision

We envision a world in which policies are made using the best evidence we have rather than using religious dogma.

www.atheists.org

Well that those definitions don’t apply to all atheists.

There are atheists who work as accountants, bankers, salespeople, carpenters, plumbers, bricklayers, police officers, fishermen, farmers, chefs, bakers, English literature teachers, athletes, musicians, artists, dancers, etc…and so many varieties of other non-scientific jobs. Do you really believe that they ALL followed the “scientific method”, if they are not scientists.

You are putting every atheists in the same pigeonhole, with a definition that don’t apply to all atheists.

it is strawman.

And again, I would ask you the same question I have asked @PureX , so please answer this question:

Have you ever asked any atheist, here at RF, whether they agreed with your claim that things (eg Universe or life) just pop into existence from nothing?

 

[shunyadragon]

Well, remember this qoute is not written by me. It is from the site of an organisation called American Atheists:
"
Definitions
Atheism is the comprehensive world view of persons who are free from theism and have freed themselves of supernatural beliefs altogether. It is predicated on ancient Greek Materialism.

Atheism involves the mental attitude that unreservedly accepts the supremacy of reason and aims at establishing a life-style and ethical outlook verifiable by experience and the scientific method, independent of all arbitrary assumptions of authority and creeds.

Materialism declares that the cosmos is devoid of immanent conscious purpose; that it is governed by its own inherent, immutable, and impersonal laws; that there is no supernatural interference in human life; that humankind, finding the resources within themselves, can and must create their own destiny. It teaches that we must prize our life on earth and strive always to improve it. It holds that human beings are capable of creating a social system based on reason and justice. Materialism’s ‘faith’ is in humankind and their ability to transform the world culture by their own efforts. This is a commitment that is, in its very essence, life-asserting. It considers the struggle for progress as a moral obligation that is impossible without noble ideas that inspire us to bold, creative works. Materialism holds that our potential for good and more fulfilling cultural development is, for all practical purposes, unlimited."

Our Vision

We envision a world in which policies are made using the best evidence we have rather than using religious dogma.

www.atheists.org

This boils down to the simple explanation that @gnostic offered without the frills and addons that do not include the belief common to all atheists

Oxford Languages and Google - English | Oxford Languages

Google’s English dictionary is provided by Oxford Languages. Oxford Languages is the world’s leading dictionary publisher, with over 150 years of experience creating and delivering authoritative dictionaries globally in more than 50 languages.

languages.oup.com

Atheism - disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.

 

[PureX]

Atheism only deal with the questions on the existence of any god, nothing more, nothing less.

But the existence of God is understood as the source and purpose of all that is. So to reject the existence of God, you must be rejecting it as the source and ourpose of all that is (all that exists). Which then logically requires some reasoned alternative. Otherwise, it's just empty negation. A reasonless and pointless attempt to end the philosophocal discussion.

Atheism isn’t study of anything. Atheism isn’t science, isn’t physics, nor biology. It is also not about any cosmology…including anything about any popping into existence.

So you are saying that it IS a reasonless attempt at ending any philosophical discussion about the source and purpose of existence. I agree that most atheist's arguments do appear to be exactly this.

You are referring to theoretical scientists in the field of cosmology, who might propose such thing…but those cosmologists might be personally be theists, atheists or agnostics, or whatever reli or philosophical background.

I did not refer to cosmology at all. Science has nothing to do with this conversation. It is a philosophical question and a philosophical discussion about the possible solutions.

Do not acquaint atheists or theists or whatever as the same as scientists, because being atheists or theists are not jobs in any science.

This has nothing to do with science. Why are you trying to insert science into it?

You are generalising…put every atheists in the same basket.

Most of them (atheists) are firmly in the basket I am referring to,

Have you even bother ask any atheist members here, if they believe anything about things (eg universe, Earth, life, etc) popping into existence from nothing?

Ask them, and they will they don’t agree with this you making about them.

Every theist I know or have encountered presumes that God is the source, sustenance, and purpose of all that is. It would be difficult to label any belief system that did not presume this as "theism".

You would be surprised just how many atheists here, thinking this is just another strawman claim from you. You are being dishonest with your generalisation about the atheists here.

btw, I am agnostic, not atheist, and I don’t agree with this garbage you are claiming.

I am not making any claims. I am reporting on what I am seeing nearly every atheist on here saying, over and over and over and over. All the while denying that they believe it. What they are saying is that if no one can prove to them that God(s) exist, then the only logical conclusion (according to them) is that no gods exist. Yet they immediately then try to claim that they do not hold that no gods exist, even as they argue in favor of that conclusion endlessly, pointlessly, and constantly.

So why do they persist in denying ownership OF THEIR OWN CONCLUSION? That's easy. It's because they know they cannot defend it, logically. Because it's not logically defensible,

 

[cladking]

If language and concepts can be agreed upon then communication may happen.
In this case the logic may be sound but the failure of the premise leaves the outcome at best undefined.

That is all.

No! It's quite the opposite. I am defining my terms and stating my axioms. Darwin for the most part DID NOT DO THIS.

Egyptology has the axioms that ancient people were very ignorant and superstitious while they dragged tombs up ramps and never changed but they have NEVER delineated these assumptions. Rather they leave everyone to figure them out for themselves. Darwin was nearly as bad though at least he did admit eventually that one of his axioms was that populations are fairly stable. He never even realized he assumed that consciousness was not related to species axiomatically. He never realized he believed in linear progress. All of his assumptions were false and he arrived at a conclusion derived from those assumptions EXACTLY AS EVERY MEMBER OF OUR SPECIES DOES; "homo omnisciencis circularis rationatio"; We know everything hear us boast.

 

[cladking]

I am not making any claims. I am reporting on what I am seeing nearly every atheist on here saying, over and over and over and over. All the while denying that they believe it. What they are saying is that if no one can prove to them that God(s) exist, then the only logical conclusion (according to them) is that no gods exist. Yet they immediately then try to claim that they do not hold that no gods exist, even as they argue in favor of tat conclusion endlessly, and pointlessly.

One of many scientific miracles is that a good scientist never reaches a conclusion but most of then still have an answer to any question. If they admit to not having an answer they can still rattle off many things they know aren't the answer.

In light of the real miracles that are reality it's a far easier to stretch to believe in a Creator than to believe everything has a natural explanation. I still favor the latter but, frankly, I'm not so sure the latter might not include the former.

Experiment for the last several decades show that science is wrong about a great many things yet nobody wants to examine premises and definitions.

 

[cladking]

If language and concepts can be agreed upon then communication may happen.
In this case the logic may be sound but the failure of the premise leaves the outcome at best undefined.

That is all.

Nonsense.

My ignore list is composed of individuals who won't accept a definition that is the first in the dictionary. Instead of using this word they want me to write a paragraph about what I mean instead.

People parse words as they choose and there's nothing you can do to change it.

What you really mean is that you don't notice communication problems when you speak to like minded individuals. Most wars are largely the result of poor communication. People mean different things when they use words like "intolerable".

 

[shunyadragon]

But the existence of God is understood as the source and purpose of all that is. So to reject the existence of God, you must be rejecting it as the source and ourpose of all that is (all that exists).

This applies only to Theist beliefs. The atheist simply rejects these beliefs nothing more.

Which then logically requires some reasoned alternative. Otherwise, it's just empty negation. A reasonless and pointless attempt to end the philosophocal discussion.

No, simply the atheist perspective concerning the nature of our explanation of our physical existence is based on science.

 

[PureX]

One of many scientific miracles is that a good scientist never reaches a conclusion but most of then still have an answer to any question. If they admit to not having an answer they can still rattle off many things they know aren't the answer.

In light of the real miracles that are reality it's a far easier to stretch to believe in a Creator than to believe everything has a natural explanation. I still favor the latter but, frankly, I'm not so sure the latter might not include the former.

I would say that logically the latter is most definitely included in the former. It's all of a singular whole: the source and the results. The "creator" and the "created". Even though we humans do not (and likely will never) know the full extent of either of these perceived phenomena.

Experiment for the last several decades show that science is wrong about a great many things yet nobody wants to examine premises and definitions.

Proper scientists understand that this will always be the case. They are not seeking any "conclusions" because they understand that this is not what science does, or is even for. It's the growing "scientism" cult that has adopted this absurdly elevated concept of science and then continually misunderstands and misstates what science has done and is doing, as a result.